EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 27.4.2009 
SEC(2009) 545 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
Accompanying the 
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSI ON TO THE COUNCIL, THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EU ROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMI TTEE OF THE REGIONS  
 
An EU Strategy for Youth – Investing and Empowering 
 
A renewed open method of coordination to address youth challenges and opportunities 
 
Impact Assessment 
{COM(2009) 200} 
{SEC(2009) 546} {SEC(2009) 548} {SEC(2009) 549} 
  
Disclaimer: This IA report commits only the Commission's services involved in its 
preparation. The text is prepared  as a basis for discussion and does not prejudge the final form 
of any decision to be taken by the Commission
 
EN 2   EN  
Table of content 
Modifications following the Opinion of the Impact Assessment Board.................................... 5 
1. Procedural issues and context setting....................................................................... 5 
1.1. Historical background of the Youth Cooperation Framework..................................... 5 
1.1.1. General context ......................................................................................................... ... 5 
1.1.2. Specific context........................................................................................................ .... 7 
1.2. Consultation of interested parties................................................................................. 8 1.2.1. Internal consultations .................................................................................................. .8  
1.2.2. Consultation of Member States.................................................................................... 8 1.2.3. Consultation of young people and youth organisations ............................................... 9 1.2.4. Consultation of experts ................................................................................................ 9  
2. Problem definition.................................................................................................... 10 
2.1. Problems.................................................................................................................. ... 10 
2.1.1. Global challenges....................................................................................................... 10 
2.1.2. Problems affecting the situation of young people...................................................... 11 2.1.3. Assessment of the current cooperation framework.................................................... 13 2.2. Affected groups.......................................................................................................... 1 6 
2.3. Baseline Scenario....................................................................................................... 17  
2.4. Legal basis and subsidiarity ....................................................................................... 17 
3. Objectives.................................................................................................................. 18 
3.1. General objectives...................................................................................................... 18  
3.2. Specific objectives ..................................................................................................... 18  
3.3. Operational objectives................................................................................................ 18 3.4. Consistency of these objectives  with other EU policies ............................................ 19 
4. Policy options............................................................................................................ 20  
4.1. Global analysis........................................................................................................... 20 
4.1.1. Possible scope .......................................................................................................... .. 20 
4.1.2. Possible instruments................................................................................................... 2 0 
4.2. Policy options not retained for analysis ..................................................................... 20 4.2.1. Ending the Cooperation.............................................................................................. 20 4.2.2. Specific approach (narrow scope).............................................................................. 21 4.2.3. Development of a set of more binding tools .............................................................. 21 
4.3. Options retained for analysis...................................................................................... 21 
 
EN 3   EN 4.3.1. Option 1: Status quo (baseline scenario).................................................................... 21 
4.3.2. Option 2: a reinforced Youth open method of coordination...................................... 22 
4.3.3. Option 3: a developed cr oss-sectoral approach.......................................................... 22 
4.3.4. Option 4: a global strategy ......................................................................................... 23 
5. Analysis of impacts................................................................................................... 24 
5.1. Social impacts ............................................................................................................ 24 
5.2. Economic impacts ...................................................................................................... 24 5.3. Environmental impacts............................................................................................... 24 5.4. Impacts on fundamental rights................................................................................... 25 
6. Comparing the options ............................................................................................ 25 
6.1. Option 1: status quo ................................................................................................... 27 
6.1.1. General objectives...................................................................................................... 27 
6.1.2. Specific objectives ..................................................................................................... 27 
6.1.3. Feasibility /implementation........................................................................................ 27 6.2. Option 2: a reinforced OMC ...................................................................................... 28 6.2.1. General objectives...................................................................................................... 28 
6.2.2. Specific objectives ..................................................................................................... 28 
6.2.3. Feasibility /implementation........................................................................................ 28 
6.3. Option 3: a developed cr oss-sectoral approach.......................................................... 28 
6.3.1. General objectives...................................................................................................... 28 
6.3.2. Specific objectives ..................................................................................................... 29 
6.3.3. Feasibility /implementation........................................................................................ 29 6.4. Option 4: a global strategy ......................................................................................... 30 6.4.1. General objectives...................................................................................................... 30 
6.4.2. Specific objectives ..................................................................................................... 30 
6.4.3. Feasibility /implementation........................................................................................ 30 
7. Monitoring and evaluation...................................................................................... 30 
Annex 1 - List of documents linked with  the current Cooperation Framework ...................... 32 
Annex 2 – Priorities and objectives of the current  Open Method of Coordination in the field of 
Youth.......................................................................................................................... 36 
Annex 3 - Description of the current Cooperation Framework ............................................... 37 Annex 4 - List of recent reference documents ......................................................................... 38 Annex 5 - General observations on the re sults of the public consultation............................... 40 
 
 
EN 4   EN  
List of main abbreviations 
EU: European Union 
EKCYP: European Knowledge Centre on Youth Policy EuNYK: European Network of Youth Knowledge  OMC: open method of coordination 
 
EN 5   EN  
Modifications following the Opinion of the Impact Assessment Board 
Following the opinion of the Impact Assessment Board several changes have been made to 
the impact assessment. 
In particular, the problem defin ition and the baseline have been further developed in section 2. 
Operational objectives expressing in concrete terms expected policy outcomes have been 
developed in section 3. Concrete information regarding proposed actions has been added in 
section 4. Information on indicators has been  added in section 7. An annex providing a 
summary of the public consultati on main outcomes has been added. 
1. PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONTEXT SETTING  
1.1. Historical background of the Youth Cooperation Framework 
1.1.1.  General context 
Youth cooperation is a developed EU policy area1. EU programmes for youth have been in 
place since 1988; the policy process is more recent. An open method of coordination was 
developed on the basis of a 2001 European Commission White Paper2 and was complemented 
by the European Youth Pact in 2005.  
The Council of the European Un ion established a framework for European co-operation in the 
field of youth (hereafter the Youth Cooperation Framework) in June 20023. The framework 
included the four priority themes for c ooperation proposed in the White Paper:  
• Encouraging young people's participation in the exercise of active citizenship and 
civil society 
• Enhancing the information addressed to young people 
• Promoting voluntary activities among young people 
• Encouraging greater understanding and knowledge of youth. 
The Member States decided to use the open method of coordination (OMC) in order to 
implement these priorities. They agreed on common objectives4 for each one of the four 
priorities, and were responsib le for the implementation of  the common objectives. They 
reported regularly on what they have done to implement them, and on the basis of these 
reports, the Commission prepared  progress reports which were presented to the Council. 
At the end of 2004, Heads of State and Gove rnment from France, Germany, Sweden and 
Spain decided to launch the idea of a European Pact for Youth in the context of the Lisbon 
Strategy revision. The aim of this Pact, endo rsed by the European Council in March 20055, 
was to improve education, training, mobility, employment and social inclusion of young 
people, while helping to achieve a work-life balance. The European Youth Pact was then 
                                                 
1 See Annex 1 listing main EU policy documents related to the cooperation framework. 
2 'A new Impetus for European Youth', COM (2001) 681, 21.11.2001 
3 Resolution of the Council and of the representatives  of the governments of the Member States, meeting 
within the Council of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the youth field [2002/C 168] 
4 See Annex 2 for list of Common objectives 
5 Annex 1 of Presidency Conclusions of the European Council, Brussels, 22 and 23.3.2005 (7619/05) 
 
EN 6   EN integrated in the Youth Cooperation Fr amework through a November 2005 Council 
resolution6. 
This same Council resolution called on the Commi ssion and the Member States to evaluate 
the framework for European c ooperation in the youth field in  2009. Council conclusions of 25 
May 2007 on future perspectives for European cooperation in the fiel d of youth policy also 
contributed with a set of proposals on futu re thematic and stru ctural perspectives7. 
The White Paper on Youth also proposed a ma instreaming approach for “taking better 
account of the ‘youth’ dimension in other policy initiatives”. Ap art from the areas covered by 
the European Youth Pact, this approach has b een developed in a few fields such as anti-
discrimination and more recently health. 
The September 2007 Co mmission Communication " Promoting young people's full 
participation in educati on, employment and society "8 was another milestone of the current 
cooperation framework. It stressed the need for a cross-cutting approach to youth issues in 
order to enhance young people's active participat ion in education, employment and in society. 
The Commission proposed to reinforce the pa rtnership between EU institutions and youth 
representatives and to prepare ever y three years an EU report on youth. 
These different elements, coming one after another, have resulted in a complex structure, 
based on three pillars:  
The open method of coordination dedicated to active citizenship of young people,  
The European Youth Pact aiming at promoti ng social and vocationa l integration of young 
people, and  
The mainstreaming activities. Other tools have been progressively devel oped in order to support the Youth Cooperation 
Framework. 
A structured dialogue with young people has been set up si nce 2005. Structured dialogue 
means that governments and administrations, in cluding EU instituti ons, discuss chosen 
themes with young people, in order to obtain results which are useful for policy-making. 
Structured dialogue cycles around different them es have already been organised. The dialogue 
is structured in terms of themes within a spec ific timeframe. Debates are organised at local, 
regional and national levels. Events where young people can discuss the agreed themes 
amongst themselves and also with  EU politicians are also orga nised on a regular basis (in 
particular 'Youth Events' twice a year, and a European Youth Week every 18 months).  
In order to acquire a greater understanding a nd knowledge of young people (which is both a 
priority of the Youth OMC and a base of the whole cooperation framework), some tools have 
also been set up at European level. A Europ ean Knowledge Centre on  Youth Policy (EKCYP) 
has been developed jointly by the European  Commission and the Council of Europe. The 
EKCYP is a knowledge management system that aims at providing youth policy-makers and 
other interested stakeholders wi th a single entry point to retrie ve information on the realities 
of youth across Europe. A European Network of Youth Knowledge (EuNYK)  was set up by 
                                                
 
6 Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, 
meeting within the Council, on addressing the concerns of young people in Europe — implementing the 
European Pact for Youth and promoti ng active citizenship [2005/C 292/03] 
7 [Official Journal C 314/24 of 22 December 2007] 
8 Commission Communication 'Promoting young people's full participation in education, employment 
and society' , COM (2007) 498, September 2007. 
 
