Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on "Relations between the European Union and the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean"
Date: 2002-02-21
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: Caribbean Islands, European Union, Latin America, cooperation policy

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 94/43

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on ‘Relations between the European Union and
the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean’

(2002/C 94/10)

On 28 February and 1 March 2001 the Economic and Social Committee, acting under the third paragraph
of Rule 23 of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an opinion on ‘Relations between the European
Union and the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean’.

The Section for External Relations, which was responsible for preparing the Committee’s work on the
subject, adopted its opinion on 28 January 2002. The rapporteur was Mr Gafo Ferna´ndez.

At its 388th Plenary Session of 20 and 21 February 2002 (meeting of 21 February), the Economic and
Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 92 votes to 2 with no abstentions.

1.

Introduction: historical background

1.1.
Relations between the European Union and Latin
America and the Caribbean began with the creation of the
European Economic Community in 1957. They were initially
conceived on a predominantly economic, bilateral basis,
focusing on trade issues with each Latin American and
Caribbean country individually. These early stages were not
easy.

1.2.
Between 1970 and the early 1990s Europe — meaning
the European Union — was preoccupied with digesting its
three successive enlargements, which doubled the number of
member countries,
injected major cultural and economic
differences and began to put pressure on the Community’s
institutions, which had initially been geared to a small number
of far more homogeneous countries. Moreover, the energy
shocks of 1973 and 1979 forced a process of radical industrial
restructuring upon Europe: the massive upsurge in unemploy-
ment had to be met with a highly supportive system of social
protection which had not originally been designed for such
high unemployment levels. As a result, Europe was more
inward than outward looking during these years.

in the way such action was viewed. Similarly, from 1984
onwards regular official relations began to be forged with the
countries of Central America — the ‘San José dialogue’ — and
with the Rio Group since 1990, in the wake of the ‘Rome
Declaration’. The European Union is beginning to see Latin
America and the Caribbean as a potential economic and
political partner in a globalised world.

1.4.
On the Latin American and Caribbean side, under the
economic approach of the 1970s, based on an autarkic import
substitution policy, Europe tended to be seen as historically
familiar, but economically and politically distant. Next came
the ‘lost decade’ of the 1980s, in which the failure of the
previous macroeconomic policy coincided with a strong rise
in the cost of money. This, together with very high external
public debt levels throughout the region in proportion to
export income, resulted in international payments moratoria
which denied the region access to new public or private
funding. At the same time many Latin American and Caribbean
countries became locked into a vicious circle of authoritarian
rule, civil unrest and, in many cases, the emergence of guerrilla
movements. The outcome was a complete breakdown of
democratic coexistence, with no opportunity to open a social
dialogue which might find some way out of the situation.

1.3.
There were however a number of signs of forthcoming
change. The first was the signature of the Lomé Convention
with the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries, which
established a solidarity-based mechanism which, although
centred on economic aspects, did comprise an embryonic
social dimension. Similarly, the individual EU Member States
began to set up trade and cooperation arrangements with a
wide range of Latin American and Caribbean nations, boosting
Europe’s presence in the region — albeit in a piecemeal
manner. All these factors resulted in the European Union
beginning to shape an outline strategy towards Latin America
and the Caribbean, revolving around three core aspects:
development cooperation as a key element, together with a
number of
trade benefits via the Generalised System of
Preferences (GSP), and a degree of sub-regional harmonisation

1.5.
The picture altered radically in the early 1990s. Firstly,
Portugal and Spain’s entry into the EU in 1986 increased
European political awareness of the region. Secondly, the
Treaty of Asuncio´ n, which set up the Southern Common
Market (Mercosur), opened up new prospects for the creation
of regional
integration machinery which could indirectly
reinvigorate similar blocs already in existence — at least on
paper — such as the Andean Pact or the Central American
Common Market. Thirdly, the success of Argentina’s converti-
bility plan, together with Chile’s earlier experiment in liberalis-
ation, shifted the emphasis to macroeconomic stability and
opening up to the private sector key areas of the economy,
previously reserved exclusively for the public sector. This
new economic approach generated major opportunities for
European businesses, principally because macroeconomic

