Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee on the European Social Fund support for the European employment strategy
Date: 2001-01-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU employment policy, European Social Fund, economic and social cohesion, economic development, employment aid

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 23.01.2001
COM(2001) 16 final/2

CORRIGENDUM :
Annule et remplace la page de couverture
du document COM(2001)16 final du 16.01.2001.
La cote du document doit se lire COM(2001) 16 final
et non COM(2000) 16 final.
Concerne les versions FR, DE, EN et DA.

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE

ON EUROPEAN SOCIAL FUND SUPPORT FOR THE EUROPEAN EMPLOYMENT
STRATEGY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In Agenda 2000, the Commission put forward plans to reform the European Structural Funds.
The objective was to increase the effectiveness of the Funds through greater thematic and
geographic concentration in order to respond effectively to the new challenges of economic
and social cohesion. At the Berlin European Council in 1999, Heads of State and Government
reached a political agreement on the reform. In particular, the European Social Fund received
a new role to support the European Employment Strategy initiated at the Luxembourg summit
in 1997. As ESF programmes for 2000-2006 have now been adopted, this communication
addresses the question of how these programmes have taken into account the need to integrate
the ESF within the key priorities of the European Employment Strategy.

€

The new European Social Fund programmes will make an investment in people of around 60
billion
as part of the modernisation and reform of the labour markets. They will give
particular attention to integrating marginalised groups into the economy and society. It will
also contribute to the transition towards the knowledge-based economy and strengthen the
competitive position of the European economy.

The European Employment Strategy puts a strong emphasis on four key areas: employability,
entrepreneurship, adaptability and equal opportunities. ESF support under Objectives 1 and 3
will promote these areas in the following way:

€
• Employability: Around 60% (34B

) of the European Social Fund budget will be allocated
€
,
to improve employability across the European Union. A third of this amount, nearly 11B
is earmarked for the fight against social exclusion.

€
• Entrepreneurship: The promotion of entrepreneurship will receive 8B

from ESF to
provide the essential leverage for new business start-ups and job creation in the service
sector.

€
• Adaptability: Close to 11B

will be allocated to invest in the adaptability of the European
labour force, with the main priorities being the development of continuous learning, ICT
use, and SME oriented activities.

• Equal opportunities: the mainstreaming of equal opportunities throughout the entire
strategy does not allow to give a precise total amount devoted to equal opportunities. The
€
budget for specific actions, however, accounts for around 4B

.

Until negotiations are complete it is not possible to present figures on how the remaining
funds under Objective 2 will support the employment strategy.

This Communication also outlines how the European Social Fund underpins the Member
States' commitments made in their National Action Plans for employment. The key focus is
on the preventative approach. This aims to prevent people becoming long-term unemployed
by offering a springboard into the labour market rather than simply a safety-net. It also
highlights how the European Social fund is a catalyst for national policies on equal
opportunities, in particular aimed at increasing the employment rate for women, with a view
to reach full employment for both men and women. The overall package of support will
provide a sound basis to underpin both the European Employment Strategy and policy
commitments made at the Lisbon European Council.

2

National,
regional and local authorities as well as social partners and the European
Commission will have to work together pursue in the coming years to maximise the impact of
these new programmes for the economic and social renewal of the European Union.

3

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE

ON EUROPEAN SOCIAL FUND SUPPORT FOR THE EUROPEAN EMPLOYMENT
STRATEGY

1.

Introduction

for economic growth,

in people recognised as a key driver

With investment
this
communication turns the spotlight on the EU's main financial tool for promoting human
resource development, the European Social Fund (ESF). Since its very beginning, the ESF has
changed in the face of new challenges. New ways of organising work, new skills needs, new
technologies all require a new response from ESF. Despite rising employment levels and
favourable macro-economic conditions, unemployment and low employment rates within
some Member States continue to pose a threat to economic and social cohesion in Europe.
New programmes for the period 2000-2006 will provide significant Community financial
resources to support the Member States in the development and implementation of their
employment policies. Within the framework of the European Employment Strategy1, about 60
€
B

of EU funds2 will be available through ESF over the next 7 years to:

• promote greater economic and social cohesion3 across the EU;

• promote job creation and competitiveness across the EU by investing in skills

development;

• support the specific labour market development needs of those regions lagging behind the

rest of the EU4;

• underpin the commitments made at the Lisbon European Council to promote a dynamic

knowledge-based economy;

• provide the necessary investment in people and training infrastructure to complement

development and introduction of new technologies;

• ensure that all people have an equal chance to share in the benefits of economic growth;

• bridge the employment gap between men and women.

This communication looks primarily at the role of ESF under Objectives 1 and 3 of the
Structural Funds in supporting the objectives of the European Employment Strategy. ESF
support through Objective 2 will also play an important part in promoting the EES within
those areas adapting to industrial change. Negotiations over Objective 2 programmes are
ongoing. Until these negotations are complete, it is not possible to provide detailed evidence
on the nature of ESF support. However, the Commission is actively promoting the link

1It is also important to recognise the valuable contribution of other Structural Funds in supporting the European

Employment Strategy.