EN 7   EN the Commission in 2006 to exchange good pract ice on developing nati onal youth knowledge 
networks between policy-makers, young people a nd researchers and thereby facilitate the 
implementation of the common objectives for a better knowledge and understanding of youth . 
The Commission also tried to facilitate peer le arning exercises. A specific peer-learning cycle 
about participation of young people with fewe r opportunities has been carried out in 2007-
2008 with various experts meetings  taking place as we ll as a conference where policy makers 
met youth workers and NGOs to discuss and share experiences on this issue9. 
During all the period, Youth Programmes have been acting beyond their financial role as 
policy laboratories where concrete ways to  mobilise young people through international 
projects have been experienced. The cu rrent Programme (Youth in Action – 2007-2013) 
includes a whole strand dedica ted to supporting European co operation in the Youth field. 
1.1.2.  Specific context 
A number of important policy documents have recently highlighted the need for a renewed 
youth strategy. 
In the November 2007 Social Vision Communication, the Co mmission provided an overview 
of the social realities on the basis of the then  ongoing Social Reality Stocktaking exercise. It 
noted that European societies are undergoi ng fast-moving, profound changes in both the 
economic and social spheres, a nd that these changes are direc tly affecting the chances of 
young people in life10. 
This vision was supported by the Bureau of  European Policy Advisers report " Investing in 
Youth – an empowerment strategy "11 which drew attention to the need for early investment in 
human and social capital. The conclusions of this report underline that "An EU consensus 
now exists on the need to ta ke action to back up young people with education, employment 
and civic participation. (…) An across-the-board policy visi on and investment strategy in 
youth is needed to fully deve lop the potential contribution of young people to growth, jobs, 
and the future of Europe.(…) The EU can help to improve this policy approach on investment in youth by highlighting the issues, mobilising knowledge and actors on the question of youth 
across Europe." 
Following this, the Renewed Social Agenda has b een adopted in July 2 008. It aims to create 
more opportunities for EU citizens, improve access to quality services and demonstrate 
solidarity with those who are affected negativel y by change. A mix of different policy tools is 
presented to achieve the object ives set out in the Agenda. 
A main priority among seven prior ity areas is youth and children : "Europe's future depends on 
its youth. Yet, life chances of many young people are blighted- they  lack the opportunities and 
the access to education and training to realise their full potential."  
The Social Agenda Communication
12 mentions that "later in  2008/2009 the Commission will 
issue a Communication on developing the open  method of coordination on youth, with a 
particular focus on young people with fewer opportunities".  
                                                 
9 Good practices identified thanks to th e peer-learning exercise are available at 
http://ec.europa.eu/youth/pdf/doc1084_en.pdf. 
10 Commission Communication 'Opportun ities, Access and Solidarity: Towa rds a New Social Vision for 
21st Century Europe',  COM (2007) 726 , November 2007. 
11 Bureau of European Policy advisers, April 2007 
12 COM (2008) 412 final 
 
EN 8   EN The Lisbon Treaty has added to political expectati ons, as its legal entry into force would give 
a new youth dimension to the EU action as well as more visibility to  youth at EU level— 
under a newly modified Article  149, Community action shall be aimed among others at 
"encouraging the participati on of young people in democratic life in Europe".  
1.2. Consultation of interested parties 
The consultation requirements have been me t, throughout various c onsultation exercises 
conducted since April 2008. 
1.2.1.  Internal consultations 
The existing Youth Inter-service Group has met twice in order to discuss main orientations of 
the future Cooperation Framework as well as this impact assessm ent. All relevant 
Commission services have been  invited to these meetings and representatives from the 
following Directorate-Generals participated: Secretariat General, Bureau of European Policy Advisers, Employment, Social Affairs and Eq ual Opportunities DG, Justice, Freedom and 
Security DG, Health and Consumers DG, Resear ch DG, Development DG, External relations 
DG, Europeaid DG, Humanitarian Aid DG, Information Society and Media DG and 
Communication DG. Complementary bilateral c ontacts have also taken place with some 
Directorate-Generals like S ecretariat General, Employment, Health and Consumers, 
Enterprise and Industry, External relations or Bureau of European Policy advisers.  
1.2.2.  Consultation of Member States 
Member States have been asked to report by mid October 2008 on their evaluation of the 
current cooperation framework and their ideas for the future cooperation. Directors General 
for Youth of the Member States have also ha d the opportunity to discuss these issues in 
several meetings which took pl ace in 2008 and early 2009. Member  States have highlighted 
achievements as well as a range of difficulties in the cooperation cycle
13, as developed under 
section 2.1.2. Among the achieveme nts, it has often been men tioned that the cooperation 
framework increased the visibility  of ‘Youth’ in Europe and allo wed for a better  incorporation 
of ‘Youth’ in EU policy. At national level, it has had influence on the development of many 
Youth strategies. The role of  the cooperation framework as a platform for exchange of 
practices and for dialogue has also been often underlined. 
However, EU youth cooperation has also shown so me limits according to the Member States 
assessment: the framework is not clear and c oherent enough, and is not  enough delivering in 
some areas, for instance, the implementation of  the European Youth Pact. The structured 
dialogue with young people needs to be revised and more inclusive, and the cross-sector 
nature of youth policy needs mo re recognition at EU and na tional level. Several Member 
States have stressed the part icular importance of having c oherent policies regarding youth, 
family and children. 
A common letter from 5 countries (France, Czech Republ ic, Sweden, Spain, and Germany) 
has also been sent in October 2008 to all Yout h Ministers and European  Commission in order 
to present a common position of these five count ries. This document underlines the need for a 
single youth policy framework merging mainstream ing efforts, in particular related to the 
Youth Pact and the open method of coordina tion, which embodies all of the youth policy 
priorities. 
                                                 
13 Ecotec-Ecorys summary of national reports, January 2009, under the Framework contract EAC/03/06 
on Evaluation, Impact asse ssment and related services. 
 
EN 9   EN Even before the consultation phase, the Counc il conclusions on future perspectives for 
European cooperation in the field of youth policy adopted in May 200714 pointed out the need 
to adapt the strategies in vi ew of the demographic changes (ageing of population, need for 
inter-generational solidarity). 
1.2.3.  Consultation of young people and youth organisations 
In the framework of the structured dialogue with young people, a whole cycle dedicated to 
future challenges for young people has been launched in April 2008. Youth organisations 
have been invited to organise conferences on this topic to cont ribute to the definition of the 
new Youth Cooperation Framework of the next decade and Commission has received feed-back from these debates. The debates culminated during the European Youth Week in November 2008, with the adoption of Conclusions which underl ined among others the need 
for a clear structure for di alogue between youth and deci sion makers, as well as a 
comprehensive cross sector policy for youth.  
A specific and regular consultation of the Eur opean Youth Forum (EU main stakeholder in 
the youth field, representing around 100 umbrella organisations) has also been organised via 
several meetings. 
A public consultation called 'Strategic Choices  for Young Europeans' which adhered to the 
Commission's minimum standards  has been launched on-line from 22
nd of September until 
25th of November 200815. 5426 responses have been provi ded, covering both individuals 
(88.5%) including half of youth or social workers, and organisa tions (11.5% that is to say 
over 600). 
When asked about the key challenges for young people in the coming de cade, the respondents 
have mainly indicated youth unemployment, re form of education systems, environment and 
sustainable development, social integration and active participat ion in society. A majority of 
the respondents would like to see more done by the EU to help young people play a more 
active role in society,  to develop opportunities or young people to live, work and travel 
throughout Europe, and to help  young people find a job.  
Most of the consultations conducted among you ng people and youth organisations indicate a 
will for a pursued and reinforced action in the citi zenship related fields, together with a strong 
request for a developed youth cr oss-cutting policy. These expectations can be found in the 
main orientation papers of the European Youth Forum16, in the conclusions of the 2008 
European Youth Week or in the re sults of the on-line consultation.  
1.2.4.  Consultation of experts 
A special meeting of researchers of the Eu ropean Network of Youth Knowledge (EuNYK) 
has been organised in October 2008. The partic ipants stressed the need to reinforce youth 
better knowledge tools in order to reinforce evidence-based policy making, not only for youth 
policies but also to provide other poli cies with a clearer  youth perspective. 
The national agencies of the Youth in Ac tion programme also provided a contribution 
underlining the need to develop a stronger linking of the national and the European level. This 
contribution also requested that  youth cooperation act for the bene fit of all young people (not 
only specific target groups, and with the aim of reaching out young people who are not 
                                                 
14 See reference in footnote 7. 
15 See annex 5 for a summary of main outcomes. The de tails of the on-line consultation outcomes will be 
published as a background document on http://ec.europa.eu/youth/index_en.htm . 
16 Website of the European Youth Forum: http://www.youthforum.org/  
 
EN 10   EN touched enough by existing measures), as well  as a stronger support of youth work. The 
following issues have also been mentioned by th e national agencies as particularly important 
for young people: mobility, innovation and entr epreneurship, links with children policy, 
health, culture, volunteering, pa rticipation and information.  
2. PROBLEM DEFINITION  
2.1. Problems  
The problem needs to be defi ned both in terms of the cha llenges directly faced by young 
people, and of how to address these challe nges via the Youth Cooperation Framework. 
All this takes place against a backdrop of new or persisting Eu ropean-wide challenges, which 
directly or indirectly impact on young people.  
2.1.1.  Global challenges  
Globalisation brings new competitive forces on the world market: notwithstanding its positive 
effects on growth, jobs and prosperity and th e need to enhance European competitiveness 
further through structural change , globalisation may also have ne gative consequences for the 
most vulnerable and least qualified workers such as the young people.  
Demographic changes are also a major challeng e for the European countries to cope with: 
Most Member States are experiencing a declin ing number of births and are among the most 
aged countries in the world17 with a shrinking workforce, and this has progressive effects on 
intergenerational solidarity. Y outh has become a scarce res ource in Europe. According to 
Eurostat population projections , the percentage of people ag ed 15–29 in the to tal population 
will be 15.3 % in 2050, whereas they currently represent 19.3%. The Council conclusions on future perspectives for Europ ean cooperation in the field of  youth policy adopted in May 2007 
point out the need to adapt the youth strate gy in view of these demographic changes. 
Climate change is affecting the way we live and work, with a demand for new skills ('green 
jobs') as well as an increasing urge for sustainable behaviours and ways of life. 
Social changes impact heavily on youth. Europeans are living longer lives, facing 
unprecedented changes in family patterns
18, making progress towards gender equality and 
adjusting to new patterns of mobility and dive rsity. At the same time, evidence shows that 
individual life chances are often set by th e time a child reaches school, with family 
background and neighbourhood environment playing a key role.  
Most Member States are now experiencing mi gratory phenomena and are confronted with 
integration challenges. While many immigrants in the European Union are well integrated, 
there are, nevertheless, growi ng concerns in a number of count ries about the situation of 
young migrants and of the young people from 2nd and 3rd generation. In se veral countries, 
over 10% of 15 year-old have parents who were born abroad. Children and youth from 
migrant background tend to have lower school results than other pupils.19  
                                                 
17 EU 2008 Demography Report 
18 Commission Communication 'Promoting solidarity between the generations' COM (2007) 244  
19 Third  Annual Report on Migration and Integration, COM (2007) 512; Green Paper "Migration & 
Mobility: challenges and opportunities for EU education systems", COM (2008) 423. 
 