C 94/44

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.4.2002

discipline and economic liberalisation policies were catching
on across the region. Fourthly, and of particular importance
from the human and social point of view, the consolidation
— or return — of democracy in numerous countries and the
peace agreements reached with many guerrilla movements
marked the end of decades of insurrection and latent civil war.
Latin America and the Caribbean, having come to terms with
themselves, created an atmosphere in which they could open
up to the rest of the world.

meetings have been held: one in Vilamoura in February 2000
and another in Santiago de Chile in March 2001. Subsequent
accounts, especially in the light of the Santiago resolutions,
reveal a lack of vigour in pursuing the deeper relations called
for in the Rio action plan.

In its communication, the Commission defined three
1.9.
priority areas for action in preparation for the Madrid summit:

These developments,

in which the two sides grew
1.6.
closer together, culminated in the first summit of Heads of
State and Government of the European Union and Latin
America and the Caribbean in Rio de Janeiro in June 1999. A
final declaration was adopted establishing a partnership
between the two regions, and an action plan was formulated
to flesh out this partnership. The action plan is to be reviewed
at the second summit to be held in Madrid, in conjunction
with the Spanish EU presidency in the first half of 2002. The
partnership is based upon the following:

i)

greater political dialogue;

ii)

iii)

sound economic and financial relations based on a
comprehensive and balanced liberalisation of trade and
capital flows;

dynamic cooperation in key sectors, especially in the
educational, social and cultural fields and in scientific and
technological development.

1.7.
The fact that civil society was associated with the
process was a particularly important factor in the success of
the Rio summit. The meeting of civil society representatives
from the EU, Latin America and the Caribbean, held under
ESC auspices in Rio, allowed the views and concerns of civil
society to be heard in the course of the summit of Heads of
State and Government, and to be adequately reflected in the
final declaration. The ESC’s own-initiative opinion on relations
between the European Union, Latin America and the Carib-
bean: socio-economic interregional dialogue figured promi-
nently in the discussions held as part of the civil society forum.

1.8.
Eleven key priorities, which had been considered in
previous years, were subsequently identified at Tuusula during
the Finnish EU presidency,
leading to expenditure of EUR
1,092 million between 1995 and 1999. No details have been
published on the follow-up to the action plan, other than the
report in the Commission’s Communication on the Follow-up
to the First Summit (1), that a bi-regional group of high officials
and involving ministerial meetings has been set up. Two such

— promotion and protection of human rights;

— promotion of the information society;

— reduction of social imbalances.

The aim in each case is to draw up main conclusions for
discussion at the summit, to be held in Spain in 2002.

1.9.1.
The Commission document made a number of
proposals for action in the first priority area, to include social,
economic and political rights, and the establishment of an EU-
Latin America/Caribbean discussion forum for this purpose.

1.9.2.
In the second area (information society), a proposal
was made to introduce a Community programme called
@LIS (2), addressed exclusively to the Latin American countries
(but not signatories to the Cotonou Agreement), with three
aims:

— to stimulate dialogue between governments, institutions,

the private sector and users;

— to increase the interconnection capacity between research

communities in the two regions;

— to implement

the applications produced by demon-
stration projects in areas such as local governance,
distance learning, education, cultural diversity, public
health and social integration.

This programme was recently adopted by the European
Commission, with a budget of EUR 63 million.

1.9.3.
ances is channelled in two directions:

The European Union’s action to reduce social imbal-

i)

firstly, the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) pro-
gramme, which seeks coordinated reductions by creditor
countries of the high level of external debt of the countries
concerned, as this puts a complete brake on their
development;

(1) COM(2000) 670 final.

(2) Alliance for the Information Society.

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 94/45

ii)

secondly, the ‘Social
Initiative’, focusing on updating
cooperation action and making it more efficient, allowing
experience and best practice to be pooled in order to
reduce social imbalances and assist the most vulnerable
groups in these countries.