€

is available from ESF under Objectives 1 and 3.

257 Billion
3ESF is one of 4 EU Structural Funds. All work to promote greater economic and social cohesion. See annex 1.
4ESF provides just under a quarter of structural funds investment in Objective 1 areas (see annex 2).

4

between Objective 2 plans and the wider employment strategy to ensure that all programmes
are working towards the common objective of more and better jobs.

Role of the European Social Fund in supporting the European Employment

2.
Strategy

At the Amsterdam European Council in June 1997, Member States agreed a new employment
title in the Treaty in order to better link employment and economic policy. While confirming
the primary responsibility for Member States in the design and delivery of employment
policies, the Treaty provided the legal base for a more strategic framework for co-ordination
of employment policies in the European Union.

The Luxembourg European Council of November that year initiated what is known as the
European Employment Strategy (EES) or the Luxembourg process. Heads of State and
Government agreed a framework for action based on the commitment from Member States to
establish a set of common objectives and targets for employment policy against four pillars:
employability, entrepreneurship, adaptability and equal opportunities. This provides the
cornerstone for ESF activity.

One of the guiding principles of the European Employment Strategy is to turn passive
measures into active labour market policies. The European Social Fund provides an important
lever to encourage and support Member States to make their policies more active. Across the
EU, ESF makes up an estimated 8%5 of expenditure on active labour market policies. The
combined national and Community effort represents a significant investment in Europe's
future.

Preparations for the EU enlargement see the EES extending its influence eastwards. The
participation of candidate countries in the EES is a top priority in the Accession Partnerships.
These Partnerships identify for each candidate country the key areas in which progress must
be made and outline the ways in which the Phare Programme will support preparation for
accession. The Phare programme finances projects in the field of employment and human
resources development through its main 'Institution Building' strand and through a specific
'Economic and Social Cohesion' strand. Several projects deal specifically with preparations
for future participation in the ESF6. Of crucial importance here is also the Special Preparatory
Programme for Structural Funds7. This programme aims particularly at building the CEECs’
capacity to manage Structural Funds effficiently and effectively in support of the EES once
they become available after accession.

5See annex 3 for details.
6Cyprus, Malta and Turkey are not eligible for Phare funding.
7Implemented under Phare in the period 1998-2000.

5

3.

Support for the four pillars of the European Employment Strategy

The balance of funds8 to each of the four pillars of the EES shows significant variations
across Member States reflecting the flexibility available to support specific domestic
priorities9. The scale of ESF and the nature of labour market problems within Member States
influence the content of programmes and the balance of support across the four pillars of the
EES10. The underlying concern is to concentrate support where it will have greatest effect
both in relation to labour market need and the level of existing financial support for particular
activities.

Planned expenditure on Objective 1 by pillar

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
f
o
%

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

France

Belgium

Greece

UK

Austria

Germany

Netherlands

Spain

EU

Portugal

Ireland

Italy

Finland

Sweden

Employability Entrepreneurship

Adaptability Equal Opportunities Other

Planned expenditure on Objective 3 by pillar

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
f
o
%

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Netherlands

Luxembourg

UK

France

Belgium

Austria

Germany

EU

Spain

Denmark

Finland

Italy

Sweden

Employability Entrepreneurship Adaptability Equal Opportunities Other

8These figures are broad estimates based on internal analysis by DG Employment & Social Affairs. Country
fiches at the back of this communication set out some basic statistics on ESF and the EES in each
Member State.

9See annex 4 for further statistical information on ESF and key labour market indictaors in each Member State.

6

3.1

Employability

In financial terms, employability is the key pillar for ESF. It represents about 60% of all ESF
€
resources, which accounts for 34 B
. In general, promoting employability receives a lower
share of funds in programmes in those regions lagging furthest behind the rest of EU in terms
of economic development (Objective 1) than in programmes covering human resource
development across the rest of the EU (Objective 3 ).

In line with the employment guidelines, there is a clear shift towards more preventive action11
in individual programmes. In some Member States, preventive action will account for about
half of ESF support for active labour market policies in Objective 3 (Denmark, and the
Netherlands). However, in areas of relatively high long-term unemployment, significant
resources continue to go towards cutting the stock of unemployed (Spain, Germany's eastern
Länder).

€
Over the next seven years, ESF will contribute around 9 B
to promote social inclusion in
Member States by promoting wider access to learning and employment opportunities.
Unemployment is the main reason for poverty and exclusion. The ESF programmes recognise
that policies putting the individual at the heart of labour market activity have greater prospect
of success by building on individual needs and aspirations. This principle drives much of the
proposed design of ESF action. It will improve the effectiveness of ESF in confronting some
of the most deep-seated problems of social exclusion within Europe.