EN 11   EN The consequences of the current economic and fi nancial crisis are not yet well known, but it is 
likely to affect firstly the most vulnerab le groups, including low-skilled young people20, 
especially when considering employability  and initial access to the labour market. 
2.1.2.  Problems affecting the si tuation of young people21 
Beyond global challenges affectin g European societies, other ch allenges more specific to 
youth are often mentioned. These problems ha ve also direct co nsequences on the 
implementation of the core objectives of the European Union and its Member States in the already mentioned context of declining demographics. 
• Lack of opportunities 
The Renewed Social Agenda stre ssed the fact that young people are not getting the best start 
in life: despite the fact that young people in the EU currently en joy a wealth of opportunities, 
today's young generation are in a particularly  fragile situation. Too many young people are 
not able to develop their full potential and to  successfully enter the job market, and leave 
school without a form al qualification.  
While the educational attainment level of the working age populat ion in the EU (15 to 64 year 
olds) has risen during the last  decade, almost 1/3 of this  population still have a low 
educational attainment level a nd every sixth young person (18 to  24 years old) still leaves 
school with only compulsory educa tion attainment level or below
22. The rate of early school 
leavers stands at 14.8%23, and is even more severe among males and young people with 
migrant backgrounds. The young people are the se gment of the European population that 
work mostly in low-quality jobs which re quire low qualifications and are poorly paid24. 
Another key challenge is linked to youth une mployment and poverty. Unemployment affects 
twice as many young people as adults in Euro pe. Youth, and the earl y school leavers in 
particular, find it difficult to get access to th e labour market, with fewer unskilled jobs 
available and very uneven access to lifelong lear ning. One-fifth of those aged between 16 and 
24 in Europe were at risk of poverty in 200625, against 14% for people aged 25-49. Such a 
situation is often combined with low social mobility, w ith young people coming from homes 
with multi-generational unemployment and/or  poverty, as well as intergenerational 
transmission of educational disadvantage. 
This lack of opportunities is not only aff ecting disadvantaged young people. For instance, 
even highly educated young people may well face difficulties of access to stable and quality 
jobs as well as a lack of financial autonomy vis-à-vis their family. By not always making the 
best of youth potential, European societies ri sk creating many frustr ations and lack of 
                                                 
20 Such consequences were already visible in many countries as underlined by the Commission Lisbon 
strategy recommendations presented in January 2009, COM (2009) 34. 
21 The situation of young people in Europe will be described in detail in the future EU Report on youth, to 
be presented as a Staff Working Document at the same time as the Communication. 
22 Impact assessment accompanying the Commission Communication about an updated strategic 
framework for European c ooperation in Education and Training, December 2008 
23 2007 figure. Within the Education and Training Cooperation Framework, the benchmark set in 2003 – 
to be achieved by 2010 – was to have not more than 10% early school leavers. The 2000 figure was 
17.3%. 
24 Young women experience even higher unemployment rates than men and are more often in low quality, 
part-time and fixed-term jobs. 
25 Being at risk of poverty meaning that the disposable income of the household in which these youngsters 
live, adjusted for household size, was below 60% of the national median income – 'Youth in the EU - 
figures', Eurostat, November 2008. 
 
EN 12   EN incentives among all categories of young people a nd increasing the gap between them and the 
main social institutions. 
• Difficulties of access and participation in society  
All young people are not always adequately equi pped to deal with all the rapid changes 
occurring in the European societ ies and some of them are particularly affected. Disadvantaged 
young people are often excluded from opportunities to participate fully in society and to enjoy 
the benefits of education, employment and soci al welfare. Without any of these opportunities, 
young people might sometimes face marginalisation or radicalisation, when  placed in extreme 
situations from an economic or social point of view.  
In addition, there is a growing recogni tion that health problems among young people 
represent an increasing key challenge for public authorities: there are sp ecificities of the youth 
population regarding issues such as obesity, life st yle, addictions and mental health. Injuries – 
often in link with ri sk-taking behaviours – are the num ber one killer of young people, 
claiming the lives of 20,000 young people aged 15-24 each year in the EU27. According to 
other recent estimates, one fifth of children and adolescents in the EU suffer from 
developmental, emotional or behavioural proble ms and one in eight have a mental disorder. 
Improving the health condition of young people and promoting a healthy lifestyle and a 
culture of prevention among them has thus become an important challenge26. 
The available information regarding the implementa tion of participation objectives (one of out 
of the four priorities in the current framework ) shows that there is still room for improvement, 
particularly regarding specific objectives such as greater pa rticipation by young people in the 
mechanisms of representative democracy or lear ning to participate. Y oung people are still not 
involved enough in society and in civic life.  
• Weakened solidarities 
As explained in the 2007 Commission Communi cation 'Promoting solidarity between the 
generations'27, inter-generational solidarity relationsh ips are more complex than in the past. 
Greater life expectancy, populat ion ageing and increasing geogr aphical mobility impact the 
relationships between the gene rations and the ava ilability of family support networks28. While 
young adults live under their parents’  roof for longer, the parents have increasing ly often to 
support dependent elderly people. And this is not always easy to reconcile with the weakening 
of family structures, combined with trends to individualisation29. 
At the same time, new risks of generation divide are emerging be tween younger and older 
generations – in a broader sense than solidarity w ithin the family – in terms of pay, pensions, 
job security and access to housing for instance30.  
These various trends directly affect the s ituation of children and young people and their place 
in society; on one hand, ther e is a growing focus on the i ndividual; on the other hand, the 
young people tend to rely more on new solidariti es outside family or other traditional 
institutions (for instance, development of virt ual communities such as Facebook, etc). This is 
not a problem in itself but might become su ch when the young people choose extreme forms 
                                                 
26 Commission White Paper 'Together for Health: A Strategic Approach for the EU 2008-2013', 
COM(2007) 630 
27 COM(2007) 244 final 
28 EU Demography Report 2008 - meeting social needs in an ageing society, SEC(2008) 2911 
29 Social reality stock taking exercise - Commission Communication COM(2007) 726. 
30 Communication COM (2007) 726 . 
 
EN 13   EN of solidarity in order to find identity an d protection (such as ga ngs or other violent 
communities). 
In link with new family patterns, many child ren now grow up with a single parent. Around 
one-third of these single parent families are at  risk of poverty – twice the proportion for the 
population as a whole. This often leads to a vicious cycle of childhood deprivation, unhealthy 
lifestyles, academic und er-achievement and social exclusion. Young parents themselves can 
be particularly affected by these weakened solidarities. 
2.1.3.  Assessment of the current  cooperation framework31  
The assessment of the results of the current c ooperation cycle by the di fferent actors involved 
in the process has shown some positive impacts. However, it has also highlighted a range of difficulties or limitations in the cooperation cy cle, particularly when tackling the above 
mentioned problems affecting young people. 
• Assessment of the Youth open method of coordination 
Priorities
32 
– Encouraging young people's participation in the exercise of active citizenship and 
civil society 
Participation was the first priority proposed in the White Paper. Good progress has been 
achieved in policies at national level, although there is still room for improvement. Youth 
parliaments or youth councils are established in  the majority of countries. Most countries 
provide financial support for greater particip ation. It appears that the downward trend in 
participation by young people in the mechanisms of  representative democracy is continuing, 
although at the same time more efforts are take n to consult young people.  Specific initiatives 
in terms of learning to participate still seem to be limited. 
At European level, initiatives have also been  successfully taken. For instance, the Youth in 
Action programme funds projects which are desi gned to encourage a sense of active European 
citizenship  in young people and encourage young people to become more involved in the 
democratic process at regional,  national and European level. 
– Enhancing the information addressed to young people 
Progress has been made on improving young people’s access to information  in terms of the 
number of countries having an information strategy. Together with  the European Youth 
Portal, national youth portals ha ve been established and many Me mber States started setting 
up Youth Information Centres. However, most countries have not ye t developed standard 
methods to assess the quality of the information. 
– Promoting voluntary activities among young people 
National strategies for young volunteers still have to be developed, although there have been a 
number of recent developments in  several Member States to revise legislation in order to 
better support volunteering among young people.  
Real progress has been achieved at EU level. The Youth in Action programme offers several 
opportunities for volunteering. On e of them is the ‘European Voluntary Service’, through 
                                                 
31 A more detailed assessment of the current cooperation framework by member States is published as a 
background document on http://ec.europa.eu/youth/index_en.htm  (Ecotec-Ecorys summary of national 
reports) 
32 See annex 2 for the list of current priorities an d objectives of the open method of coordination 
 
EN 14   EN which young people can be full-time volunteers fo r up to one year in another country. A 
Council recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers across the European Union33 
has also been recently adopted in order to  encourage youth cross-border volunteering.  
– Encouraging greater understanding and knowledge of youth 
This priority is characterised by weak implem entation at national level. While progress has 
been made since the adoption of the common objectives in 2004 and lo ts of good practices 
exist, much is still to be done  in this field. The major challe nge for Member States seems to 
be how to develop a coordinated approach to y outh research that brings all the actors in the 
field together in a joint effort to  identify and streamline youth research34.  
Processes 
More generally, the public authorities for youth35 in many Member States have acknowledged 
that the EU cooperation framewor k in the field of youth has insp ired youth-related legislation 
at national level and helped many Member Stat es develop national stra tegies. National laws 
and strategies have been very much been influenced by European common objectives and priorities either in the "old" Member States
36, or in the Member States that have joined the 
European Union since 2004. More and more c ountries involve youth organisations in their 
policy-making and the youth policy fi eld is increasingly structured in a manner similar to or 
consistent with the EU framew ork at local and regional level37. 
While a majority of stakeholders feel that th e main instruments of the cooperation framework 
remain appropriate, they  also demand that the OMC tool s should be further improved on and 
the quality of cooperation should be increased. 
Some Member States have for in stance underlined that there is a lack of unders tanding of the 
diversity of ‘youth’ in the cooperation cycle, and some have also criticised a lack of 
representativeness of th e youngsters involved in th e structured dialogue. 
It has also been suggested that the definition of ‘Youth’ – oriented towards the 15 to 25 age 
group – is too narrow in the past cooperation cycl e, and that not enough attention is given to 
children (and children’s rights). 
Some stakeholders also highlighted the fact th at there is a low awaren ess of EU youth policy. 
More generally, some youth organisations consid er that the OMC also still needs to be 
genuinely implemented in all Member States . In this sense, the current cooperation 
framework has not always pr oved its efficiency and its capacity to deliver.  
It has often been underlined that youth work – a set of activities outsi de schools, developed by 
young people, youth organisations or local authorities and managed by youth workers or 
youth leaders – has not been recognised a nd supported enough by the current cooperation 
framework. In particular, youth work has recentl y been evolving from activities traditionally 
focused on leisure time to activ ities dedicated to fight unemployment, educational failure, 
marginalisation and social exclusion; these last ones are often qua lified as non formal 
education activities in the youth field. So far, this shift has not been  sufficiently analysed. 
                                                 
33 OJ C319/8, 13.12.2008 
34 'European Research on Youth' available at http://ec.europa.eu/research/social-sciences/library_en.html  
35 Summary of national reports prepared by Ecotec-Ecorys, January 2009 
36 For example, the Finnish Youth Policy Development Programme 2007-2011 is presented in official 
documents as a national implementation of the European Youth Cooperation Framework. 
37 Many Member States actively promote the creation of local/municipal youth councils: 850 in Greece, in 
200 out of 350 municipalities in Finland, half of th e municipalities in France, Charter on participation 
of young people in local and re gional life in Bulgaria, etc…) 
 