1.10.
The decision taken at the beginning of 2001 under
the Everything But Arms agreement also confirms that the EU
is serious about continuing to open its borders to the least
developed countries. However, this by no means goes far
enough. A greater impact could have been achieved by
allowing access for processed agricultural products. In any
case,
less than 80 % of trade concessions for developing
countries in the form of tariff-free import quotas for unpro-
cessed agricultural products have been used in the past few
years (OECD and WTO figures). This puts the EBA agreement
somewhat in perspective. The reasons that opportunities for
exporting to the EU have not been taken up lie mainly in the
ever more rigorous EU food safety requirements. The EU has
nevertheless taken concrete steps in the framework of the
WTO negotiations to strengthen the negotiating position of
developing countries in the WTO. Private sector investment in
South America is at the moment also many times greater than
government assistance.

1.11.
No review of the historical background to relations
between the European Union and Latin America and the
Caribbean would be complete without mentioning five topical
issues: (i) recent political and economic developments in the
Latin American and Caribbean countries; (ii) the present state
of the Enterprise for the Americas initiative and its key element,
the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA); (iii) the related
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); (iv) relations
between Latin America and the Asia-Pacific Economic Confer-
ence (APEC) countries; and (v) the prospects for relaunching
the WTO ministerial conference and the collective role of Latin
America and the Caribbean in this regard.

Circumstances within the Latin American countries,
1.12.
and by extension within the regional integration movements,
can only be described as critical. Following a lengthy period of
democratic consolidation and growing cooperation between
countries, the 1997 Asian economic crisis — which has since
spread far around the world — has undermined much of the
progress achieved. Populist governments have emerged in
some countries, in others elections have been held against a
backdrop of acute political and social uncertainty, military
confrontations — thankfully brief — have flared up between
neighbouring countries. More broadly, social tensions have
been exacerbated, or progress to ending armed conflicts in
certain countries has become bogged down. Moreover, many
countries are struggling with very heavy external debt burdens,
dampening their prospects for economic recovery or imposing
extremely severe external adjustment programmes. On top of
this, Central America has been hit by a series of natural

disasters which have wiped out
ten years’ of economic
progress. This has been reflected regional integration terms in
the enormous problems facing Mercosur, the slow-down in
Central American integration and the recent lack of enthusiasm
in pursuing Andean integration. Only the Caribbean countries
seem to have escaped this picture of decline in recent years,
even though high levels of poverty persist. Latin America and
the Caribbean can therefore be described as having reached a
milestone in their history: the European Union can play a key
role in guiding them towards greater democratisation, growth
and further progress with the social improvements launched
in the 1990s.

The development of pan-American relations,

1.13.
the
most important aspect of which is the ‘Enterprise for the
Americas’ initiative launched in 1994 by the then President
Bill Clinton, has been given a major boost in recent months,
following the entry into office of President Bush, as demon-
strated at the Quebec Summit in March 2001. The most
significant result of the initiative is probably the draft FTAA
Agreement which, according to the Declaration of Quebec
City, should be implemented by 2006 at the latest. It should
be noted that
the technical work has made remarkable
progress since the Miami Summit in 1994 and that, although
considerable political suspicion remains — most overtly in
Brazil — that a pan-American agreement may make sub-
regional integration efforts redundant, the significant political
boost given in Quebec, and by the recent adoption by the US
Congress of the ‘presidential executive power’ or so-called ‘fast
track’ procedure,
is very real. The Americas initiative is
unarguably political and economic in character, touching only
indirectly upon social aspects.

1.14.
The recent adoption of the US dollar by a number of
Latin American countries (Ecuador and El Salvador, together
with Panama, which has used the dollar since gaining national
independence at the beginning of the 20th century), along
with the dollar’s status as a reference currency in Argentina’s
fixed convertibility system (currency board), means that the
dollar is taking on a predominant role in economic relations,
punching far above its weight in trade and investment terms.
It also means that countries opting for dollarisation are
rejecting autonomous-type monetary policy.

1.15.
Experience with the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) may give some indication of the impact
of a future FTAA on the region’s relations with the European
Union: in spite of all the transitional periods and safeguards
built
its introduction in 1994 immediately
triggered a massive dislocation of trade affecting both EU

into NAFTA,

C 94/46

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.4.2002

exports to Mexico (replaced with direct imports or from third
countries via the US and Canada) and, less spectacularly but
inexorably, European exports to the US and Canada, substi-
tuted by the upsurge in labour-intensive manufacturing in
Mexico, through the so-called ‘maquiladora plants’ (foreign-
owned assembly plants). The signing of the free trade agree-
ment with Mexico, which came into force in 2000, has
restored the former state of affairs.

