30.3.2004 EN C 80/103 Official Journal of the European Union
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the
Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions: mid-term review of the social policy agenda’
(COM(2003) 312 final)
(2004/C 80/26)
On 2 June 2003 the Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned
communication.
The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 25 November 2003. The rapporteur wasMr Jahier.
At its 404th plenary session (meeting of 10 December 2003), the Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion by 104 votes, with 5 against and 9 abstentions.
1. Introduction
1.1. The European social policy agenda has been a signifi-
cant achievement in building a more social Europe based on
the principles of solidarity and justice. In the Member States,
welfare systems originated and developed in historically diversenational cultures, producing a variety of approaches to social
protection, but all based on the principle of solidarity. The
agenda provided and provides the joint foundation for socialconvergence and comparison between individual countries.
1.2. The strategy that has made it possible to accept a
European social agenda is based on two pillars: a) recognitionof work as a need and right that must be protected in order to
guarantee the conditions for effective social integration and to
shape and sustain economic competition in internal andinternational markets; b) the fight against poverty, social
exclusion and the problem of inequality, especially where it
has a negative impact on relations between social groups,gender relations and, as is becoming increasingly evident, on
the younger generation.
1.3. The agenda is part of the broader strategic objective set
by the European Council in Lisbon, which aims to foster
synergies between economic, employment and social policies
in order to promote virtuous circles of economic and socialprogress with a view to sustainable development (
1).
(1) The issue of sustainable development is discussed in numerous
Committee opinions, e.g. The Lisbon strategy and sustainabledevelopment, OJ C 95, 23.4.2003 and the opinion on theCommission Communication Towards a global partnership for
sustainable development, OJ C 221, 17.9.2002.1.4. The mid-term review of the social policy agenda is
therefore part of a longer-term strategy intended to make thesocial agenda a road map for promoting human and socialdevelopment in the individual Member States and the EU
promoting the establishment of similar levels of social welfare
provision and defining the most appropriate ways of promot-ing and realising these.
1.5. This objective can be achieved first of all by ensuring
the continuity of the approaches that were adopted and
promoted in the agenda: the open coordination method,
coherent legislation on implementing minimum social stan-dards that encourages agreements between the social partners,
social dialogue to enhance the way work is organised in terms
of achieving a balance between flexibility and security, targeteduse of the Structural Funds and programmes to supportinnovative policies, and so encourage individual countries to
adopt an autonomous approach to the measures to be taken.
1.6. The review provides an opportunity to assess the
results achieved (
2), to make recommendations for effective
implementation of the second phase of the social agenda
(2004/2005) and to shape the preparatory phase for future
discussion of the 2006-2010 agenda.
2. General comments
2.1. The EESC endorses the overall thrust of and proposals
contained in the Commission Communication, in so far as
these set out the main features of the ongoing process and therelevant problems that have to be taken into consideration. Itis pleased to see that almost all the agenda’s intended actions
have been launched.
(2) A comprehensive overview can be found in the Commission
Communication which is the subject of this opinion and in theCommunication of February 2003 Scoreboard on implementing
the social policy agenda (COM(2003) 57 final).
C 80/104 EN 30.3.2004 Official Journal of the European Union
2.2. However, it is still difficult to monitor progress made
in the fight against poverty and in promoting social inclusion
owing to the lack of recent data in several sectors. Over the
next two years, better information must be ensured in relationto the following: more and better jobs; working environmentand job security; the fight against all forms of exclusion and
discrimination; modernising and improving social protection;
gender equality; and strengthening the social dimension ofenlargement and the European Union’s external relations.
2.3. One guiding principle in the social policy agenda was
also the desire to strengthen the role of social policy as a factor
of production: the Commission pursues this approach by
examining the ‘costs of non-social policy’ in the variouscountries.
2.4. Another key aspect of the social agenda is governance.
More emphasis must be placed on governance during the
second phase, in particular by promoting participation of
stakeholders and joint evaluations of social policy. The Com-mission has undertaken to ensure that the legislative acquis in
this area is fully complied with.