EN 15   EN The assessment of the past repor ting cycle and of other documents  also clearly indicates that 
there are important gaps in the information supplied by Member States, and more generally 
the field suffers from a real lack of data at European level, which contradicts the need for 
evidence based policies. 
• Assessment of the European Youth Pact 
The adoption of the European Youth Pact has been welcomed and its three strands 
(employment and social integration, education, training and mobility, as well as reconciliation 
of working and family life) are consider ed as very important areas for youth.  
Priorities 
– Employment, integration and social advancement 
Some progress has been achieve d on youth employment and inte gration after this became a 
priority of the Lisbon strategy since 2005. The P act has particularly helped to develop a 
transversal approach of youth i ssues regarding employment.  
The implementation of the European Youth Pa ct, however, still needs work at EU and 
national levels, and the current economic crisis brings risks of relapse. The analysis of the National Reform Programmes for 2008 shows that  youth unemployment is  around 15.5%, that 
is to say 2 points less than in 2007, but rema ins however twice the gl obal unemployment rate. 
It has not changed much since 2000, when th e youth unemployment rate was 16.1% and the 
general rate 8.4%. Moreover, young people are likely to be par ticularly vulnerable in the 
deteriorating economic situation
38. 
– Education, training and mobility 
These are still issues, particularly concerni ng the high rate of drop-outs from the school 
system and the lack of recognition of non-formal and informal education, despite some progress achieved at EU level with Youthpass and Europass. Furthermore, mobility is only 
possible for a limited part of the young people in Europe. 
– Reconciliation of working life and family life 
This priority has not been characterised by much progress. However,  there is a growing 
awareness of how crucial child-friendly policie s are for tackling many of the issues arising 
among youth and for addressing demographic change. 
Processes 
At national level, the profile of youth as a pr iority area in employment policies has increased 
since 2005. However, youth ministri es are not always enough invol ved in that process, and 
coordination on the youth issues between the rele vant policies is insufficient in many Member 
States. Moreover, the involvement  of youth organisations in th e implementation of the Pact, 
as foreseen in the European Council conclusions themselves, varies according to the 
countries. 
At EU level, the youth dimension is more visi ble in main reporting documents, and the Youth 
Council presents every year key message s to the Spring European Council.  
                                                
 
38 Council Key messages to the Spring European Council on the European Youth  Pact and European 
cooperation in the youth field, 16 February 2009. 
 
EN 16   EN The already mentioned 2007 Communicati on about "Promoting young people's full 
participation in educatio n, employment and society"39 went a step further in listing many 
concrete actions in the fiel d of youth education, employment , inclusion and participation. 
• Assessment of mainstreaming activities 
Priorities 
Mainstreaming activities have been developed since 2002 in few areas like the fight against 
racism, xenophobia and other forms of discrimi nation or since 2008 health and well-being on 
which a Council resolution ha s recently been adopted40.  
Fight against discrimination has been char acterised by a strong youth involvement in 
European campaigns such as ‘For Diversity-A gainst Discrimination’ or 'All different, all 
equal'41. 
Although we are at the beginning of the EU level mainstreaming process regarding health, the 
growing youth dimension of health strategies is very promising42. 
Processes 
There is a consensus for asking more recogniti on of the cross-sector nature of youth policy 
and a broader scope for this cross-cutting approach as al ready illustrated in Council 
Conclusions of November 2007 on a tr ansversal approach to youth policy43 and in the 
European Parliament Declaration on youth empowerment44. However, the current framework 
is not coordinated enough in order to tackle all the necessary issues. 
All in all, there is also a general feeling that the 'Y outh' resource (youth organisations, youth 
networks, youth workers, youth leaders, and young people themselves) could be better 
valorised and used in order to tackle main EU challenges.  
2.2. Affected groups 
This initiative will affect primarily the young people. The Europeans between 15 and 29 are 
around 20 % of the current EU population, th at is to say 96 million people.  
Another affected group will be Youth non-gover nmental organisations. These organisations 
are present at every level of decision making, from the local le vel to the European Union. 
Youth organisations or councils are generally very structured and represent a whole range of 
youth groups.  
The initiative also concerns people working w ith young people such as youth/social workers. 
Youth administrations at all levels will also be  affected by this initiative, as they would 
implement it. 
                                                 
39 See full reference in footnote 8 
40 See for instance Council Resolution of 20 November 2008 on health and well-being of young people. 
41 See http://www.stop-discrimination.info/  and http://alldifferent-allequal.info/  
42 See also footnote 27 
43 Conclusions of the Council and of the Representa tives of the Governments of the Member States, 
meeting within the Council of 16 November 2007 on a transversal approach to youth policy with a view 
to enabling young people to fulfil their potential and participate actively in society, [2007/C 282/16] 
44 The European Parliament adopted in September 2008 a written declaration on youth empowerment, 
with 433 MEPs signing a text calling on the Commission and Member States to take into account the 
needs of young people when developing policies that affect them and to develop a more horizontal 
youth policy. 
 
EN 17   EN 2.3. Baseline Scenario 
As already explained in chap ters 1.1.2 and 2.1.3, a framework for European co-operation in 
the field of youth (Youth Coopera tion Framework) was establishe d in June 2002 by way of an 
open method of coordination (OMC) focusing on active citizenship of young people, and 
complemented in 2005 by the European Youth Pact  – an instrument dedicated to social and 
vocational integration of young people within th e Lisbon strategy. Other elements, such as 
mainstreaming activities (taking account of the ‘youth’ dimension in ot her policy in itiatives), 
knowledge tools, structured dialogue with young people a nd peer-learning, have been 
progressively developed within the Youth Cooperation Framework.  
The current Youth Cooperation Framework has three pillars: the OMC dedicated to active 
citizenship of young people, the European Y outh Pact aiming at promoting social and 
vocational integration of young people, and mainstreaming activities. 
The current cycle of the open method of coordi nation will come to an end in 2009 with an 
assessment of the implementation of the fourth  and last priority (b etter knowledge of the 
situation of young people) and with an evaluation  of the whole cycle, as foreseen in Council 
resolutions.  
No other work is planned under this current framework, which means that the cooperation 
between Member States would cease regardi ng citizenship of young people without specific 
action being taken: extension of the curre nt OMC beyond 2009 would hence also require a 
specific proposal by the Commission and endorse ment by Council. The po ssibility of ending 
the cooperation has not been retained for further analysis ( as explained below in section 4.2 ), 
and this extension scenario has been chos en as a status quo option under section 4.  
2.4. Legal basis and subsidiarity 
The legal basis for this initiative can be  found in Article 149 of the EC treaty.  
Member States have the main responsibility fo r the policy changes need ed to respond to the 
challenges identified in Section 2, and most of the policies concerned are areas where the EU 
has only competence to carry out actions to support, coordinate or supplement the actions of 
the Member States. However, a more pro-active role at EU level is necessary in order to 
support Member State cooperati on. Action by a Member State alone would not achieve the 
same results as described in the assessment of the current cooperation framework such as 
raising visibility of Youth and youth strate gies, defining common objectives, developing 
mutual learning, exchange of pr actices and experience as well as structur ed dialogue with 
young people at a European level, , acce ss to European wide data, etc.  
Moreover, stakeholders and Member States have found that the current OMC has provided 
added value (in particular by acting as a catal yst in relation to s upporting development of 
national strategies) and have e xpressed keen interest in cont inued cooperation on key issues. 
As described in section 1.2, they see the need to strengthen the effectiveness of the OMC in 
certain ways to achieve better outcomes. The added value of the EU in implementing 
interlinked policies has also been underlined.  
All the options examined below fully respect the principle of subsidiarity. These options 
envisage setting up common objectives and coope ration principles, but national competences 
as well as diversity of nati onal situations regarding youth and youth strategies are fully 
respected, as the framework will leave implemen tation of these objectives and principles in 
 
EN 18   EN the hands of the Member States45. Since the Youth Cooperation Framework is based on the 
voluntary cooperation of the various stakeholders , including the local and regional levels is 
also very important for achi eving the common objectives. 
3. OBJECTIVES  
3.1. General objectives 
On the basis of the problem definition and ch allenges listed above, the next European Youth 
Cooperation Framework will aim to enhance th e well-being of young people in Europe during 
the next decade, by investing properly in youth and in empowering young people for contributing in a more competitive, c ohesive and sustainable EU society. 
The general objectives of the proposed framework are in line with its st rategic orientations 
listed above and with the problems affecting young people themselves: 
• Creating more opportunities  for youth in education and employment  – Helping 
young people to develop their potential, part icularly in terms of formal and non-
formal education, employment (employabi lity, flexicurity and work/life balance) 
as well as creativity. 
• Improving access  and full participation of all young people in society  – Ensuring 
access to social and civic opportunities for all young people in their diversity, 
particularly in terms of health and participation. 
• Fostering mutual solidarity  between society and young people – Promoting both 
solidarity of society towards youth and of  young people towards other generations 
or other young people, in particular thr ough volunteering or so lidarity with the 
rest of the world. 
3.2. Specific objectives  
• The specific objectives of the proposed European Youth Cooperation Framework 
seek to improve its cohere nce and its efficiency: To develop a transversal 
approach  of issues relating to youth, in order to address these issues in a 
comprehensive way; 
• To improve  efficiency  of the cooperation, so as to answer the concerns expressed 
by most of the actors; 
• To mobilise youth organisations and young people,  in order to develop youth 
empowerment. 
3.3. Operational objectives  
The operational objectives of the proposed Eu ropean Youth Cooperation Framework should 
enable the revised framework to tackle the issu es addressed in the assessment of the current 
cooperation. They are the following ones: 
• To develop coordination mechanisms between policies; 
• To reinforce structured dialogue with young people; 
                                                
 
45 As most coordination processes, the youth fram ework is mainly aimed at initiating or facilitating 
reforms to be conducted at the national level. 
 