1.16.
Prior to the 1997 crisis, many American countries
along the Pacific seaboard were fascinated by the economic
development model offered by numerous Asian countries. The
traumatic experience of the 1997 crash, however, which
highlighted the model’s economic weaknesses, combined with
a total
lack of social awareness as understood in western
culture, has severely tarnished this model’s attractiveness. This
is not to say that in the medium term, economic links with the
relevant parts of Asia and Oceania may not be reactivated,
although not to the extent which seemed likely until 1997.

1.17.
The failure of the WTO’s Seattle ministerial confer-
ence in 1999 brought a two-fold revolt into the limelight:
firstly, the small and medium-sized countries in wealth terms,
who were not prepared to see a replay of imposed liberalisation
timetables and measures, as happened at
the Marrakech
ministerial conference, and secondly, the emerging civil society
platform which, although mixed with corporative interests,
called upon political
leaders to give greater heed to the
reasonable demands of society and make the negotiating
process more transparent.

aspects which accompany trade liberalisation, but some predict
that these aspects could be used to bring about unbalanced
protection favouring the markets of the more developed
countries.

The historical background to the relations between
1.19.
the European Union and Latin America and the Caribbean
might be summarised as follows:

1.19.1.
Latin America and the Caribbean are at a turning-
point in their political, economic and social development.
They are confronted with the need to restate their commitment
to democratic values and to combating poverty and social
exclusion, to seek ways of reconciling models of sub-regional
integration, of pan-American trade integration and of a trade
and partnership structure with the European Union, and to fit
all these possible models into the multilateral trade liberalis-
ation process under the WTO.

1.19.2.
For its part, the European Union must confirm that
Latin America and the Caribbean represent a major priority
within its global strategy and provide the corresponding
resources, establish a genuine partnership with a major
economic and commercial dimension but with social and
cultural values as a fundamental element and, lastly, integrate
this partnership into the broader framework of its relations
with the trans-Atlantic dialogue, or with the process of
multilateral trade liberalisation.

1.19.3.
The European Union, Latin America and the Carib-
bean must understand that a strategic link between our regions,
maximising our potential and minimising our weak points,
represents an opportunity to boost our individual roles in the
new world economic setting. Together, we will be stronger
and less vulnerable.

Civil society in Latin America and the Caribbean
1.18.
clearly lacks an organisational foundation at the present time
able to guarantee its place within democratic society and its
effectiveness, something which the European Union can help
to consolidate. However, the general thrust of the EU’s post-
Rio strategy is in this direction, and it is to be hoped that civil
society in Latin America and the Caribbean will assume a
much more active role in the near future. Government
positions are underpinned by two central concerns: not to
erode the comparative advantages currently enjoyed by many
countries under the GSP and GSP-Drugs arrangements, and to
launch of a global negotiating round covering all sectors,
especially agriculture. Moreover, in a number of cases — again,
Brazil
trade
in particular — the effect of a multilateral
liberalisation policy in watering down current regional inte-
gration processes is viewed with concern. There is no clear,
public government position on the social and environmental

2. Key elements in the partnership between the EU and

Latin America and the Caribbean

The partnership concept must govern all aspects of
2.1.
relations between the two regions. It must embrace concepts
such as grassroots proximity, visibility and public acceptability.
From this starting point, the partnership must rest upon the
following principles:

2.2.
A relationship of equals acknowledging the specific
features of each country and region, while acknowledging that
absolutely equivalent concessions by each side are not a pre-
requisite for negotiations.

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 94/47

Sustainable development, aimed at achieving practical

2.3.
medium- and long-term results.

2.4.
A far more ambitious approach than simply pooling
production potential or opening up markets, to foster econ-
omic competitiveness in the two regions.

A foundation on organised civil society as a means of
2.5.
associating citizens in the common project. Both sides are
considering the human (economic, social, cultural, political)
rights of minorities, especially of the indigenous people, as a
matter of real concern. After centuries of exclusion the time
has come for reconciliation, inclusion and prosperity for all.