2.5. Employment
2.5.1. The results of structural reform of European employ-
ment markets are becoming visible, especially in terms of
higher employment intensity and the creation of jobs in high-tech and knowledge-intensive sectors. Twelve million new jobs
have thus been created since 1997, raising the level of
employment by four percentage points and, according toEurostat data, bringing total unemployment in the EU in 2001to its lowest level since 1992 (7,4 %) (
1).
2.5.2. However, in 2002 unemployment already rose sub-
stantially for the first time since 1996; persistent regional
disparities and long-term weaknesses, with low employmentlevels among older workers, gender differences, and high
youth and long-term unemployment (
2), should thus prompt a
(1) Eurostat / Employment DG, The Social Situation in the European
Union , September 2003.
(2) The Committee would point out here that the employment level
for immigrants is markedly below the average, as noted forinstance in the EESC own-initiative opinion on Immigration,integration and the role of civil society organisations, OJ C 125,
25.5.2002.definite strengthening of the measures already planned (3). This
situation has prompted the EESC to draw up an own-initiative
opinion on employment support measures (4).
2.6. Health and safety at work
2.6.1. Progress has been made during the last few years in
reducing accidents at work, and the total number of serious
accidents has been falling since the mid-1990s. However, rates
of accidents at work remain high, taking a very high toll onEuropean competitiveness and revealing shortcomings in
current practices relating to health and safety at work (
5).
Moreover, in a fast-changing employment market, new healthproblems arise, e.g. musculoskeletal disorders and psychosocialproblems such as stress, depression and anxiety, and other
disorders closely linked to developments in working con-
ditions.
2.7. Gender equality
2.7.1. The gender balance in employment has improved
slightly in the past few years, though without a major change
being achieved (
6). This is compounded by the untenable
difference in remuneration between the sexes (7), with women
estimated to earn on average 16 % less than men. The EESC
therefore endorses the idea of setting up a European institutewith responsibility for gender equality issues, in order to step
up Europe’s commitment in this regard.
2.8. Social impact of legislation
2.8.1. The social impact of legislation is largely a new
concept, to which little attention has yet been paid. The socialagenda has introduced monitoring of implementation of EU
legislation and directives at Member State level, with reference
to labour law, gender equality, free movement of workers,health protection and safety in the workplace.
(3) The Committee has on several occasions called for these measures
to be stepped up. See in particular the opinion on the Guidelinesfor the employment policies of the Member States, OJ C 208,3.9.2003 and the exploratory opinion on the Lisbon strategy.
(
4) Opinion currently in preparation concerning the review of the
European Employment Strategy (EES).
(5) See EESC exploratory opinion on Health and safety at work, OJ
C 260, 17.9.2001 and the opinion on the New Communitystrategy on health and safety at work, OJ C 241, 7.10.2002.
(
6) See EESC opinion on Equal treatment for men and women, OJ
C 123, 25.4.2001.
(7) See EESC own-initiative opinion on wage discrimination, OJ
C 155, 29.5.2001.
30.3.2004 EN C 80/105 Official Journal of the European Union
2.8.2. The EESC thinks a more specific evaluation of the
social impact of legislation and its effectiveness is called for.
To this end, the concept of ‘social return’ on legislation,
expressed by means of comparable indicators, could be usedto compare social impact between different countries, bearingin mind for example that the precarious nature of certain
employment conditions — not to be confused with accepted
forms of labour flexibility — also does substantial damage tothe Union’s economy.
2.9. Social indicators
2.9.1. The Committee welcomes the fact that strategies and
instruments have been designed to monitor events and checkthe impact of actions promoted by the agenda, but it notes
that there is still a lack of effective monitoring capacity for
comparing formal performance indicators (on legislative andregulatory output) with indicators of the efficacy of action
undertaken (lower rates of social problems, exclusion, poverty,
long-term unemployment, etc.).