EN 19   EN • To improve implementation of cooperation (particularly via simplified reporting 
and peer-learning processes);  
• To develop knowledge based policy making. 
3.4. Consistency of these objectives with other EU policies 
These objectives will help to meet the challenges mentioned in Section 2, as well as the core 
objectives of the European Union. 
They will contribute to implementing the Renewed Social Agenda, as already outlined in 
Section 1, as well as the goals of the Lisbon Strategy and probably the future post Lisbon objectives. Youth strategies have a key role  to play for social cohesion, access to 
opportunities, inclusion, health or  intergenerational dialogue.  
European competitiveness highly depends on efforts for education, training and youth 
employment (for instance, flexicurity). 
Participation and commitment are key words fo r youth strategies, in or der to develop active 
citizenship of the young Europeans. 
There is also a strong link between these Y outh strategy objectives  and recent actions 
undertaken by the European Uni on regarding children's rights
46 and families. 
Youth strategy has also to do with integration policy, including actions aiming at facilitating 
access to employment, raising the educational a ttainments, promoting equal opportunities for 
all, fostering intercultural dial ogue and increasing civ il, cultural and politi cal participation of 
immigrants. Insofar as mobility of  third country nationals (stude nts, trainees, volunteers) is 
concerned, Youth and immigration po licies are closely interconnected. 
                                                 
46 Commission Communication 'Towards an EU strategy on the rights of the child', COM(2006) 327 
 
EN 20   EN  
4. POLICY OPTIONS  
4.1. Global analysis 
In relation to the objectives identified, four polic y options have been considered; they can be 
briefly differentiated accordi ng to the policy scope or to  the instruments chosen. 
4.1.1.  Possible scope 
The scope could vary al ong two main scenarios. 
A specific approach characterised by a narrow scope  would be focused only on active 
citizenship of young people, par ticipation and commitment di rectly connected to Youth 
policy, supporting traditional youth work. 
A transversal approach characterised by a holistic scope  would encompass all policies which 
concern young people, namely education, employ ment, inclusion, health, justice, including a 
renewed youth policy regarding active citizensh ip as well as mobilisation of young people).  
4.1.2.  Possible instruments 
As far as the instruments are concerned: 
• The Youth open method of coordination  (citizenship focu sed scope) could be 
either based on the current tools  or an improved  one, with new mechanisms for 
reporting, monitoring, knowledge and dialogue with the stakeholders. 
• The necessary cross-sectoral coordination  could also be either: 
– based on light mechanisms (such as now, with so me mainstreaming activities in a 
few policies)  
– Or improved by stronger , more global and integrated mechanisms:  
– Identifying how youth policy can c ontribute to ot her policies 
and with which tools; 
– Checking if and how the current youth needs are considered in 
these policies at the right level (monitoring); 
– Ensuring a certain level of  cooperation-coordination; 
– Mobilising young people and youth organisations for 
implementing the relevant policies. 
• Another way of action could be to develop a set of more binding tools  in order to 
complement national policies. 
4.2. Policy options not retained for analysis 
4.2.1.  Ending the Cooperation  
Without any explicit extension of the OMC – whic h is the core of the current framework – the 
cooperation would cease on citizenship prioritie s beyond 2009. In this area, the situation 
would be quite similar to the one before the 2001 White Paper: the ma in cooperation activities 
would be centred on the implementa tion of the Youth programmes.  
The European Youth Pact would go on within the Lisbon strategy fram ework, at least until 
the revision planned in 2010. The few other mainstreaming activities developed under the 
Youth Framework might be at risk as they will  lose the leverage eff ect of the Youth OMC. 
 
EN 21   EN Under this option, most of the 'acquis' obtained through the cooperation and policy 
development since 2001 would thus  risk being lost or dimini shed. It would send a negative 
message to the young people, at a particularly difficult moment for them from an economic 
point of view.  
4.2.2.  Specific approach (narrow scope) 
Restricting the scope of the EU Youth Coopera tion Framework to the ci tizenship area would 
be in contradiction with all the requests for more cross–sectoral approach coming from the 
various stakeholders in the field, including the Member States themselves.  
It would also be counter-productive as it woul d compromise an important 'acquis' (European 
Youth Pact, mainstreaming). With all the li mitations described under section 2 above, the 
European framework has nevertheless encour aged the development of cross-sectoral 
coordination mechanisms, which ar e particularly relevant for be tter taking into account the 
youth dimension in other policy domains47. Since 2005, the European Youth Pact has become 
a key tool of European action for youth. In th is context, the specific dimension of youth life-
transitions is more taken into account when adopting new measures related to the labour 
market.  
Moreover, a narrow approach would not be in line with the policy line advocated in the 
September 2007 Communication. 
4.2.3.  Development of a set of more binding tools  
Within the holistic approach, the main invol ved policies are based on open methods of 
coordination or other non-bindi ng instruments. Although the us e of 'soft law' might be 
appropriate in specific cases (such as recen tly done with success under Article 149 EC in 
order to adopt a Council Recommendation on  the Mobility of Young Volunteers across 
European Union), wide adoption of binding tools would be in c onflict with the subsidiarity 
principle. Furthermore, it would only be possible to adopt such acts in areas expressly covered 
by Treaty provisions and would not  make possible to achieve th e objectives identified under 
section 3, particularly regarding the necessa ry development of a transversal approach. 
4.3. Options retained for analysis 
Option 1: Status quo 
Option 2: a reinforced youth OMC Option 3: a developed cr oss-sectoral approach 
Option 4: a global strategy These policy options can be br iefly described as follows.  
4.3.1.  Option 1: Status quo (baseline scenario) 
Under this option, continuation of the current OMC beyond 2009 would be based on a 
specific proposal by the Comm ission and endorsement by the Council. The extended Youth 
Cooperation Framework would then function on the basis of the current tools and objectives, 
and the framework would remain divided in three pillars. 
                                                
 
47 In Latvia, for instance, eight ministries are involved in an inter-ministerial committee headed by the 
Minister of Children, Family and Youth affairs. These ministries have to report on how they include 
youth dimension in their activities. 
 
EN 22   EN The OMC would keep its four 'ac tive citizenship' pr iorities. It should be noted that the current 
youth OMC does not foresee the adaptation of these priorities. Thus, new challenges as 
mentioned in the problem definition above coul d not be highlighted as  specific priorities 
under this extended framework. Every two years, one  of the four priorities of the OMC would 
be reported about by the Member States. Tools such as peer-learning an d structured dialogue 
could continue to evolve on an experimental basis. 
The European Youth Pact would continue to exist within both the Youth Cooperation 
Framework and the Lisbon Strategy at leas t until this proces s is revised in 2010. 
The current mainstreaming activities would go on in the current limited way, without more 
cooperation instruments than ad hoc ones. 
4.3.2.  Option 2: a reinforced Youth open method of coordination 
In this option, the priority w ould be given to improving the ac tive citizenship of young people 
in Europe, as it was the 2001 Commission Wh ite Paper, with some mechanisms for 
mainstreaming of youth in other policies beside s this. The Youth OMC should be reinforced 
while keeping its active citizenship orientation. Besides the reinforced OMC, other tools (such 
as mainstreaming) would remain the same than today.  
In order to implement the reinforced OM C, the following tools could be developed. 
It is proposed to keep and develop peer-lear ning processes, possibly via clusters between 
some Member States (meetings of  experts at technical level) or high level seminars when 
political cooperation is essential. 
Structured dialogue with young peop le should be reinforced, po ssibly complemented with ad 
hoc dialogue with social partners. 
In order to develop monitoring tools, the rein forced OMC could be base d on indicators, to be 
decided later on the basis of the results of a special working group. 
The current tools for better knowledge of young people (such as Eurostat data, national 
reports, the Knowledge Centre) w ould have to be complemented mainly regarding citizenship 
of young people. On this basis, one could probabl y reinforce the networki ng of researchers in 
order to support the analysis.  
Another tool of the reinforced OMC would be  a triennial presenta tion and discussion of 
Commission/Council joint reports,  on the basis of national repor ts. This triennial report –
dealing also mainly with citizenship of young people – would also be the time for evaluating 
the framework and if necessary updating the priorities chosen for implementing the 
objectives. 
Besides this reinforced OMC, the cooperation framework would not have stronger tools than 
today for mainstreaming youth in other policy fields. 
4.3.3.  Option 3: a developed cross-sectoral approach 
In this scenario, the main focus would be put on  cross-sectoral approach in policies being of 
first importance for young people, such as employ ment, education, inclusion, health, etc. The 
OMC would keep its current tool s and objectives without any rein forcement, considering that 
it is not necessary to go further in the deve lopment of tools for ac tive citizenship of young 
people.  
The cross sectoral approach would be  developed along the following lines: 
- Through developed coordination mechanisms for policies with a strong youth dimension 
(such as employment, inclusion or health for instance) at EU and national level whenever 
 
EN 23   EN possible, in order to ensure a priority to youth in other policies whenever relevant; the 
principle of a cross-sectoral approach at na tional level could be agreed, and the way to 
implement it should be left to the Member States responsib ility. At EU level, Commission 
should also devise coordination mechanisms su ch as developing Youth Interservice group and 
Council could envisage setting up ad hoc coop eration between Council formations when 
dealing on transversal youth issues. 
- Via mobilisation of youth as a resource in  policies where youth actors, young people and 
youth organisations can play a role and/or provide expertise. Young people and especially 
youth organisations and youth lead ers have a specific role and responsibilities in some areas 
such as environmental awareness48, creativity and innovation, solid arity (intergenerational, 
with young migrants, with young peopl e with fewer opportunities, with  rest of the world), the 
fight against discriminations, etc.. 
4.3.4.  Option 4: a global strategy 
This option would be characteri sed by a general evolution, both in  the tools and in the issues 
covered by the framework. The main instrume nts of the future framework would be a 
reinforced open method of coordi nation as well as a developed cross sectoral approach. Both 
tools have already been described above, in options 2 and 3.  
In this scenario, the cross sectoral approach would furthermore also benefit from the tools 
used in the reinforced OMC, such as repor ting, structured dialogu e, and knowledge. This 
option is the most ambitious one as it plans an upgrading in term s of priorities and tools. It 
would embrace the different aspects of the life of young people, whether at  school, at work, at 
leisure time or outside these environments. 
Within this option, synergies between youth OM C and cross-sectoral approach could be 
developed, by using tools developed in the fr amework of the OMC such as structured 
dialogue with young people, bette r knowledge instruments, peer -learning and mobilisation 
capacities in order to contribute to the implementation of other policies. 
In terms of structure, this op tion would favour an integrated a pproach rather than maintaining 
the fragmented three pillar one. The new struct ure would, in particular, fully integrate the 
issues addressed by the European Youth Pact. 
                                                 
48 See for instance Commission campaigns directed at children and young people, at 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/campaign/index_en.htm  
 
EN 24   EN 5.  ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS  
The impact of the current Youth Cooperatio n Framework is not easily measured in 
quantitative terms, and the same will also appl y to other policy options in the field. Although 
the final aim of all the options is to impr ove policy outcomes for young people, it is difficult 
to assess the direct impact of the framework due to the multitude  of contributing factors. The 
analysis below is thus more an assessment of  potential qualitative impacts of the various 
options, regarding social, econom ic and environmental outcomes, as well as impact on human 
rights. 
The microeconomic aspects (such as admini strative costs mainly) are duly taken into 
consideration when comparing the “f easibility” of the various options. 
5.1. Social impacts 
None of the options considered would have a negative social impact, but not all would be 
equal as to potential conse quences on social outcomes. 
Without any revision of the cooperation framewor k as planned in option 1 (status quo), the 
existing cycle would risk being out of touch w ith current and future needs of the young people 
as well as the main renewed So cial Agenda orientations.  
All other options are in line w ith the renewed Social Agenda and would have a more positive 
social impact. Option 2 (a reinforced Youth OMC) would put an emphasis on an increased 
civic participation and more solidarity of youn g people. However, options 3 (a developed 
cross-sectoral approach) and 4 (a global strategy) would have  the most important social 
impact, by setting up tools in order to develop e fficient strategies specifically dedicated to 
encourage employment, inclusion and gene ral well-being of young people, as well as 
reinforcing participation and solidarity for option 4. 
5.2. Economic impacts 
As for social impacts, none of the options  considered would ha ve a negative economic 
impact, but not all would be equal as to potential consequences on economic outcomes.  
The same analysis than for social impacts is valid regarding option 1: the existing cycle, 
characterised by a limited flexibility, would risk  being quickly (if not already) out of touch 
with the everyday problems of the young people,  such as the high unemployment rate of 
young people and its macro-economic consequences . This also goes for option 2 which would 
not change the efficiency and sc ope of the current transversal ac tions regarding other policies.  
Options 3 and 4 would have a greater posit ive impact on competitiveness and would 
positively feed into the Growth and Jobs Strategy : the development of cross-sectoral approach 
which they foresee aims at reinforcing the positive consequences of the Youth cooperation on the employment and education levels of young peopl e, and would also a llow taking better into 
account the future needs of youth and of  European societies in this area. 
For options 2 and 4, the impact on the administrative burden would be quite positive, as this 
scenarios include a triennial reporting obligation rather than a more fr equent one as today.  
The various options have no impact on the EU budget. 
5.3. Environmental impacts 
None of the assessed option would have direct environmental impacts. In the long run, no 
option among those proposed would have a negative impact on the environment.  
Options 2 and 4 could have secondary positive environmental impacts.  
 