2.6. Mutual reinforcement of these regions’ potential at
world level, representing a contribution to a new, culturally
and socially fairer world balance which respects different
models of society.

2.7.
The aim, while recognising the differences between
regions and countries, of creating a real European and Latin
American community of nations, which is democratic, socially
just and has an efficient economy, which encompasses areas
such as migration and culture, and in which civil society has a
decisive part to play.

3. The strategic thrust of the EU’s action on relations

with Latin America and the Caribbean

3.1.4.
It must take constant account of the need to achieve
sustainable development shared between the two regions,
together with an
embodying the idea of balanced trade,
increasing input of environment-friendly European tech-
nologies under socially and economically viable conditions.

3.1.5.
It must be based on sharing the core values of the
European Union, especially the concept of the European social
model, which combines free market aspects with social
dialogue and public participation through civil society and is
of more ambitious scope than simple trade agreements.

It should support sub-regional integration projects
3.1.6.
in Latin America in keeping with the EU model, insofar as
these go further than the simple trade development which is
the primary aim of the FTAA treaty.

3.1.6.1.
It must involve strengthening state and public
administration institutional structures and operating and
monitoring machinery at all levels, and sufficient budgetary
resources must be provided for it to be able to fulfil
its
important role in this process.

3.1.7.
Each EU institution or body must play a specific role
in building up this partnership. It is the task of the European
Economic and Social Committee to offer the benefit of its
experience to the creation or reinforcement of similar bodies
— such as the Mercosur consultative forum — either already
in existence or on the drawing-board, at sub-regional level and
within the various individual countries of Latin America and
the Caribbean. It is also vital for the economic and social
partners of both regions to participate actively and be involved
in pursuing this strategy.

3.1. General aspects

3.1.8.
The possibility of setting up a specific body for
carrying forward these relations and implementing practical
measures should be considered.

The first element is the need to have a well-defined,
3.1.1.
permanent strategy backed up with a practical and specific
action plan and timetable, dispelling the aura of impermanence
that has surrounded these relations over recent years.

3.1.2.
The strategy must be based on the considerations of
the Rio action plan, subsequently confirmed at Tuusula during
the Finnish EU Presidency, but must be extended, as far as is
possible, to other spheres.

It must be based on sub-regional strategies, tailoring
3.1.3.
the various political, trade and cooperation opportunities
offered by the European Union to each specific case.

3.2. Relations with Mexico

3.2.1.
In the economic sphere, the main thrust of the
European Union’s strategy must clearly be to develop the
potential offered by the Free Trade Agreement to its full extent
and adjust the Agreement to reflect any changes which may
occur regarding either the various trade agreements which
Mexico is carrying forward with Central America as a whole,
or any modifications which signature of the FTAA treaty may
entail for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

C 94/48

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.4.2002

3.2.2.
In the social sphere, the European Union can clearly
help to establish a new framework of social dialogue for
relations between workers and employers, in keeping with the
domestic and international changes which the country has
experienced in recent years.

Turning to civil society as a whole, approaches must
3.2.3.
be sought which suit Mexican circumstances, a feature of
which is the simultaneous presence of large marginalised
populations and problems in integrating a number of minori-
ties. The EU, which also shares these problems to some degree,
can in turn benefit from Mexico’s experience in resolving
them.

3.3. Relations with Central America and the Caribbean

From the economic point of view,

3.3.1.
the current
cooperation arrangements must shed their primary focus on
very small-scale actions, and shift to a regional strategic
approach, implemented in cooperation with socio-economic
players, fostering the growth of economically and environmen-
tally sustainable activity, stepping up economic and trade links
between the different countries and seeking the support of
external regional
initiatives, as in the case of the Puebla-
Panama Plan.

In social

3.3.2.
terms, socio-occupational organisations
must be given strong backing so that they can, firstly, provide
socio-economic guidance to their governments in enabling the
fundamental ILO conventions to be fully incorporated into
their legislative frameworks and complied with, and secondly,
strengthen societies which, especially in Central America, have
been scarred by the climate of violence of recent decades, by
launching a social dialogue.