2.9.2. The Committee also points to the importance of
getting people and social interest groups — as well as localauthorities — more involved, not just in producing indicators
but also in evaluating them, as proposed by the Social
Protection Committee.
In one of its own opinions (
1), the EESC set out detailed
recommendations that are intended not just to improve thereliability of indicators but also to make them easy to
manipulate and apply, prioritising indicators that can be used
to measure social integration and access to welfare, especiallyto health care and social services.
2.10. Costs attributable to absence of social policy
2.10.1. The agreed frame of reference for analysing the
costs attributable to absence of social policy is the trade-off
between economic efficiency and social efficiency, evidenced
in terms of equity in the distribution of opportunities andresources (
2).
(1) See EESC own-initiative opinion, OJ C 221, 17.9.2002.
(2)Costs of non-social policy: towards an economic framework of quality
social policies — and the costs of not having them . Report for the
Employment and Social Affairs DG, 3 January 2003.2.10.2. The costs of an absence of social policy can be
measured in terms of information and education deficits,
unequal access to services, lack of equal opportunities for
lifelong learning, gender inequality, lack of participation, andrigidity of educational and employment processes.
2.10.3. Inter-country comparisons of poverty levels before
and after the implementation of redistributive policies show asignificant social gain in the short term, but above all in the
medium and long term. This gain is reflected not only in
reduced poverty levels, but most importantly in a reduction insocial conflict and disparities, which undermine family
relations and the social capital of the communities concerned.
2.10.4. The EESC also stresses the importance of ‘welfare
performance’ as an idea, i.e. of positive indicators that can be
monitored in the relationship between public welfare spending,
rates of production and development, inflation, poverty andpublic debt and basic social indicators such as life expectancy,
infant mortality, school attendance, the income of the most
disadvantaged sectors of the population and education levels.
2.10.5. The Committee holds that measures under the
social agenda must focus on and be completely geared towards
these areas so that the agenda changes from being primarilytheoretical and indicative to being much more concrete and to
evaluating investment in social capital, in the quality of work
and in social cohesion.
2.11. The second phase of the agenda in a changed economic
context
2.11.1. The social policy agenda, just like the whole broad
framework of new strategies adopted after the Lisbon summit,was conceived during a period of sustained economic growth
and on the assumption that growth would continue, both in
the context of international economic trends, as a positiveresult of integration of the new Member States into theEuropean Union, and as a result of development and growth
policies (social and employment) and their synergistic effects
on the economic cycle.
2.11.2. The EESC believes that the social agenda should
continue to play a key role, even against a background of
prolonged economic crisis or stagnation. However, the EESC
is concerned about the fact that there has not been a detailedreview of the framework for applying the social policy agendaand that there is no discussion of the different impact, needs
and sustainability, and the future of these social policies and
of employment, in the context of such a radically transformedeconomic cycle.
C 80/106 EN 30.3.2004 Official Journal of the European Union
2.11.3. It is crucial to continue on the course set by the
Lisbon strategy, accelerating the measures provided for in the
social policy agenda, but only if the following factors are
considered and evaluated:
— the inevitable impact of the unfavourable economic cycle
on persistent structural weaknesses in the employment
market and the fact that this will make it considerablymore difficult to achieve on a lasting basis the objective
of 15 million new jobs by 2010 and the various
qualitative targets;
— the inevitable consequences of the present economic
cycle on the possibility of the social agenda having a
significant and lasting impact — assuming current poli-cies and resources invested by the Member States remain
unchanged — on the current 9 % of the European
population living in long-term poverty.
2.11.4. Within the spheres of action provided for by the
agenda it is therefore a matter of urgency to adopt a more
specific system of priorities, taking account of the challengesposed, the political agenda for the next two years and the
considerable limitations on available resources.
3. Specific comments
3.1. Employment and incomes policy
3.1.1. In the current economic situation, conditions are
much more difficult for achieving the employment goals set,though these remain a crucial objective, especially in view ofthe structural problems affecting youth employment and the
low employment rates of women and older workers.