EN 25   EN Option 2 (a reinforced Youth OMC) could be  used for inviting young people to consider 
environmental issues as important.  
Option 4 (a global strategy) w ould combine youth work and citizenship focused strategy with 
cross-sectoral approach. Environment is one of the areas where above mentioned synergies 
between the youth OMC and the cr oss-sectoral approach could be developed. By using tools 
developed in the framework of the OMC,  mobilisation capacit ies of young people can 
contribute to the implementati on of policies such as envir onment, energy or transport. 
5.4. Impacts on fundamental rights 
All the options are compatible with the obligation to respect fundamental rights as laid down 
in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The righ ts enshrined in the 
Charter of Fundamental Rights that have a par ticular link with youth issues are Article 24 
(Rights of the child) as well as  Article 21 (Non-discrimination – including based on age) and 
Article 32 (Prohibition of child labour a nd protection of young people at work).  
Other provisions of particular interest for this field are Artic le 7 (Respect for private and 
family life), Article 14 (Right to education), Article 15 (Freedom to choose an occupation and 
right to engage in work), Article 23 (Equa lity between women a nd men) and Article 33 
(Family and professional life). 
Generally speaking, all options would have a positive impact on the rights of children and 
young people. Options 3 and 4 would have more positive impacts on the fundamental rights connected with family and professional life, as  they would offer the pos sibility to develop a 
transversal approach for youth in these areas. 
6. C
OMPARING THE OPTIONS  
The four options have been compared on the basis of their impact on the objectives  to be 
achieved and on the basis of their feasibility. 
In this context the concept of feasibility refers  mainly to political acceptance of the options, 
availability of human res ources and financial means, and administrative burden. 
 
EN 26   EN  
The ranking of impacts (compared with the baseli ne scenario) is defined in the table below: 
Table 1 – Ranking criteria  
 ++ + 0 - -- 
Impact 
compared with baseline scenario  Positive 
impact Small positive 
impact Neutral 
impact Small 
negative impact Negative 
impact 
Feasibility/ 
Implementation feasible more or less 
feasible feasibility 
difficult to assess slightly 
difficult difficult 
 
Table 2 – Comparing the options with re gard to the impacts on the objectives 
 Option 1 (status 
quo) Option 2 (A 
reinforced Youth OMC) Option 3 (a 
developed cross- sectoral approach) Option 4 (a 
global strategy) 
General objectives 
     
Objective 1 
Creating more 
opportunities  0 0 + + 
Objective 2 
Improving youth 
access  0 + - ++ 
Objective 3 
Fostering mutual 
solidarity 0 + - ++ 
Specific objectives 
 
Objective 4 0 - + ++ 
 
EN 27   EN Transversal 
approach of youth issues 
Objective 5 
Improve the 
efficiency of the framework  0 +/0 +/0 + 
Objective 6 
Mobilisation of 
young people 0 + +/0 ++ 
 
Table 3 – Comparing the options according to  rating of feasibility/implementation 
 Option 1 (status 
quo) Option 2 (a 
reinforced Youth OMC) Option 3 (a 
developed cross-sectoral approach) Option 4 (a 
global strategy) 
Feasibility / 
implementation ++ + + + 
 
Based on the description in table 2 and 3 rega rding impacts on objectives and feasibility, the 
following conclusions can be draw n regarding the four options. 
6.1. Option 1: status quo 
6.1.1.  General objectives 
This option will not lead to creating mo re opportunities and improving access and 
participation than now, as this option only forese es an extension of the current approach. As 
already discussed, it does not appear as an appropriate answer to tackle challenges 
enumerated above under section 2. 
6.1.2.  Specific objectives 
This option would suffer from a lack of interact ion and in particular of coordination between 
policies. It would also be di fficult to mobilise young people a nd their representatives with 
such an option. 
6.1.3.  Feasibility /implementation 
This option would be straightfo rward easy to implement as it is  an extension of the current 
situation. However, political acceptance might be an issue as it would not provide a sufficient 
answer to the message both of Member States in favor of a more efficient OMC and of a 
stronger transversal approach. It would not make  administrative burden li ghter, as the current 
reporting cycle would continue to apply. 
 
EN 28   EN 6.2. Option 2: a reinforced OMC 
6.2.1.  General objectives 
This option would reinforce mainly access to civic and volunteering opportunities, a limited 
even if important part of the specific objec tives, and would not have more positive impacts 
than with the current cooperation on the creation of opportunities for employment and 
education. The general effects on inclusion of young people would be quite limited, as it 
would not include real developments  in the cross-sectoral approach. 
6.2.2.  Specific objectives 
This option could bring some improvements in  the implementation of youth cooperation and 
youth work at the European a nd national levels (dialogue w ith young people, exchange of 
practices, etc…), and allow greater participatio n and mobilisation of youth for society, in line 
with the modification of Article 149 proposed  by the Lisbon Treaty (as mentioned above, 
under modified Article 149, Comm unity action shall be aimed among others at "encouraging 
the participation of young people in democratic life in Europe"). 
However, this would enable developing only a partial knowledge of the situation of young 
people in Europe. Moreover, no improvement would be obtained re garding interaction 
between policies.  
6.2.3.  Feasibility /implementation 
Based on the experience of othe r OMCs (social, education,  culture, etc.), proposed 
improvements are certainly realistic. This option would be appreciated by ministries 
responsible for youth as far as the improveme nt in OMC mechanisms would maintain a 
reasonably light approach. However, it does not fit with the demand fo r more coordination 
expressed by the same ministries for youth and by Member States in general.  
6.3. Option 3: a developed cross-sectoral approach 
6.3.1.  General objectives 
This option could provide a good answer to tack le some essential objectives very important 
for young people in terms of education, employm ent, social inclusi on, health, justice. 
However, taking on board more policies wi thout upgrading instruments would limit the 
potential impacts regarding these areas, as tools would not match the objectives. 
It also runs the risk of mi nimizing within the cooperation fr amework the role of policies 
which have been developed by youth ministri es in supporting youth work for non-formal 
education, active citizenship, volunt eering and creativity of young people. 
 
EN 29   EN  
6.3.2.  Specific objectives 
This option could provide a good interacti on and coordination between policies.  
However, in this scenario, youth policy itself woul d suffer from a lack of efficiency due to the 
fact that the OMC tools would not be upgr aded, which would cause disappointment of 
stakeholders dealing with young people outside th e formal infrastructures. This option would 
enable developing only a partial knowledge of the situation of young people in Europe, even 
if not the same knowledge than in option 2. 
This option would also include limited tools to mobilise young people themselves for dealing 
with other policies as planned under options 2 and 4 with a reinforcement of youth OMC. It 
would also have limited effects on solidarity pur poses, as the cross-sect oral approach would 
not include a reinforcement of tools for youth volunteering. 
6.3.3.  Feasibility /implementation 
This option would be more difficult to implement particularly at the national level, due to the 
necessary respect of the subsidiarity principle and the diversity of national situations, with 
some Member States where coordination is not a strongly developed pract ice; at the European 
level there are already some mechanisms of co ordination like the Euro pean Youth Pact and 
regular inter-services co nsultations in all domains of intere st for youth. All in all, such a 
development of the cross-sectoral approach seem s absolutely necessary in order to achieve a 
quantum leap improvement of the situation. 
As mentioned for option 1, maintaining the curren t tools of the OMC might not be politically 
well accepted in particular by Member States.  
Focusing the strategy on developing cross-cut ting activities while keeping a somehow low 
profile on the youth policy area itself might also be a challe nge for public authorities in 
charge of youth, who generally have their main  competences in the area of youth work and 
citizenship. 
 
EN 30   EN  
6.4. Option 4: a global strategy 
6.4.1.  General objectives 
This option would be the best one for cr eating opportunities for young people in acting 
through different fields and policies: educati on, employment, youth work, entrepreneurship, 
etc… 
This would also be the best one for working towards a better involve ment of all young people 
in the society, either in terms of social incl usion or citizenship, in acting through different 
fields and policies: inclusi on, health, and participation. 
Finally, it seems also the best option to capit alise all the potential of the framework for 
solidarity purposes, and to mobilise young people in activities such as volunteering. In this regard the synergy effects expected from usi ng some OMC tools for other policies, such as 
development aid or environment for instance, could be very helpful. 
6.4.2.  Specific objectives 
This would be the most advanced option for achieving interaction and coordination of all 
policies able to properl y invest in youth.  
In acting holistically (transversal  approach), it would be the most  efficient approach to create 
synergies between youth polic ies and other policies. 
Option 4 would also benefit from synergy e ffects due to global impact of instruments 
(coordination tools, structur ed dialogue, exchange of prac tices, better knowledge of the 
situation of young people), which woul d allow for a better efficiency. 
This would also be the best  option to empower young people, while illustrating that their 
concerns are taken into account in  a global perspective,  also in line with the modification of 
Article 149 proposed by the Lisbon Treaty of which it could make a more global use, based 
on the interconnection between  policies affecting youth. 
6.4.3.  Feasibility /implementation 
This option would globally face the same ch allenges and opportunities as the option 3 (a 
developed cross-sectoral approach), regarding the development of cross-sectoral cooperation 
mechanisms. 
As for option 2, this option woul d be appreciated by ministries responsible for youth as far as 
the improvement in OMC mechanisms would main tain a reasonably light approach. It would 
also enhance the visibility of youth strategies.  
On the basis of the assessment above and in tables 2 and 3, the preferred option is Option 4. 
7. MONITORING AND EVALUATION  
Monitoring and evaluation of the Cooperation fr amework would take place via triennial joint 
progress reports and adaptations would be made  on a regular basis. Emphasis on monitoring 
by the stakeholders (in particular via structured dialogue with young people) will also be put 
in the new framework.  
On the basis of results of evaluation, propos als for improvement would be done on a regular 
basis. 
 
EN 31   EN A possible way of evaluating success of th e Youth Cooperation Framework could be by 
looking at: 
• Successful consensus building on coordinati on between policies with an important 
youth dimension; 
• Identification of policy developments in Member States linked with the 
implementation of key priorities at EU level; 
• Regular dialogue with Eu ropean stakeholders; 
• Involvement of the regional and lo cal levels in youth strategies; 
• Awareness of policy priorities by national stakeholders (Nati onal Youth Councils 
and other youth dedicated organisations); 
• Triennial reporting about implementation of  priorities and s ituation of youth in 
Europe; 
• Dashboard of existing indicators or benchmarks from other policy areas relevant 
for youth (such as early school l eaving rate, child poverty, or youth 
unemployment rate) in order to illustrate the level of  knowledge of the field;  
• Development of tools describing youth wo rk activities; a working group to discuss 
possible descriptors could be set up. 
 
EN 32   EN ANNEX 1 - LIST OF DOCUMENTS LINKED WITH THE CURRENT COOPERATION FRAMEWORK  
1. Open method of coordination 
European Commission White Paper of 21 Nove mber 2001 - A new impetus for European 
youth [COM (2001) 681 final - Not pub lished in the Official Journal]. 
Resolution of the Council and of the represen tatives of the governme nts of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council of 27 J une 2002 regarding the framework of European 
cooperation in the youth field [O fficial Journal C 168 of 13.07.2002]. 
Resolution of the Council and of the Represen tatives of the Governments of the Member 
States of 24 May 2005 meeting within the Counci l on the evaluation of activities conducted in 
the framework of European cooperation in th e youth field [Official Journal C 141/01 of 10 
June 2005] 
1.1 Information and participation 
Communication from the Commission to the C ouncil - Follow-up to the White Paper "A New 
Impetus for European Youth" - Proposed common objectives for the participation and 
information of young people, in response to th e Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 regarding 
the framework of European cooperation in the youth field [COM( 2003) 184 final - not 
published in the Official Journal].  
Commission staff working paper - Analysis of Member States ' replies to the Commission 
questionnaires on youth partic ipation and information [SEC /2003/0465 final - not published 
in the Official Journal].  
Council resolution of 25 November 2003 on comm on objectives for participation by and 
information for young people [Off icial Journal C 295 of 05.12.2003] 
Resolution of the Council and of the Represen tatives of the Governments of the Member 
States of 24 May 2005 meeting within the Council on implementing the common objective 
"to increase participation by young people in the system of representative democracy" 
[Official Journal C 141/02 of 10 June 2005]  
Resolution of the Council and of the Represen tatives of the Governments of the Member 
States of 24 May 2005 meeting within the C ouncil on implementing the common objectives 
for youth information [Official Journal C 141/03 of 10 June 2005] 
Communication from the Commi ssion to the Council on European policies concerning youth 
participation and information [COM(2006) 417 fina l - Not published in th e Official Journal]. 
Resolution of the Council and of the Represen tatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, on the rec ognition of the value of non-formal and informal 
learning within the European youth field [Official Journal C 168, 20.7.2006] 
Resolution of the Council and the Representative s of the Governments of the Member States, 
meeting within the Council, on implementing the common objectives for participation by and 
 
EN 33   EN information for young people in view of promoti ng their active European citizenship [Official 
Journal C 297 of 7 December 2006] 
Resolution of the Council and of the Represen tatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, of 25 May 2007 on creating equal opportunities for all 
young people — full participation in society [Off icial Journal C 314 of 22 December 2007]  
Resolution of the Council and of the Representati ves of the Government of the Member States 
meeting within the Council of 22 May 2008 on the participation of young people with fewer 
opportunities. http://register.consilium.eu ropa.eu/pdf/en/08/st09/st09133.en08.pdf  
1.2 Volunteering 
Communication from the Commission to the Council, of 30 April 2004 - Follow-up to the 
White Paper on a New Impetus for European  Youth - Proposed common objectives for 
voluntary activities among young people in res ponse to the Council Resolution of 27 June 
2002 regarding the framework of European coop eration in the youth field [COM(2004) 337 
final - not published in the Official Journal]. 
Resolution of the Council and th e Representatives of the Governments of the Member States 
meeting within the Council of 15 Nove mber 2004 on common objec tives for voluntary 
activities of young people  
http://register.consilium.eur opa.eu/pdf/en/04/st13/st13996.en04.pdf  
Commission Staff Work ing Document accompanying document to the Communication from 
the Commission to the European Parliament, th e Council, the European Economic and Social 
Committee and the Committee of the Regions "Promoting young peopl e's full participation in 
education, employment and society"  
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, 
SEC(2007) 1084. 
http://register.consilium.europa .eu/pdf/en/07/st12/st12772-ad01.en07.pdf  
Council Resolution of 16 November 2007 on voluntary activities of young people 
http://register.consilium.europa .eu/pdf/en/07/st14/st14427-re01.en07.pdf  
Council recommendation of 20 November 2008 on the mobility of young volunteers across 
the European Union, OJ C319/8, 13.12.2008  
1.3 Better knowledge 
Communication from the Commission to the C ouncil of 30 April 2004 - Follow-up to the 
White Paper on a New Impetus for European  Youth. Proposed common objectives for a 
greater understanding and knowle dge of youth, in response to the Council Resolution of 27 
June 2002 regarding the framework of European  cooperation in the youth field [COM (2004) 
336 final - Not published in the Official Journal]. 
Resolution of the Council and th e Representatives of the Governments of the Member States 
meeting within the Council of November  2004 on common objectives for a greater 
understanding and knowledge of youth 
http://register.consilium.eur opa.eu/pdf/en/04/st13/st13997.en04.pdf  
 
EN 34   EN 2. European Youth Pact 
Conclusions by the Council of 21 February 2005 on Youth in the framework of the mid-term 
review of the Lisbon Strategy [Official Journal C85 of 7 April 2005] 
European Youth Pact (Annex 1 of Presidency Co nclusions of the European Council, Brussels, 
22 and 23.3.2005 (7619/05)) http://ec.europa.eu/youth/pdf/doc423_en.pdf  
Commission Communication of 30 May 2005 on European po licies concerning youth: 
Addressing the concerns of young people in Euro pe - implementing the European Youth Pact 
and promoting active citizenship [ COM (2005) 206 final - Not pub lished in the Official 
Journal]. 
Council resolution of 24 November 2005 on a ddressing the concer ns of young people in 
Europe - implementing the European Pact for Youth and promoti ng active citizenship 
[Official Journal C 292 of 24.11.2005].  
Conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of th e Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the C ouncil, on the implementation of the European Pact for Youth 
[Official Journal C 70 of 22 March 2006] . 
Contribution of the Council (in the field of youth policy) to  the Spring European Council on 
the implementation of the European Pact for Youth − Key messages to the Spring European 
Council, February 2007 
Contribution from DG EAC to the prepara tion of Commission's December 2007 Annual 
Progress Report (internal document) 
Commission's December 2007 Annual Progress Report 
http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/ european-dimension/200 712-annual-progress-r eport/index_en.htm  
Contribution of the Council (in the field of youth policy) to  the Spring European Council on 
the implementation of the European Pact for Youth − Key messages to the Spring European 
Council, February 2008 
European Council Conclu sions, 13-14 March 2008 
Contribution of the Council (in the field of youth policy) to  the Spring European Council on 
the implementation of the European Pact for Youth − Key messages to the Spring European 
Council, February 2009 
3. Future perspectives 
Conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of th e Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the C ouncil, of 25 May 2007 on future perspectives for European 
cooperation in the field of youth policy [Offi cial Journal C 314/24 of 22 December 2007] 
Questionnaires sent to the Member States by the Commission on future perspectives, 
February 2008 – Answers from the Member States 
4. Others 
Communication from the Commissi on of 5 September 2007 to th e European Parliament, the 
Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on 
 
EN 35   EN Promoting young people's full participation in education, employment and society 
[COM(2007) 498 final - Not publishe d in the Official Journal] 
Commission staff working document on youth employment in the EU - Accompanying 
document to the Communication from the Comm ission to the European Parliament, the 
Council, the European Economic and Social Co mmittee and the Committee of the Regions - 
Promoting young people's full participation in education, employment and society 
{SEC(2007) 1084} 
Conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of th e Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the C ouncil of 16 November 2007 on a tr ansversal approach to youth 
policy with a view to enabling young people to fulfil th eir potential and participate actively in 
society [Official Journal C 282/16 of 24 November 2007] 
Resolution of the Council and the Representative s of the Governments of the Member States, 
meeting within the Council of 20 November  2008, on the health and well-being of young 
people 
European Knowledge Centre for Yo uth Policy (EKCYP) country sheets: 
http://www.youth-partnership.net/youth-par tnership/ekcyp/countryinformation.html  
 
EN 36   EN ANNEX 2 – PRIORITIES AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CURRENT OPEN METHOD OF 
COORDINATION IN THE FIELD OF YOUTH  
4 Priorities – 14 Common Objectives 
Participation  
(1) Increase young people’s participation in  the civic life of their community  
(2) Increase young people’s participation in the system of representative 
democracy 
(3) Provide greater support for various forms of learning to participate  
Information 
(1) Improving young people’s access to information services 
(4) Increasing the provision of quality information  
(5) Increasing young people’s participation in youth information, for example in 
the preparation and dissemi nation of information  
Volunteering 
(1) Develop voluntary activities with the aim of enhancing the transparency of 
the existing possibilities, enlarging th eir scope and improvi ng their quality  
(6) Make it easier for young people to carry out voluntary activ ities by removing 
existing obstacles 
(7) Promote voluntary activities with a view to reinforcing young people’s 
solidarity and engagement as citizens 
(8) Recognise the voluntary  activities of young peopl e with a view to 
acknowledging their personal skills a nd their engagement for society 
Greater understanding and knowledge of youth 
(1) Identify existing knowledge in priority areas of the youth field (participation, 
information and voluntary activities) and implemen t measures to collect, 
analyse and update this informa tion and facilitate access to it  
(9) Determine existing knowledge in further pr iority areas of in terest to the youth 
field (e.g. discrimination, educati on and training, employment, social 
inclusion and health) and implement measures to collect, analyse and update this knowledge and faci litate access to it  
(10) Ensure quality, comparability and rele vance of knowledge in the youth field 
by using appropriate methods and tools  
(11) Facilitate and promote exchange, di alogue and networks to ensure the 
visibility of knowledge in the youth fi eld and to anticipate future needs. 
 
EN 37   EN ANNEX 3 - DESCRIPTION OF THE CURRENT COOPERATION FRAMEWORK  
Current European Youth
Cooperation Framework 
INSTRUMENTS
European Youth Pact (Lisbon    
Strategy)
• Education and training OMC • Social OMC• Life Long Learning and Youth in 
Action Programmes 
• European Social Fund
PRIORITIES
• Employment and social inclusion
• Education and Training• Reconciliation of work and family
lifeSOCIAL AND OCCUPATIONAL 
INTEGRATION
INSTRUMENTS
•Open Method of Coordination 
Youth
• Youth  in Action Programme• European Knowledge Centre on
Youth Policy
PRIORITIES
• Participation
•I n f o r m a t i o n• Volunteering• Better knowledge and 
understanding of youthACTIVE CITIZENSHIP OF 
YOUNG PEOPLE
INSTRUMENTS
•Mainstreaming
Youth in Action Programme
• Other EU programmes
PRIORITIES
• Fight against racism and
xenophobia and discriminations
• HealthYOUTH IN OTHER POLICY 
FIELDS
STRUCTURED DIALOGUE
 
 
EN 38   EN  
ANNEX 4 - LIST OF RECENT REFERENCE DOCUMENTS  
"Towards an EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child", Communication from the 
Commission, 4.7.2006, COM (2006) 367 final 
"Investing in youth: an empowerment strategy", Bureau of European Policy Advisers 
(BEPA),  April 2007 
"Promoting solidarity between the generations " Communication from the Commission to 
the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the 
Committee of the Regions , 10.05.2007, COM (2007) 244 final  
"Together for Health: a Strate gic Approach for the EU 2008-2013" , Commission White 
Paper , 23.10.2007, COM (2007) 630 final 
"Opportunities, access and solidarity: toward s a new social vision for 21st century 
Europe" , Communication from the Comm ission to the European Pa rliament, the Council, the 
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, 20.11.2007, 
COM(2007) 726 final 
"Child Poverty and Well-Being in the EU - Current status and way forward ", Social 
Protection Committee Report, January 2008 . 
"Renewed social agenda: Opportunities, acce ss and solidarity in 21st century Europe"  
Communication from the Commission to the Eur opean Parliament, the Council, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, 2.7.2008, COM(2008) 
412 final  
"A renewed commitment to social Euro pe: Reinforcing the Open Method of 
Coordination for Social Protec tion and Social Inclusion", Communication from the 
Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social 
Committee and the Committee of the Regions , 2.7.2008, COM (2008) 418 final 
"Migration & mobility: challenges and o pportunities for EU education systems", 
Commission Green Paper , 3.07.2008, COM (2008) 423 final  
"Improving competences for the 21st Centur y: An Agenda for European Cooperation 
on Schools", Communication from the Commission to th e European Parliament, the Council, 
the European Economic and Social Committ ee and the Committee of the Regions, 3.07.2009, 
COM(2008) 425 final.  
Declaration on youth empowerment,  European Parliament , 2 September 2008. 
"Acting now for a better Europe - Commi ssion Legislative and Work Programme 2009 ", 
Communication from the Commission to the Eur opean Parliament, the Council, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions , 5.11.2008 , COM (2008) 
712 
"Demography Report 2008: Meeting Soci al Needs in an Ageing Society ", Commission 
Staff Working Document , November 2008, SEC (2008) 2911 
"An updated strategic framework for European  cooperation in education and training"  
Communication from the Commission to the Eur opean Parliament, the Council, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, 16 December 2008, COM 
(2008) 865 
 
EN 39   EN "New skills for new jobs - Anticipating and matching labour market and skills needs" 
Communication from the Commissi on to the European Parliament, the Council, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, 16 December 2008, COM (2008) 868 
 
EN 40   EN  
ANNEX 5 - GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE RESULTS OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION  
1. Background of the public consultation 
On 22 September 2008 the Commission launched a two-month online public consultation in 
the youth field, called "Strategic choices  for young Europeans - An EU-wide public 
consultation on the future of youth policy". The ai m of the consultation was to evaluate what 
the European cooperation on youth policy has achi eved since its beginning in the year 2000 
and propose new objectives for the decade to come. 
The idea of this exercise was to provide the possibility to di fferent stakeholders 
(organisations, public authorities , individuals) from all Member  States as well as from 
Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Turkey, Croa tia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of 
Macedonia to give their opinion on the prioriti es and the challenges for the future of the 
European youth policy. The Commission soug ht answers on how EU youth policy should 
develop in the coming years a nd what proposals could be made  to EU member countries. 
2. Questionnaire 
The questions were grouped in five major thematic blocs: 
Profile of the respondents; 
Addressing key challenges for young people in Europe;  
Identifying policy priorities for European Union cooperation; Specific questions on: ed ucation, employment, social issues, citizenship; 
Youth and the European Union Only the answers to the closed questions (which  were 18 out of 20) have been examined for 
this note. 
3. Statistics and prof ile of the respondents 
In the period 22 September until 25 November 2008 a total of 5426 responses were received, 
out of which the majority (88.6%) came from in dividual persons not representing any type of 
organisation or public body. This may be percei ved as a very positive outcome indicating that 
the consultations may have reached groups of pe ople which are not prof essionally involved in 
the youth field and normally do not particip ate in social polls in this area.  
11.4% of the responses receiv ed (over 600) were generated on behalf of different 
organisations. Many of these entities were sma ll organisations, which are difficult to reach by 
other methods of consultations. Their particip ation is a positive ph enomenon showing their 
interest in the area. 
The individual respondents were predominantly young people of up to 30 years (61.4%), still 
studying (43.1% as to 32.9% working and 12.7% ot her), female (54.7% as to 33.9% of men).  
The nationals which were the most involved and provided most input in the online 
consultations originated from: Italy (13 %) , Portugal (11.6%), Germany (8.1%), France 
(7.5%), Romania (6.7%), Poland (6%) and Spain ( 5.9%). All Member States are represented.  
Almost half of the individual query partic ipants are professiona lly involved with young 
people on a regular basis (48%, that is to sa y around 2000 persons), most of all by means of 
youth organisations (38.2%), non-governmental organisations (29.8%) or a public authority 
(17%).  
 
EN 41   EN 4. Addressing key challenges for young people in Europe 
75.9% of all the answers provided in the public  consultation indica ted youth unemployment 
as the prime concern and challenge for young people in Europe in the coming decade.  
Reform of education systems emerged as the se cond key priority which will have most direct 
impact on young people's lives (70.4% of answers).  
Over half of the respondents indicated environm ent and sustainable deve lopment as a priority 
(62.7%). Social integration and exclusion came on fourth place (57.9%). Still over half of the 
consultation participants marked active participat ion in society as the most important subject 
for the coming years. Just as little bit less important were the migration/multi-ethnic/multi-
religious issues, youth violence, and discrimination – racism - xenophobia.  
Slightly less popular challenges indicated by the query participants  concerned: work/life 
balance (46%), poverty (46.1%) and demographic changes as falling bi rth rate and aging 
population (43.6%). Terms like discrimination against women and domestic violence are 
considered as key challenges in this particular cont ext by only around 19% of the respondents.  
5. Identifying policy priorities for European Union cooperation 
Taking into account the identified challenges for young people in Europe the participants of 
the public consultation were asked to indicate what policies should the European Union focus 
on.  
Priority was given to helping young people play  a more active role in the society (66.1% 
respondents), followed by helping young people get a job (62.1% votes).  
A lot of emphasis was also placed on provi ding better standards of  life for the youth. 
Developing opportunities for young people to live , work and travel throughout Europe was 
marked by 61.6 % of people. 
The general idea is that provi ding higher standards of life is  crucial and it can be done by 
focusing on employment, facilitating travelling, participation in the society, supporting youth 
organisations and youth leaders, promoting work and life balance, improving young people's 
health and well-being.  
6. Specific questions on education, em ployment, social issues, citizenship 
• 6.1. Education 
67% of the queried were not satisfied with th e school or higher education system in their 
country of residence. 47.7% found it the EU's an d its member countries' competence to reform 
the official education systems. In general term s, people tended to thi nk that it was the EU 
countries which should be responsible for the ed ucational reform (35.8%) rather than the EU 
(only 10.2%). 
In the opinion of 56.4% of the respondents, clos er cooperation with the formal education 
system is the key to ensuring that non-formal learning is properly recognised. 52.1% found it 
equally important to engage in the spreading of the knowle dge of non-formal learning to 
employers and better promotion at European level (49.8%). The learni ng happening in youth 
organisations could be better appreciated if th e employers took it into account more (36.7% of 
votes) and schools gave credits for the le arning in youth organisations (31.6%). 
• 6.2. Employment 
With reference to the employment three top ac tions to be undertaken in order to prepare 
young people for finding work were identified: giving more opportunities for internships and 
training on the job (65.8%), closer partnershi ps between schools and stakeholders in the 
 
EN 42   EN labour market (65.5%) and better matching betw een learning outcomes and the labour market 
(49.8%).  
• 6.3. Social issues 
Even though 60.3% of the queried answered that social inte gration of young people facing 
difficulties such as poverty, educational prob lems, unemployment should be considered as 
priority, they underline that the European  cooperation should rather focus on all young 
people. Moreover, a greater interconnection betw een different policy fields relevant to youth 
is said to be necessary (49.2%),  especially with the involvement of young people in the policy 
making (41.1%). Financial support is recognised  to be one of the most important factors 
supporting the youth organisations, youth worker s and leaders (51.2%), followed by more 
exchanges of good practices and better recogniti on of the role of youth workers and leaders 
(45 % and 39.3% respectively).  
Apart from employment and education the follo wing issues have also been identified as 
problematic: alcohol and drug abuse (77.7%),  social exclusion (68.9%) and stress and 
psychological disorders (68.2%). A high position of the last problem relating to health (which 
was placed even before the "poverty" factor, wh ich usually is indicated as one of the main 
concerns) may be quite worrying. Th is is due to the fact that it  affects all youth and not only 
young people from less privileged socio-economical backgrounds.  
Awareness raising campaigns were indicated as one  of the most important tools to deal with 
discrimination (53%). Much lower atten tion was given to stronger laws (24.3%). 
• 6.4. Citizenship 
As a general rule the respondents perceive th at the young people lack ways to make their 
voice heard in the society. However, the tendency is  that at the European level the situation is 
not good but there are more and more opportunities to do so. On national le vel the situation is 
much worse and also the situation is not improvi ng so fast. The best ways to speak up may be 
found on local and regional level. There, the young seem to have growing opportunities to 
play an influential role.  
The five most effective methods for young pe ople to make their voices heard by policy 
makers were in the opinion of  the consultation participants:  joining and being active in 
political parties, youth organisations, other NGOs  or trade unions (68.2%), participating in 
debates with policy makers (65.6%) a nd voting in the elections (44.3%).  
The youth policies in the opini on of the consultation res pondents should recognise the 
prominent role of young people in social ch allenges (58.9%), democratic participation 
(49.9%) and building the EU (43.1%).  
Volunteering abroad is very much dependent  on knowing where to find more information 
about the opportunities in othe r countries (59.7%), knowing th at the experience will be 
recognised and knowing the quality of the vol unteering experience (having recommendation 
from others or having it certified).  
7. Youth and the European Union 
In the last closed questions res pondents were asked to select the terms that they have heard of 
before in the context of the European Union's work in the field of youth. The term with which 
most of the participants were familiarised w ith was the European Voluntary Service (53.1%) 
and the Youth exchanges in the framework of the Youth in Action Programme (51.5%). 44.2% of the people have heard of the Europass and of the Life-long learning strategy. The 
least known tool was the Eur opean Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy (only 9.7%).  
 
EN 43   EN 8. How the consultation was taken into account 
The problem definition, the general objectives and the chosen policy option reflect the 
outcomes of the various consultati ons. As regards the public cons ultation, this is particularly 
the case for the challenges identified by res pondents and the priorities highlighted as key 
issues to be tackled by the European Union.