€
12 of ESF
Lifelong learning cuts across a number of priorities within ESF plans. At least 12B
will go towards the development of lifelong learning over the next seven years. For some
Member States, ESF does not just complement national effort on lifelong learning, it is the
key motor for the development of a strategy for lifelong learning (Portugal, Austria).
Proposed expenditure on lifelong learning broadly reflects the level of educational attainment
within Member States. Expenditure on lifelong learning accounts for a greater share of ESF in
Member States with lower levels of educational attainment13.

New programmes are no longer just about delivering training courses. They embrace a wider
approach encompassing: development of a better framework for skills development; a more
systematic approach to the validation and recognition of qualifications and skills; and efforts
to raise the quality of education and training provision and its relevance of learning to the
demands of the workplace. In other words, they support the development of a coherent
approach to establish a learning culture.

For some Member States, ESF support for the Public Employment Services (PES) will play a
key role in supporting employability by helping to ensure a better match between employers
and job-seekers. For countries such as Greece, Italy and Portugal, ESF will have a major role
in promoting the modernisation of PES. In combination with the European Regional
Development Fund, it will provide a much needed boost to physical infrastructure, PES staff
training, and the development of better tools for advice and guidance. In countries such as

10See annex 5 for an analysis of the relationship between ESF support for each of the pillars and key labour

market indicators.

11Preventive action aims to identify and provide early help to those most at risk of long-term unemployment.
12Arguably most of ESF support is about promoting lifelong learning. This figures is a conservative estimate of
support based on proposed expenditure under the specific ESF policy field on lifelong learning.

13See annex 5.

7

Germany, Finland and Ireland ESF focuses more on co-funding and developing pilots and
innovative approaches to the delivery of PES support.

ESF action on employability

Success from the past (1994-99)

Training and education measures in Portugal during the 1994-99 programmes demonstrated
integrating training and work experience through ESF. More
the long-term value of
generally, ESF programmes played a key role in developing and diversifying the range of
support available to bring education and the world of work closer together.

The experience of ESF support in the Netherlands and the UK highlighted the valuable
contribution of an integrated approach to labour market support offering people a pathway
back to work. The effects of this sort of approach were particularly positive for the most
disadvantaged groups within the labour market.

Commitment for the future (2000-2006)

In France, preventive active labour market policies offering guidance and training will offer
a "New Start" to young people and unemployed adults. ESF support through the "Plans
locaux d'insertion par l'economique" will also offer a clear pathway to employment for
unemployed people at risk of exclusion.

Employability is the key pillar for ESF in Portugal. Building on the good start during the
previous programmes, ESF will provide significant support for improving the transition from
school to the labour market through developing more and better "sandwich courses" and by
providing alternative education and training routes for those who fail at school.

In Spain, the integrated pathway approach will help in the fight against social exclusion by
targeting specific measures at immigrants, disabled people and other marginalised groups
such as "travellers". There will also be a special measure to provide school drop-outs with
basic technical skills and work experience. Within the school system itself, the pattern of ESF
finance will shift towards greater integration of new technologies and practical experience
for students.

In Germany's eastern Länder, a pathway approach will also be developed to rectify
deficiences in the education system, ensure good training, and facilitate the transition to
work. In addition, a safety-net will be provided for those who drop out along the way,
consisting of a special
them
becoming unemployed.

tailor-made counselling and training package to prevent

To open university courses to persons who traditionally have no access to them, Austria is
promoting distance learning through the internet.

8

3.2

Entrepreneurship

Many of the employment guidelines on entrepreneurship lie outside the scope of ESF action
and have a greater focus on improving the institutional framework for entrepreneurship within
Member States e.g. reducing the administrative burden of national legislation on firms,
€
promoting a supportive taxation system. Nevertheless, with just under 8 B
devoted to
supporting entrepreneurship, ESF can make a significant contribution to business
development and competitiveness across the EU. This will fund a wide range of activities
including: support the development of entrepreneurial and innovative skills; the support for
business-start-ups; the establishment of networks to reinforce support for entrepreneurship;
the promotion of greater awareness of the potential rewards from entrepreneurship.

Typically, support for entrepreneurship is almost twice as high under Objective 1 compared
with Objective 3. Spain, Portugal, Greece and Ireland all place greater emphasis than other
Member States on support to SMEs. This reflects a greater need to develop firms in Objective
1 regions. There is also some evidence14 that entrepreneurship accounts for a greater share of
funds in those Member States with lower levels of employment in services.

ESF action for entrepreneurship

Commitment to the future (2000-06)

In Italy, support aims to tap into and sustain the spin-offs and enterprise creation potential of
research and development. A clear commitment to equal opportunities underpins specific
support for help to female entrepreneurs to set up in business in Denmark, Greece and
Germany.

There are important efforts to support new fields of employment through the social economy
by upgrading of skills within the social economy organisations (Sweden); encouraging the
supply side to create stable jobs offering training to people at risk on the labour market
(Belgium); encouraging social economy organisations to enhance the employability of people
who are at risk on the labour market (Luxembourg).

Inspired by previous successful schemes in East Berlin, some regions in eastern Germany are
creating integrated ESF/ERDF programmes facilitating R&D in universities and assisting its
transfer to new SMEs in future-orientated fields (ICT, biotechnology, etc.).

14See annex 5.

9

3.3

Adaptability

€
will go towards policies promoting adaptability. This global
Across the EU as a whole, 11B
figure hides wide variations between the Member States. Although other Member States such
as Portugal and Italy also propose to spend significant amounts on adaptability, Nordic
countries tend to focus most on this area. Under Objective 3 in Sweden, for example, around
half of ESF funds go to this pillar. New programmes place a stronger emphasis on supporting
human resource development in and for SMEs than under previous programmes. Providing
access to continuing training is the key objective. Furthermore, all programmes share a
commitment to respond to wider changes in work organisation.

The EES placed special emphasis on the need for social partners to participate in the
modernisation of the workforce. In supporting the employment guidelines, ESF will make an
important contribution to the development of more innovative approaches to including social
partners in the development of policies on adaptability.

Maximising the potential from information and communication technologies (ICT) will be
crucial to strengthen the competitiveness of companies within Europe. As a result, many
programmes will encourage a more effective transfer of technology to SMEs. This will be
through employee training, support for the development of IT networks and improving
collaboration between SMEs and ICT research and development centres.

While the structural funds will make a major investment in IT in schools, it is not enough to
simply provide schools or other learning organisations with PCs. Teachers need to be familiar
with ICT. Consequently, the training of teachers and trainers feature strongly in a number of
ESF programmes. However, ESF is about more than just training particular groups. It is also
about getting in place the right education and training infrastructure. Developing multi-media
training packages and a range of distance and open learning methods to promote the
development of IT skills in SMEs are a feature of a number of programmes.

In the fight against social exclusion, new ESF programmes reflect the increasing concern to
confront what has become known as the digital divide, the exclusion of certain groups from
the potential benefits of emerging ICT. Programmes give a clear commitment to widen access
to new information technologies.

10

ESF action on adaptability

Success of the past (1994-99)

Between 1996-1999, the level of employment in firms supported by ESF under Objective 4 in
Germany remained stable compared to a fall of between 2% to 6% in firms which did not
participate in ESF. Evaluation in Sweden found that ESF Objective 4 had allowed many firms
to make a start on skills development. In the UK, there was evidence of a significant rise in
the proportion of workers involved in training as a result of ESF support.

Commitment for the future (2000-06)

In Sweden, some innovative steps will be undertaken to support skills development of all the
employees in private and public enterprises with a priority to small SMEs. Skills development
stimulus requires an analysis of the development of the work organisation and the needs of
skills development of the employees. Skills development within a workplace requires an
agreement between the employer and local trade union and in its absence with the staff.

UK plans encourage the systematic integration of ICT skills into all types of activities but
with particular focus on basic and key skills. Others pay specific attention to improving the IT
skills of older workers (Finland) and school drop-outs (Netherlands).

In Greece, significant efforts will go towards improving education and training infrastructure
through improving the link between education and the labour market and the level of
certification of continuing training. There are also substantial efforts to develop the
information society in education, business and other areas of economic importance. All
schools will be equipped with computers by 2002, and the teachers trained in ICT.

Objective 3 in the UK aims to fund capacity building projects with the aim of helping social
partners play an active part in fulfil supporting the modernisation of the workforce.

11

3.4.

Equal opportunities

Virtually all Member States propose to adopt a two-pronged approach to equal opportunities
between men and women within the ESF programmes. In line with the employment
this sets specific measures to support gender equality alongside a wider
guidelines,
commitment to mainstream equal opportunities across all actions and programme priorities. It
is difficult to put a figure on the overall investment in gender equality at this stage15. So much
depends on the application of gender mainstreaming across all areas of ESF activity.
However, as to specific actions, the ESF will provide nearly 4B
to the promotion of gender
equality. The inclusion of funds supporting mainstreaming actions would boost this figure
significantly.

€

A simple comparison of the share of funds going to specific actions for gender equality
suggests that, some Member States plan to spend a lower proportion of ESF on specific
measures to promote gender equality than labour market indicators might suggest16. For
example, some Member States with a large gap between men and women in the employment
or unemployment rate plan to spend significantly less than other Member States where the
gap between men and women is much smaller. The reasons for this are complex. Figures on
the level of funds for specific actions for women take no account of the support for women
under the policy of gender mainstreaming. Member States may choose to focus efforts on
mainstreaming rather than through specific actions. Support from ESF must also complement
Member States' own activities.
In addition, where existing national effort on equal
opportunities is already high, it may be more appropriate to follow the mainstreaming route
rather than target funds on specific activities which are already well supported.. However, the
analysis does raise important questions about the approach to gender equality through ESF.

Proposed support for women covers the whole spectrum of labour market activities. Many,
however, emphasise specific measures designed to develop and support effective childcare
strategies, greater flexibility in delivery arrangements for education and training, and specific
targeting of activity for women (e.g. business start-ups).

Almost all programmes introduce explicit project selection criteria designed to test out the
commitment ESF projects to equality. Typically, this will be backed up with an enhanced
approach to monitoring. In most cases, programme monitoring committees now also include a
representative from equal opportunities institutions. These changes will raise the visibility and
impact of gender issues at each stage in the programmes from design to implementation and
through to evaluation.

15An assessment of the Programme Complements for structural fund programmes will provide further details on
the scale of funds going towards gender mainstreaming. These documents will be available over the
coming months.

16See annex 5.

12

ESF action for equal opportunities between men and women

Success from the past (1994-99)

In Ireland, the overall share of women on ESF programmes rose from 36% in 1992 to 54% in
1997. The proportion of women going into employment on leaving ESF was close to that of
men, although many moved into part-time or temporary jobs. ESF support in France helped
contribute towards a greater emphasis on positive action to support women in the labour
market. Evaluation of ESF in Spain flagged up a trend towards greater awareness of gender
issues through ESF support for the dissemination of good practice material at regional and
local levels

Commitment for the future (2000-06)

New programmes in Ireland demonstrate the value of structural funds coming together to
complement each other in promoting the development of childcare provision. Here, ESF
investment in a quality improvement programme, training and staff costs complement a
capital grant scheme for childcare facilities co-funded by ERDF.

Support for gender mainstreaming in programmes in Austria gives particular emphasis to the
development of female employment in non-traditional and new areas of work and support for
job opportunities in science and technology.

Some Italian regions are bringing in a quality mark which will be issued to firms developing
good practices for reconciling work and family life – not only work-place creches, but also
flexible hours, parental leave and other measures.

4.

Implementation and management of programmes

It is not just the focus of ESF that has changed for 2000-2006, it
is also the way of
implementing the programme. Key changes aim to improve the effectiveness of ESF support.
The most significant of these is the greater emphasis on better programme management. The
programmes mention explicitly what measures will be taken to improve the systems for
monitoring and evaluation. This is crucial to get the most out of ESF. For some Member
States this has led to significant changes in financial control systems (Netherlands) and
improved co-ordination between regional and national policies (Belgium). Monitoring
systems need to deliver timely information to support an informed assessment of programme
performance at each annual review between programme managers and the Commission.

Other major improvements with regard to the implementation of programmes include the
following:

• An approach reflecting the regional and local dimension to implementation provides
greater opportunities to tailor ESF to very specific needs of regional and local labour

13

markets. Member State have also signalled their intention to use the flexibility offered by
the use of global grants17 to support better local responsiveness of programmes.

• Ensuring that funds complement each other in meeting economic and social development
objectives is a central element of structural funds programmes. Decision-makers can
establish very close links between investment through ESF and ERDF. By providing a
clear contribution to human resource development, ESF can help accelerate the impact of
other funds in meeting the objective of greater economic and social cohesion.

• A key theme for ESF is active involvement of social partners, non-government
organisations and other relevant
interest groups. Partnership is the key to success.
Consultation on plan development has been wider than ever before. Member States have
involved a wide range of interests via both traditional channels for consultation with social
partners and newer means via the internet. It will be important to maintain the clear
commitment to partnership by encouraging the active participation of all partners.

5.

Conclusions

Negotiations over ESF have shown the commitment of the Member States to allocate
Community funding in line with their employment policies as established in the framework of
the Luxembourg process. In this sense, the ESF has shifted its focus from an essentially
training programme to a policy oriented instrument with a wide range of measures to invest in
people. It is aimed at improving the effectiveness and responsiveness of labour market
policies and puts a strong emphasis on facilitating job creation. The most clear-cut example is
the priority given to the preventive action within ESF programmes. The new programmes
show also firm commitments to gender equality, social inclusion and wider access to the
benefits of information and communication technologies.

The challenge is now for Member States to make the programmes work. They need to ensure
that ESF remains responsive to changing needs and that it continues to get the appropriate
match of policy tools and funding to meet specific labour market problems. The greater
emphasis on programme monitoring should be used as a positive tool for continuous
improvement to maximise the impact of ESF. The annual meetings between programme
managers and the Commission allow scope for regular assessment of the need for adjustments
to improve the monitoring and management of programmes.

The mid-term review of programmes in 2003 will provide the first opportunity to assess in
full how the implementation of the programmes match with the actual plans. This will also be
provide a key opportunity to review and redirect programmes. To ensure these exercises are
soundly based, Member States need to give priority to establishing effective monitoring and
evaluation systems from the start of the programming period. This must go hand in hand with
efforts to develop a better link between ESF monitoring and the annual reporting process
through the National Action Plans. It is not enough for ESF programmes to incorporate the
priorities of the EES if National Action Plans fail to fully integrate the contribution of ESF
and other Structural Funds to the EES.

17Member States can give certain intermediary organisations responsibility to manage the allocation of small
sums to local development organisations or initiatives. Most propose to allocate 0.5% to 1% of funds to
this.

14

The negotiations over the new programmes represented a good first step in developing a
strong and clear link between ESF and the EES. It is important to build on this good start to
ensure that ESF is equal
lie ahead in supporting the European
to the challenges that
Employment Strategy and commitments made at the Lisbon European Council.

15

Structural Fund support 2000-2006

There are 4 Structural Funds: European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), European Social Fund
(ESF), European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), Financial Instrument for
Fisheries Guidance (FIFG). These provide financial support through 3 Objectives:

Annex 1

Objective 1: promotes development and structural adjustment of regions whose
development
receive
€
135,954M

is lagging behind. From 2000-2006,

from ERDF, ESF, EAGGF, FIFG.

these regions will

Objective 2: supports the economic and social conversion of areas facing structural
€
difficulties. Regions under Objective 2 will receive 22,454M
from ERDF, ESF,
EAGGF, FIFG.

Objective 3: supports the adaptation and modernisation of policies and systems of
education, training and employment in all areas not designated an Objective 1 area.
€
ESF alone will provide 24,050M

over the lifetime of the programme.

ESF accounts for around one third of all structural fund support providing around a quarter of
structural fund expenditure in Objective 1 areas and all in Objective 3.

Financial Allocations 2000-06 (mill

€

, 1999prices)

Member State

Objective 1

Objective 2

Objective 3

Fisheries
Instrument
(outside Obj.1)

Total

625
0
19958
20961
38096
3805
3088
22122
0
123
261
19029
913
722
6251
135954

BE
DK
DE
EL
ES
FR
IR
IT
LU
NL
AU
PO
SF
SV
UK
EUR(15)

Interreg
Urban
Leader
Equal
Innovative Actions
Total

433
183
3510
0
2651
6050
0
2522
40
795
680
0
489
406
4695
22454

16

737
365
4581
0
2140
4540
0
3744
38
1686
528
0
403
720
4568
24050

34
197
107
0
200
225
0
96
0
31
4
0
31
60
121
1106

1829
745
28156
20961
43087
14620
3088
28484
78
2635
1473
19029
1836
1908
15635
183564

4875
700
2020
2847
994
195000

Share of ESFinObjective 1 programmes 2000-2006

Annex 2

Italy

Greece

Austria

Sweden

Spain

Portugal

EU

France

Netherlands

Germany

Finland

Belgium

UK

Ireland

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

%ESF

17

Estimated scale of ESF compared to national active labour market policy

Annex 3

ESF as a share of expenditure on
active labour market policy*

Active labour market policy
as a share of GDP

Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Portugal
Spain
Sweden
UK
EU 15

(%)

7.5
4.0
1.8
5.9
4.1
5.4
58.4
8.8
8.3
9.7
3.5
40.0
24.6
2.8
14.6
8.1

(%)

0.52
1.34
1.77
1.22
1.33
1.30
0.35
1.66
1.10
0.30
1.80
0.85
0.81
1.84
0.37
1.09

Source: DG Employment and Social Affairs; OECD Economic Outlook (June 2000)

* These are very broad estimates based on a simple comparison of planned ESF expenditure against figures on
expenditure on active labour market polices provided by Member States to the OECD. OECD figures cover a
narrower range of policies than those covered by ESF. Consequently, the table is likely to slightly overstate the
share of ESF out of total expenditure on active labour market policies

18

Annex 4

COUNTRY FICHES

19

ESF in Austria 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1 & 3)

Entrepreneurship
8%

Adaptability
9%

Equal Opportunities
11%

Other
3%

Employability
69%

KEY DATA (OE)

All

National

EU

Men

Women

National
76,7
-
3,1
0,9
-
-
-
-
-
-

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
- Objective 1 (M
)
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
- Objective 3 (M
)
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

68,2
1,0
3,7
1,2
66,4
13,0
7,5
603,1
55,0
20,3
548,1
96

)

-

)

EU
71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-

National
59,7
-
4,5
1,6
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-

-

-

-

20

ESF in Belgium 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1 & 3)

Entrepreneurship
10%

Employability
69%

Adaptability
11%

Equal
Opportunities
5%

Other
5%

KEY DATA (BE)

All

Men

Women

EU National
68,0
-
7,8
4,4
-
-
-
-
-
-

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
- Objective 1 (M
)
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
- Objective 3 (M
)
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF). (ESTAT )
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

National
59,2
1,1
9,0
5,0
30,7
17,0
4,0
957,0
192,0
29,6
765,0
70

)

)

-

EU National
50,4
-
10,7
5,9
-
-
-
-
-
-

71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-

-

-

-

21

ESF in Denmark 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 3)

Entrepreneurship
8%

Employability
53%

Adaptability
36%

Men

Women

Other
3%

KEY DATA (DK)

All

National

EU

National
81,2
-
4,5
0,9
-
-
-
-
-

76,5
1,0
5,2
1,1
53,1
12,0
1,8
379,0
0
379,0

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
)
- Objective 1 (M
€
)
- Objective 3 (M
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
24965,6

)

)

-

EU
71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-

National
71,6
-
6,0
1,2
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-

-

-

-

22

ESF in Finland 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1 &3)

Entrepreneurship
16%

Adaptability
37%

Employability
35%

KEY DATA (SF)

All

National

EU

Equal Opportunities
9%

Other
3%

Men

Women

National
69,1
-
9,8
3,1
-
-
-
-
-
-

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
- Objective 1 (M
)
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
)
- Objective 3 (M
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

66,3
3,5
10,2
2,9
40,2
n.a.
5.9
688,8
273,0
28,8
415,8
68

)

-

)

EU
71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-

National
63,4
-
10,7
2,7
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-

-

-

-

23

ESF in France 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1 & 3)

Entrepreneurship
9%

Employability
72%

Adaptability
12%

Equal Opportunities
4%

Other
3%

KEY DATA (FR)

All

Men

Women

EU National
67,5
-
9,6
3,6
-
-
-
-
-
-

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
- Objective 1 (M
)
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
- Objective 3 (M
)
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

National
60,4
1,5
11,3
4,4
40,1
16,0
4,1
5646,5
932,5
23,8
4714,0
301

)

-

)

EU National
53,5
-
13,3
5,3
-
-
-
-
-
-

71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-

-

-

-

24

ESF in Germany 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1 & 3)

Entrepreneurship
9%

Adaptability
14%

Equal Opportunities
10%

Other
5%

KEY DATA (DE)

All

Men

Women

Employability
62%

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
- Objective 1 (M
)
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
)
- Objective 3 (M
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT).
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

EU National
72,4
-
8,3
4,0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

National
64,8
0,3
8,7
4,4
57,0
16,0
5,4
10620,0
5864,0
28,3
4756,0
484

)

)

EU National
57,1
-
9,3
4,9
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

25

ESF in Greece 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1)

Entrepreneurship
13%

Employability
67%

Adaptability
8%

Equal Opportunities
12%

KEY DATA (EL)

All

Men

Women

Total employment rate (1998) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1998) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1998) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
)
- Objective 1 (M
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
- Objective 3 (M
)
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

EU National
71,6
-
7,8
3,1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

National
55,5
1,2
11,6
5,9
n.a.
21,0
58,4
4241,2
4241,2
19,5
0
98

)

)

EU National
40,2
-
17,4
10,1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

26

ESF in Ireland 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1)

Entrepreneurship
17%

Employability
51%

Adaptability
16%

Equal Opportunities
12%

KEY DATA (IR)

Other

All

Men

Women

EU National
73,6
-
5,8
2,5
-
-
-
-
-
-

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
)
- Objective 1 (M
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
- Objective 3 (M
)
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

National
62,5
5,1
5,8
2,4
n.a.
18,0
8,8
1056,6
1056,6
33,0
0
32

)

-

)

EU National
51,4
-
5,8
2,1
-
-
-
-
-
-

71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-

-

-

-

27

ESF in Italy 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1 & 3)

Entrepreneurship
30%

Employability
32%

Adaptability
26%

Other
2%

Equal Opportunities
10%

KEY DATA (IT)

All

Men

Women

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
)
- Objective 1 (M
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
- Objective 3 (M
)
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

EU National
67,1
-
8,7
5,3
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

National
52,5
1,0
11,3
6,9
33,7
19,0
8,3
7981,1
4094,0
17,8
3887,2
371

)

)

EU National
38,1
-
15,6
9,3
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

28

ESF in Luxembourg 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 3)

Entrepreneurship
12%

Adaptability
2%

Equal Opportunities
5%

Other
2%

Employability
79%

KEY DATA (LU)

All

Men

Women

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
)
- Objective 1 (M
€
- Objective 3 (M
)
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
24965,6
2847

EU National
74,4
-
1,7
0,7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

National
61,6
4,8
2,3
0,8
43,9
12,0
9,7
39,5
0
39,5
4

)

)

EU National
48,5
-
3,3
0,9
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

29

ESF in Netherlands 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1 & 3)

Entrepreneurship
0%

Adaptability
8%

Equal Opportunities
1%

Other
3%

Employability
88%

KEY DATA (NL)

All

Men

Women

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
)
- Objective 1 (M
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
- Objective 3 (M
)
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

EU National
80,3
-
2,3
0,9
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

National
70,9
2,5
3,3
1,2
42,1
12,0
3,5
1783,3
33,3
26,1
1750,0
196

)

)

EU National
61,3
-
4,7
1,7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

30

ESF in Portugal 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1)

Entrepreneurship
10%

Employability
55%

Adaptability
34%

KEY DATA (PO)

All

National

EU

Equal Opportunities

Men

Women

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
- Objective 1 (M
)
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
)
- Objective 3 (M
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

67,4
1,8
4,5
1,7
11,5
22,0
40,0
4370,0
4370,0
22,1
0
107

)

)

National
75,8
-
3,9
1,5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

National
59,4
-
5,2
2,0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

31

ESF in Spain 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1 & 3)

Entrepreneurship
18%

Employability
56%

Adaptability
23%

Other
0%

Equal Opprtunities
3%

KEY DATA (ES)

All

National

EU

Men

Women

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
- Objective 1 (M
)
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
- Objective 3 (M
)
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

52,5
3,4
15,9
7,3
14,6
18,0
24,6
11013,0
8792,0
22,2
2221,0
485

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

)

)

National
67,9
-
11,2
4,5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

National
37,6
-
23,1
11,6
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

32

ESF in Sweden 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1 & 3)

Entrepreneurship
6%

Employability
27%

Adaptability
50%

Men

Women

Other
2%

Equal Opportunities
15%
KEY DATA (SV)

All

National

EU

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
- Objective 1 (M
)
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
- Objective 3 (M
)
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

72,2
2,2
7,2
2,1
48,5
n.a.
2,8
905,7
158,7
21,2
747,0
81

)

)

National
74,0
-
7,2
2,4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

National
70,3
-
7,1
1,7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

33

ESF in The United Kingdom 2000-2006

Share of ESF by pillar
(Objective 1 & 3)

Entrepreneurship
4%

Adaptability
14%

Equal Opportunities
7%

Other
2%

Men

Women

Employability
73%

KEY DATA (UK)

All

National

EU

Total employment rate (1999) (1)
Total employment growth (1999)
Unemployment rate (1999) (2)
Long-term unemployment rate (1999) (3)
Educational attainment rate (1999) (4)
Poverty (1996) (5)
Estimate of ESF as % of ALMP (6)
€
Total ESF funding 2000-06 (M
€
)
- Objective 1 (M
- ESF(OBJ1) as % of total OBJ1
€
- Objective 3 (M
)
€
EQUAL (M
(1) Employed persons as % of working age population in same age bracket (15-64 years). (JER)
(2) Total unemployed as % of active population. (JER)
(3) Unemployed (>12months) as % of active population. (JER)
(4) % of population (15-64 years) having at least attained upper secondary level education. (JER)
(5) % of population (<60% of median monetary revenue; EU-13 excl. S and SF) (ESTAT)
(6) Average annual ESF funding as % of publ.exp.on Active Labour Market Policies).(OECD)

62,2
1,4
9,2
4,4
42,3
17,0
8,1
57013,0
32047,5
22,7
24965,6
2847

70,4
1,2
6,1
1,8
52,5
19,0
14,6
6722,0
1979,0
30,5
4743,0
376

)

)

National
76,9
-
6,7
2,3
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
71,6
-
7,9
3,7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

National
63,7
-
5,3
1,1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU
52,9
-
10,9
5,4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

34

Analysis of the share of ESF for specific policy areas18

Annex 5

Planned expenditure on employability against unemployment rate (1999)

Netherlands

Luxembourg

UK

Greece*

Austria

Portugal

Denmark
Ireland

France

Belgium

Germany

Spain

Finland

Italy

Sweden

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

unemployment rate (%)

Planned expenditure on social inclusion against rate of long-term
unemployment

Netherlands

Luxembourg

Denmark

UK

Belgium

France

Finland

Austria

Portugal

Sweden

EU

Ireland

Germany

Greece*

Spain

Italy

F
S
E
%

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

0

45

40

35

30

F
S
E

f
o
%

25

20

15

10

5

0

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

rate of long-term unemployment (%)

18 The analysis presents a very simple comparison of the share ESF support for particular pillars of the
Employment Strategy or specific policy fields for ESF action. Most labour market data are for 1999.
Those marked ** are 1997.

35

Planned expenditure on lifelong learning against educational attainment levels

Greece*

Italy

France

EU

Luxembourg

Belgium

Netherlands

Spain

Ireland**

Austria

Finland

Sweden

UK

Denmark

Germany

Portugal

F
S
E

f
o
%

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

% of population (26-64) with higher or medium level qualifications

Planned expenditure on entrepreneurship against employment in services

F
S
E
%

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Italy

Spain

Ireland

EU

Finland

Portugal

Germany

Belgium

Luxembourg

Greece*

France

Austria

Denmark

Sweden

UK

Netherlands

30

35

40

45

50

55

Rate of employment in services (%)

36

60

50

40

F
S
E
%

30

20

10

0

50

Planned expenditure on Adaptability against employment rates

Sweden

Finland

Portugal

Denmark

Italy

Spain

EU

Ireland

France

Belgium

Greece*

Germany

UK

Austria

Netherlands

Luxembourg

55

60

65

70

75

80

Employment rate (%)

Comparison of the employment gap between men and women and planned
ESF expenditure on specific actions for women

Greece*

Ireland

F
S
E
%

Italy

Spain

Luxembourg

Belgium

Germany

UK

Belgium

France

Netherlands

Portugal

Denmark

14

12

10

Finland

Sweden
8

6

4

2

0

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

Difference between employment rate between men and women

37