3.1.2. In particular, especially in certain countries, younger
people continue to experience chronic difficulty in entering
the labour market. The short-term consequence of this is thatthey remain dependent on family; over the medium- and long-
term, they build up a ‘deferred social debt’. This will be borne
by public welfare budgets, which in future will have to providesupport during old age for those who have not been able to
accumulate enough pension income to live above the poverty
line.
3.1.3. Another critical question arising is that of the
purchasing power of income, especially of lower incomes,
against the background of inflation in various Europeancountries. More must be done to find effective ways ofcountering this trend, which reduces the purchasing power of
workers and families, especially those with low incomes, and
of single-parent households, most often lone mothers with
children, and increases the number of so-called working poor,i.e. people living below the poverty line even though they havework.
3.2. EU enlargement
3.2.1. EU enlargement and the integration of ten new
countries is the most qualitatively demanding challenge thatwill be faced by Europe in the period in question (2004/2005)
and the one to follow. This strategic priority is becoming more
and more important for the Union, especially in terms of thenot insignificant issue of its economic and social cohesion (
1).
3.2.2. In many of these countries, labour costs have adjust-
ed to Western standards more rapidly than anticipated,
especially in large cities and the specialised services sectors,where short-term gains have often been cancelled out by therapid increase in the cost of living. Employment rates still
diverge significantly from the EU average, and a large number
of pensioners, farm workers and other groups are living inpoverty.
3.2.3. With a demographic structure that is largely similar
to that of the current EU 15, these countries cannot afford to
reduce their own public spending and, having committedthemselves to a programme of inevitable convergence, they
can only expect an increase in the domestic demand for
welfare to guarantee and maintain pensions and health, activeanti-discrimination and anti-poverty policies, and policies to
promote employment.
3.2.4. To avoid the sudden introduction of policies that
would have devastating consequences for Europe, flows ofeconomic aid should therefore increase, and not decrease, afterenlargement. This major problem, which because of the
current political climate will not really be addressed before
2005, goes hand in hand with the social policy agenda and itspractical feasibility and sustainability. It is also fundamentally
important to step up all flanking and enforcement measures
with respect to correct and complete application of theCommunity acquis.
(1) See the Commission’s Second Progress Report on Economic and Social
Cohesion (COM(2003) 34 final) and the relevant EESC opinion.
30.3.2004 EN C 80/107 Official Journal of the European Union
3.3. Governance and social integration
3.3.1. European governance is based on five principles:
openness, participation, responsibility, efficacy and coherence.Experience shows that these principles must be complemented
by the subsidiarity principle, which is the main foundation for
correct governance. This also concerns the types of cooper-ation and co-responsibility, both vertical and horizontal,
needed to maximise the contribution of all those social and
regional players concerned by economic and social policies.
3.3.2. To this end, presentation of the legislative proposals
should be preceded and prepared by a systematic and indepen-dent analysis of their anticipated impact on welfare and of the
cost-benefit ratio of implementing them (
1).
3.3.3. The EESC thinks that the Communication should
therefore place more emphasis on the open method of
coordination, which was the major innovation of Lisbon andis certainly a significant factor in improving governance in the
EU, but above all an important instrument for implementing
new types of measure and achieving real modernisation in thesphere of social policy and employment.
3.3.4. The Committee considers that the Commission
should make explicit and public the aspects of evaluation thatit has already established for the process followed during the
past few years. To this end, social dialogue should be used
more widely, enhancing the profile of the social partners’ workprogrammes, respecting their autonomy in implementing
those programmes, and seeking to extend this practice of
active consultation to as many sectoral policies as possible andabove all to the new Member States of the EU (
2).