Similarly, civil society operators in these countries
3.3.3.
need to be strengthened so that they can help consolidate a
culture of democracy and basic human rights and guide the
countries concerned onto a stable path towards economic
growth and wealth distribution, alleviating the present high
levels of poverty and social exclusion.

3.4. Relations with the countries of the Andean Community of

Nations

3.4.1.
In the economic sphere, the most obvious need is to
seek formulas for macroeconomic stability and free market
consolidation,
approaches
returning the region to the failed experiments of the 1970s. It
is therefore essential to reinforce public institutions in such a
way as to bring transparency to the way they work.

avoiding populist

economic

3.4.2.
In the social sphere, workers’ and employers’ associ-
ations — many of which have a wealth of tradition — need to
be supported and modernised in order to forestall either
violence of any kind against their leaders and their families, or
the emergence of spurious forms of participation out of
keeping with the basic conventions of the ILO: this would
stand in the way of a real social dialogue being consolidated.
The EU should employ every means at its disposal to help
bring an end to such violence and foster full compliance with
the relevant international conventions.

3.4.3.
Although the position regarding civil society as a
whole is different in each of the region’s five countries, it is
clear that in order to guarantee its future, the climate of armed
violence and the breakdown of traditional forms of public
participation — or their absence in the first place — must be
overcome. Only by organising citizens can the serious prob-
lems, which have been holding the entire region back for more
than thirty years, be resolved.

3.5. Relations with Mercosur and Chile

In the economic sphere, it is clearly impossible to
3.5.1.
integration schemes in a globalised world
pursue regional
without coordinating the basic economic parameters. The
most urgent task is therefore to support the Mercosur consoli-
dation process regarding external tariff aspects, progress in
building up an internal market, and work to devise a new
macroeconomic policy framework capable of absorbing the
asymmetric shocks of the last three years. This will also entail
work to provide Mercosur with a broader institutional base.
At the same time, it is vital to create legal and administrative
conditions capable of sustaining the necessary flow of new
and productive direct foreign investment.

There is a clear need at social

3.5.2.
level to involve
the socio-occupational partners in the complex process of
economic convergence. As part of this process, European
businesses established in the region can play a leading role in
generating a climate of social dialogue; in tandem with this,
the Mercosur Consultative Forum has a crucial role to play at
regional level, and employers’ and workers’ organisations at
national level, in effectively consolidating the Mercosur system.

3.5.3. With regard to civil society, the Mercosur idea of
course emerged from governing political circles and was
accepted by the social partners, but was not properly com-
municated to the general public. As in Europe in the 1970s,

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 94/49

this enthusiasm for a shared future must be communicated to
the citizens of each of the countries involved, and this can
only be done through society’s constituent organisations.

Without its contribution, and without a proper social dialogue,
it is obvious that none of the advances made in economic and
trade integration can be lasting or sustained by the countries
themselves.

4. The role of EU, Latin American and Caribbean civil

society in this process

4.1.
The historical background to relations between these
regions has of course been dominated by politics, about which
the public has not been adequately informed despite the
unarguable benefits it has brought to all. As a result, citizens
were not involved in the necessary effort and are unable to
bring their points of view to bear through their representative
bodies. Moreover, overall statistics are lacking in many areas,
making it difficult to identify and analyse the impact of EU
action on these countries.

4.2.
The Economic and Social Committee consequently
promoted the first meeting of representatives of civil society
organisations in Rio de Janeiro, prior to the 1999 Summit of
Heads of State and Government:
the
experience between 17 and 19 April 2002, only weeks before
the second summit, to be held in Madrid in May of this year.

it plans to repeat

4.3.
An amount of preparatory work will be needed ahead
of the second meeting of civil society representatives, to ensure
that the discussions, and the conclusions to be submitted to
the summit of Heads of State and Government (i) reflect
majority public opinion and its priorities, and (ii) in particular,
include a work programme for the future which guarantees
that the meetings are more than occasional events and are
held in accordance with the action plan accompanying the
communication.