3.3.5. Similarly, insufficient attention is given to the role of
organised civil society and non-profit-making social services;
the part they play in the public sphere of activity should be
better identified and developed, bearing in mind that they arenot required to protect rights (this being the responsibility of
the relevant public authorities) but to help make them more
enforceable in the individual national welfare systems. As theCommittee has pointed out previously, not-for-profit social
services can make a crucial contribution to various objectives
(1) EESC opinion on European Governance — a White Paper , OJ C 125,
27.5.2002.
(2) See EESC opinion on the Social Policy Agenda 2000, OJ C 14,
16.1.2001 and EESC opinion on The scoreboard on implementing
the social policy agenda, OJ C 241, 7.10.2002.of the social policy agenda, through the support provided
by associations, foundations, cooperatives and mutual
societies (3), in the various national and local contexts of the
Union.
3.3.6. The contribution of non-profit-making social ser-
vices to employment and their social impact is increasingly
recognised and exploited, with significant implications in
terms of promoting and protecting the rights of disadvantagedpeople, responding to needs in education, social assistance and
health assistance, and support for policies to promote inclusion
and reduce social inequality.
3.3.7. Non-profit-making organisations help to identify and
articulate emerging social needs, especially those of less-
advantaged sectors of the population; they invest in repairing
a damaged social fabric where healthy structures must berestored; they mobilise social fellow-feeling and participation,
as the necessary condition for flourishing democratic struc-
tures, even in the most disadvantaged areas.
3.3.8. The role of the social economy as a development
factor and that of the non-profit players that support it must
therefore be better recognised and developed in the social
services and care sectors, with particular reference to Europeancompetition law.
4. Developing European social citizenship
4.1. The period 2004/2005 will be primarily a completion
and consolidation phase for the strategy launched in 2000. Inview of the changed economic situation, the EESC believes
that the strategic axes should be clearly and progressively
defined; although these axes are already present in the currentagenda, they must play a greater role:
— in order to guide sectoral policies and priorities in
implementing the current agenda;
— and to shape the preparatory phase of the new social
agenda for 2006-2010, which has already been launched.
(3) See EESC opinion on The scoreboard on implementing the social
policy agenda, OJ C 241, 7.10.2002, EESC opinion on Privatenot-for-profit social services in the context of services of generalinterest in Europe, OJ C 311, 7.11.2001 and EESC opinion on
The social economy and the single market, OJ C 117, 26.4.2000.
C 80/108 EN 30.3.2004 Official Journal of the European Union
4.1.1. The mid-term review is actually a valuable oppor-
tunity to underpin the transition from a social agenda focusing
mainly on employment (and social measures to promote
employment in a context of international competition) to afuture agenda in which social development and cohesion areaddressed separately and in relation to other areas of EU
political action.
4.1.2. In particular, if today the guiding concept is social
cohesion as a factor of production in a Union that is making
social solidarity the locomotive for its development, the term
‘production’ must be better defined, both in the economicsense and in the sense of promoting better social conditions.
Social issues must be treated not just in the sense of social
problems (exclusion, inequality, etc.), but also in the sense ofpromoting and strengthening the positive elements favouring‘citizenship’, i.e. national and local social capital.
4.1.3. It is particularly important to address the issue of
how a shared European identity can be understood as Europeansocial citizenship, not in the sense of a new legal status
based on a process of assimilation of particular national
characteristics (civil and political), but rather in the sense ofdrawing on those characteristics in the context of increasingmobility of people for work, education, research, production
and skills transfer. As has occurred in the case of currencies,
mobility of citizens means sharing certain basic aspectsof citizenship and social solidarity intended to ensure the
‘transferability’ of basic rights within the EU area, so as to meet
people’s basic needs and thus offer them more opportunitiesfor exchange, mobility and security.
4.1.4. The prospect of thus providing shared social citizen-
ship infrastructures ties in with the drive to put in place largeinfrastructures for European economic development. This is
an ambitious project that must be set out and examined in
terms of its feasibility. It requires consideration of the con-ditions (minimum infrastructure) that will be needed to
promote social citizenship in the light of options already
chosen by individual countries, with respect to health, socialprotection, welfare, education, environmental protection and
family policy, in other words the social capital of the various
national communities.
4.2. Developing Europe’s human and social capital
4.2.1. Developing Europe’s human and social capital is not
just essential for building a knowledge-based economy and so
increasing competitiveness, but is also a key element ineffectively supporting structural changes in the labour marketand the future of citizenship and social inclusion (
1). Higher-
quality human capital is the key resource for tomorrow’s
Europe, based on full and active involvement of the various
social stakeholders.
4.2.2. This also requires that lifelong learning policies (2)
become an absolute priority, not just in active job-creatingpolicies, but also in social policies in the broader sense. Ifthe different countries of the Union offered everybody the
equivalent of one extra year’s education or training, total
productivity in the EU would certainly increase both in theshort and in the longer term. The EESC therefore believes that
this aspect should become a more prominent and long-term
horizontal priority in the new phase of implementing thesocial agenda.
4.3. Modernising and improving social welfare systems
4.3.1. Welfare systems are the key distinguishing feature of
the European social model as well as making that model anexample in today’s world (
3). The issue of pensions and the
changes under way in the various national systems, and the
complex question of health and healthcare promotion againsta background of free movement of workers within the Union,
are the two main pillars of European welfare systems and thus
have a significant impact on the efficiency, cohesion, securityand development of the social system.
4.3.2. Alongside the National Action Plans for Social
Inclusion (NAPs/inclusion), the EESC agrees that there should
be a concerted effort to streamline and strengthen the opencoordination method. The 2005 deadline for the process and
measures planned in relation to pensions and the European
Council’s call on the Commission to put forward new pro-posals for stepping up cooperative exchanges, e.g. in thesectors of healthcare and care of the elderly, could become
important levers of this strategy, boosting the impact of the
social policy agenda (
4).
(1) See also the resolution of the Employment, Social Policy, Health
and Consumer Affairs Council of 2-3 June 2003 on the import-
ance of social and human capital.
(2) See EESC opinion on the Memorandum on Lifelong Learning,
OJ C 311, 7.11.2001 and EESC opinion on the CommissionCommunication European benchmarks in education and training:follow-up to the Lisbon European Council, OJ C 133, 6.6.2003.
(
3) See EESC opinion on Options for the reform of pension schemes,
OJ C 221, 17.9.2002 and EESC opinion on Safe and sustainablepensions, OJ C 48, 21.2.2002.
(
4) See the Commission communication on Strengthening the social
dimension of the Lisbon strategy: Streamlining open coordinationin the field of social protection (COM(2003) 261 final) and therelevant EESC opinion adopted at the plenary session of 29-
30 October 2003.
30.3.2004 EN C 80/109 Official Journal of the European Union
4.4. Employment as a priority for economic and social development
4.4.1. The issue of employment has been one of the main
points of convergence and commitment of the European social
agenda. Solutions found mainly involve the creation of jobs in
high-technology and more knowledge-intensive sectors. Thisstrategy must be paralleled by a social inclusion programme
(directed at women, young people, disadvantaged people,
adults made redundant in economic sectors facing problems,immigrants, etc.). It is particularly important to pursue bothanti-discriminatory and positive action policies promoting
access to employment for disabled people.
4.4.2. Even during an economic downturn, the political
and cultural basis exists for capitalising on investment already
made, in terms of improving the quality of employment. As
well as tackling the still grave problems of safety and protectionin the workplace, this means considering the issues of working
conditions and labour relations (
1).
4.4.3. Quality of employment relates to strategies for
transferring knowledge (lifelong learning and learning environ-
ments), to the problem of flexibility versus precariousness of
work (which concerns the younger generations in particular),to non-conflictual and collaborative strategies for managing
work processes (accountability, sharing strategies and results)
and to the balance between work and family life —, which insome countries has significant effects on the birth rate.
4.4.4. In short, individual countries must considerably step
up their efforts to combat undeclared work, given thataccording to current World Bank estimates some 20 million
people in Europe are working illegally (
2). Not only do these
people not fulfil their tax and welfare obligations, but at thesame time they are not helping to provide funding for theirown pensions. In this connection the Committee welcomes
the relevant Resolution adopted by the Employment, Social
Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council, which re-emphasises the gravity of the problem and calls on the Member
States, European institutions and social partners to take
measures to combat it (
3).
(1) See EESC opinion on Improving the quality dimension of social
and employment policy, OJ C 311, 7.11.2001.
(2) The Committee points out, as it has several times before, that
immigrants are a particularly vulnerable group in this respect. Seein particular the EESC own-initiative opinion on Immigration,integration and the role of civil society organisations, OJ C 125,27.5.2002.
(
3) Resolution of the Council on Undeclared Work, in the Conclusions
of the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs
Council of 20 October 2003.4.5. Participatory evaluation and monitoring
4.5.1. Monitoring efforts have revealed limitations inherent
in the European objective of evaluating social trends and theimpact of the agenda on the basis of shared and credible
criteria. The current trend towards simple reporting creates
problems: an assessment is needed that can measure whetherthe anticipated results have actually been achieved. The
inadequacy of monitoring instruments, mentioned several
times, must therefore not be an obstacle in the future or, evenworse, an accepted excuse, but rather should become a limit
to be overcome as a matter of priority.
4.5.2. Measures to remedy this knowledge gap should
prompt the development of a ‘European social impact assess-ment model’ for legislation and relevant policies, based on athreefold system of indicators: investment and financing
(input), organisation of responses (output) and efficacy (out-
come). This should provide a reliable picture of levels ofEuropean social citizenship as attained in the various countries.
4.5.3. Such a system, which is already being tested through
pilot schemes, demonstrates how evaluation can be simplified
and made more cost-effective by reducing the number ofvariables observed, and how results can be presented by
combining the above-mentioned indicators, making compari-
son between countries simpler and clearer. This would make iteasier to read and interpret results in the current strategy ofsocial indicators, demonstrating the ‘social return’ of the
measures carried out at European level and in individual
countries and facilitating a more participatory evaluation ofoutcomes by involving the social partners and various social
stakeholders with an interest in social citizenship.
5. Conclusions
5.1. The EESC is pleased that all the actions planned under
the 2000 social policy agenda have been launched and
reiterates its firm conviction that continuing to implement the
measures planned and the future of the social agenda arecrucial, even in a period of economic crisis and stagnation.
C 80/110 EN 30.3.2004 Official Journal of the European Union
5.2. The EESC agrees that measures, investment and
approach must be sustained, paying particular attention to the
social impact of legislation, investment in human and social
capital and development of the social economy and its variousactors, so as to ensure fuller and more effective achievementof the social development and cohesion objectives provided
for by the Lisbon Strategy.
5.3. The EESC reiterates that it is imperative for recent data
to be more readily available, in order to underpin the necessaryongoing monitoring, also with a view to identifying more
effective and innovative methods of participatory evaluation.
5.4. The EESC believes priorities should be defined more
precisely for the second phase of the agenda that has now
been launched, so as to take account of political and economic
Brussels, 10 December 2003.
The President
of the European Economic and Social Committee
Roger BRIESCHproblems, the institutional timetable, scarcity of resources and
the specific task of integrating the new Member States.
5.5. The EESC would stress the need to help the new
Member States to participate actively in implementing theLisbon strategy and to honour their commitment to respect
the Community social acquis .
5.6. Finally, the EESC agrees that 2004 and 2005 will be
key years for properly setting out the terms of the debate on
the future of European social policy. It therefore strongly
endorses the Commission’s setting-up of a high-level studygroup to examine the future of social policy and employment,
as provided for in the Communication. In preparation for thepublic debate to be held in autumn 2004 and on the basis ofthe solid and extensive stock of opinions issued over the pastfew years, the EESC therefore expresses its interest in beingactively involved in this process that has now been launched.