4.3.1.
This should put these meetings on a more official
footing, ahead of the summits of Heads of State and Govern-
ment. Furthermore,
it should lead to meetings’ agendas
reflecting both priority points identified by civil society and
the socio-economic issues to be discussed at the summits.

The ESC therefore believes that the following actions
4.4.
should firstly be broached in information plans, in association
with economic and social councils and similar institutions,
and in the preparations for the thematic papers, in line with
the agenda of the Madrid summit.

4.6.
Over many decades, Europe has forged the ‘European
social model’ on the basis of a concept of shared prosperity
and solidarity, a market economy combined with a high level
of social protection and accompanied by social dialogue, the
existence of services of general interest which are of benefit to
all, and a concept of subsidiarity understood not only as the
most efficient division of responsibilities between all levels of
territorial administration, but also as a division of
tasks
between the state and private sectors, equally in the interest of
efficacy.

4.7.
The experience of the European Union and, more
particularly, of the ‘European social model’ can make a valuable
contribution to the debate on how best to ensure that such
relations are sustainable. For their part, the nations of Latin
America and the Caribbean can offer the European Union
the example of their vitality and imagination in difficult
circumstances, together with their multiethnic, multicultural
wealth and their capacity to build these values into a young
society determined to achieve progress and justice.

5.

Initial ideas for the preparation of the Declaration of
the second meeting of civil society representatives
from the European Union, Latin America and the
Caribbean

The hearing in Santiago de Chile with Latin American and
Caribbean representatives allowed a number of themes to be
picked out for inclusion in the forthcoming Declaration of the
second civil society meeting. They are as follows:

5.1.
Representative civil society organisations constitute a
key element in the democratic and social consolidation of both
regions, and they must play an active and effective part in the
political negotiations.

4.5.
As argued above, the active and informed involvement
of civil society, through the full range of economic and social
partners, is a crucial element of support in the process of
strengthening democracy, civil peace and economic prosperity.

5.2.
Latin American and Caribbean economic and social
vulnerability is such that means must be found to guarantee
sustained economic growth and a fairer distribution of the
wealth created, so as to reduce the intolerable levels of poverty
and social exclusion.

C 94/50

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.4.2002

5.3.
A reinforcement of social dialogue, and by extension
of civil dialogue, as a key flanking measure for a fairer, more
solidarity-based society.

legislative and decision-making processes having an impact on
civil society.

5.4.
The need for Latin American and Caribbean countries
to choose freely the international economic integration model
which best suits their practical interests, and, with regard to
reciprocal concessions, to be able to pursue non-symmetrical
agreements reflecting their greater economic and social vulner-
ability.

The pressing need for the European Union and the
5.5.
countries of Latin America and the Caribbean to pursue active
policies in areas such as migration, general education and
leadership training, the introduction of sustainable develop-
ment models, or expanded and enhanced technology transfer
flows.

5.6.
The need to devise ways of strengthening all types of
civil society organisation — without interfering with their
freedom of action — and of encouraging the creation of
forums for dialogue at national level, which could subsequently
be extended to regional and international levels.

5.7.
On the basis of this national and regional dialogue,
encouraging the establishment of economic and social councils
or similar bodies, putting the dialogue on an official, insti-
tutional footing so that it can be effectively integrated into

Brussels, 21 February 2002.

6. Priority measures for the preparation of the Second
meeting of civil society representatives from the EU,
Latin America and the Caribbean

6.1.
Information actions: establishment of a dedicated web
page, with links to all the civil society organisations who
attended Rio, and open to comments and suggestions. Con-
sideration might also be given to publishing a two-monthly
electronic bulletin. Similarly,
the EU
delegations should be sought in mobilising other organisations
in each of the countries concerned.

the cooperation of

Action through the economic and social councils and
6.2.
similar institutions: both of the EU and those existing at
regional or national level. The aim would be ensure that civil
society has an organised presence in these countries, and to
generate mutual added value for them through their presence
at the event.

6.3.
Preparation of four thematic papers on key issues of
direct importance to civil society on the agenda for the Madrid
Summit of Heads of State and Government. A further paper
should be added, focusing on sustainable development in our
two regions, and the possibility of carrying out joint actions
or exchanging best practice in this field.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS