Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on  The road to the European knowledge-based society — the contribution of organised civil society to the Lisbon Strategy
Date: 2005-12-14
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, EU employment policy, company research, continuing vocational training, innovation, knowledge economy, social integration

C 65/94

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.3.2006

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘The road to the European know-
ledge-based society — the contribution of organised civil society to the Lisbon Strategy’

(2006/C 65/18)

On 22 April 2005, the future Austrian EU Presidency decided to consult the European Economic and
Social Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on The road to
the European knowledge-based society — the contribution of organised civil society to the Lisbon Strategy

and under Rule 19(1) of its Rules of Procedure, the Committee decided to establish a subcommittee to
prepare its work on the matter.

The subcommittee adopted its draft opinion on 9 November. The rapporteur was Mr Jan Olsson, the co-
rapporteurs were Ms Eva Belabed and Mr Joost van Iersel.

At its 422nd plenary session, held on 14 and 15 December 2005 (meeting of 14 December 2005), the
European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 127 votes to 1 with
8 abstentions.

Recommendations and conclusions

1.
The EESC suggests that Member States and EU institutions
commit themselves beyond 2010 to establish a Common Euro-
pean Area of Knowledge, based on intensified cooperation in
Learning,
Innovation and Research policies. This will be an
important step in the relaunch of the Lisbon Strategy as well as
in underpinning the European model of society, thereby also
bridging the gap between Europe and its citizens.

2.
This relaunch requires the public authorities and orga-
nised civil society in each country to be mobilised for this
objective, by defining key priorities and proposing and imple-
menting actions both on their own and in cooperation with
each other, which also should be reflected in the national
reform programme.

3. Member States, the European Commission, European and
national parliaments, businesses and financial
institutions as
well as civil society must commit themselves to a Common
European Area of Knowledge aimed at all citizens, organisa-
tions and companies and based on clearly defined targets,
benchmarks, timetables as well as clear responsibilities.

The Internal Market remains the major cornerstone of the
4.
integration process,
leading to improved economic perfor-
mance, more and better jobs, social progress and sustainability.
The interaction between the Common European Area of
Knowledge and the Internal Market will release new potential
for growth. Therefore, obstacles to the Internal Market that
hamper the transition to the knowledge economy must be
removed as quickly as possible

6. Mobility is a way to acquire and transfer skills. Free circu-
lation of labour, researchers and students must be stimulated,
accompanied by decent wages and working conditions.

7.
The EU, Member States and regions must redirect their
public spending to growth-enhancing investments. Member
States in cooperation with private stakeholders, should commit
themselves to realising a ‘National Programme for Boosting
Knowledge’ backed by EU funding.

8.
The EESC urges that the European Commission proposals
concerning the 2007-13 Financial Perspectives for funding
research,
innovation and learning be upheld. The proposed
7th Research Framework programme must be fully realised and
targeted to contribute to European innovative capacity.

9.
The EESC urges business, financial institutions and private
foundations to increase their investments in the knowledge
economy and that they be supported in doing so by fiscal
incentives.

10.
The European Commission should have more power to
give policy directions and monitor progress. It should publish
an annual report on progress to be discussed by the Council
and the European and national Parliaments, as well as the
concerned stakeholders and the public.

11.
The EESC suggests the launch of a permanent and struc-
tured debate to motivate the decision-makers at all levels and
to further the dialogue with citizens.

12.
National parliaments as well as national economic and
social committees have a crucial role and must participate in
the debate. Local and regional actors should be involved.

All citizens, all sectors and all regions must be encour-
5.
aged to take part and be able to reap the rewards of the knowl-
edge society, which provides unique opportunities to bridge
existing divides.

Private stakeholders should act and take responsibility
13.
through tangible contributions and actions. Social and civil
dialogue are important tools to further life long learning, inno-
vation and technology policies.

17.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/95

14.
A sound macroeconomic policy focusing on growth and
employment, should create the conditions for creating the
knowledge society and should give priority to demand pull
policies for new technologies.

2.2
Central to such a reorientation are policies to achieve
sustainable growth, create more and better jobs and raise real
incomes through the realisation of a knowledge society based
upon human resources, learning, research and innovation.

15.
Life long learning is the key to the knowledge society.
The EESC reiterates its call for a Charter of Life Long Learning
to be implemented at all
levels. It should be supported by
public and private investments as well as by the structural
funds. Employment policies and new forms of social protection
need to create favourable conditions to enable workers to fully
participate in lifelong learning. The Danish flexicurity approach
may be an inspiring example.

High ambitions to foster health, sustainable environ-
16.
ment, quality in urban and rural infrastructure, smart transport
solutions, safe and reorganised workplaces and cultural heritage
will generate new technologies and new innovative products
and services and should be supported by healthy conditions for
innovation and job creation in enterprises.

to boost

Dissemination of knowledge is a critical factor in poli-
17.
Industrial
innovation and competitiveness.
cies
regions, technology parks and other innovative environments
should be promoted.

1. Introduction

1.1
This EESC opinion is about how organised civil society
can contribute to the knowledge society. It will focus on the
role that social partners and other civil society organisations
can play in establishing a ‘Common European Area of Knowledge’
as one of the major planks of the Lisbon Strategy. It stresses
the responsibility of civil society organisations in Member
States to mobilise for this objective. The opinion will be under-
pinned by other EESC opinions on related subjects and by a
Summary report drafted in collaboration with the national
economic and social councils.

2. Context and analysis

Europe is a project

2.1
for people by people. However
current developments have created a gap between Europe and
its citizens At the same time the sustainability of our unique
model of society based on democracy, social and civil dialogue,
a social market economy and cohesion is threatened by
increasing global competition, an ageing population and envir-
onmental pressures. Different philosophies over which policy
directions to take lie behind the current EU crisis. In order to
restore confidence in the European project, policies must first
of all be refocused on their original aims of economic and
social progress and improving working and living conditions.
The crisis constitutes a crucial opportunity for reorientation.

Enterprises are in a key position for this reorientation. They
should direct their investments accordingly, but for this they
need framework conditions that support their potential
for
innovation, growth and job creation.

2.3
The knowledge society, based on the responsibility of
private and public stakeholders, must make for a more cohesive
society which combats all kinds of inequalities. And in turn
social cohesion is a prerequisite for a smoother transition to
the knowledge society.

Prospects

look rather

alarming (1). Business-funded
2.4
research has been decreasing since 2000. EU total R&D expen-
diture is stagnating and falls short of the 3 % target. It stands at
2 % compared to 2.7 % in the US and over 3 % in Japan. The
brain-drain is a very worrying phenomenon. Moreover, large
emerging economics like China are catching up with the EU in
terms of research expenditure.

The European Innovation Scoreboard shows that Europe lags
behind the USA in 10 out of 11 indicators. This is a result of
active US policies to support research and innovation through
inter alia, public procurement, tax cuts, guarantees for venture
capital funds and SME loans.

2.5
However, an assessment of research expenditure and
innovative performance of the EU vis-à-vis the USA requires a
deeper analysis. Europe has strengths both at Member State
and sector level. European cooperation in aeronautics and the
Galileo project can be highlighted as examples as well as the
fact that the number of engineering students is higher than in
innovative capacity, Europe needs
the US. To boost
in life long learning, an additional
increased investments
700 000 researchers, more technological poles and clusters,
support for SMEs and better methods of disseminating knowl-
edge.

its

2.6
Public investment in education is not progressing as
rapidly as it should. The PISA study highlights some of the fail-
ures of the education system. Participation in adult education
has only reached 65 % of the 2010 target. School dropouts
continue at the same level. University students face unemploy-
ment when they graduate. Moreover, by 2015 over a million
primary and secondary teachers will have to be recruited (2).
The Commission could carry out a study on basic learning, in
order to identify the keys to success in the most successful
countries in the international PISA survey.

(1) European Innovation Scoreboard 2004 – Comparative analysis of
innovation performance, Commission Staff Working Paper, SEC
(2004) 1475 of 19.11.2004.

(2) Progress towards the Lisbon objectives in education and training
(2005 report), Commission Staff Working Paper, SEC (2005) 419 of
2203.2005.

C 65/96

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.3.2006

Private and public stakeholders must recognise that the whole
of the education system needs to be reformed in order to
improve performance and provide everyone from early child-
hood through to old age, with opportunities to take an active
part
lend their full
support to this reform, which also requires new pedagogical
concepts and qualified teaching staff.

in the knowledge society. They must

2.12
Lifelong learning is the key to the knowledge society.
High quality lifelong learning, based on models that make
education and training accessible to everybody, gives people
the opportunity to refresh their ideas, continually enhance their
skills and play a full part in their community, family, neigh-
bourhood and workplace. It is the basis for innovation, labour
mobility and productivity growth. Motivation for
lifelong
learning starts by fostering the curiosity for learning in early
childhood.

2.7
The transition towards the knowledge society is chan-
ging the nature and organisation of work and the structure of
enterprises. A knowledge-driven society and new technologies
offer great opportunities but also generate new risks and leave
many behind. Jobs are restructured and tasks are redefined.

There is also a risk of relocation of headquarters, research and
production from Europe.

It

should be

is fundamental to strengthen and coordinate the
2.13
links in the knowledge chain. The triangle linking private and
public research institutions, universities and business (especially
SMEs),
and cross-border
reinforced. National
exchanges of qualified staff between industry and university can
both help greatly. Basic education — from childcare facilities to
secondary education — and lifelong learning must be linked to
universities in order to raise the quality of teachers and training
staff and update their knowledge.

New and better jobs have to be created by increased investment
in learning, innovation and technology. The brain-drain has to
be counteracted by finding new attractive sources of employ-
ment for university graduates in all Member States.

3. Shortcomings of the Lisbon Strategy

The knowledge society is a fundamental choice in
2.8
addressing the challenges and it affects many areas of policy
making. Its realisation requires an overall and comprehensive
approach. Progress towards the knowledge society must be
seen in a longer-term perspective beyond 2010. Policies must
be pursued in a determined way.

To sharpen its global competitive edge by relying on its
2.9
capacity to use the know-how and creativity of its people to
produce high value-added products and services constitutes
both a challenge and an opportunity for Europe. Resources
have to be reoriented towards growth-enhancing technologies
and innovative systems, safeguarding as well as adapting where
necessary the essential elements of the European economic and
social model in the wider context of sustainable development.

2.10
Knowledge creation, knowledge application and knowl-
edge dissemination have to meet societal needs. Everyone has
the right to reap the rewards of the knowledge society, every-
body has a responsibility to take part in and contribute to the
achievement of
if given adequate
support.

the knowledge society,

3.1
‘Alongside undeniable progress, there are shortcomings and
obvious delays’ in implementing the Lisbon Strategy the Euro-
pean Council stated in March 2005 (3).

There are many reasons for these shortcomings and

3.2
delays.

3.2.1
Commitment to the Strategy is lacking. It must be
recalled that the Lisbon Strategy was launched by the European
Council without a clearly defined role for the EU Commission.
A fundamental problem is the inconsistency of a European
strategy that has to be implemented mainly at national level.
Member States have not shown real commitment to the objec-
tives and actions agreed upon. The open method of coordina-
tion (OMC) has not delivered the expected results. National
action plans on employment, social
inclusion and in other
areas have been transformed into bureaucratic activity reports
and the intentions of the Strategy only partially implemented.
Fragmentation between policy areas continues. There is too
little support from the EU budget. Good practice from other
Member States is not taken into account. Member States also
fail to take into consideration the social and economic effects
of their policies on other Member States.

2.11
Putting people first means focusing on learning, under-
standing, civilisation and cultural patterns to foster an environ-
ment that stimulates knowledge in its broadest sense.
It is
about human aspirations for knowledge which are not based
predominantly on immediate benefit and which serve as the
basis for the mix of theoretical, social and practical skills that
are needed for the future.

3.2.2
The European Commission plays only a minor role in the
Strategy. It does not have sufficient and effective powers to give
policy directions and monitor progress. For instance, the open
method of coordination has no alarm system that would enable
warnings to be issued.

(3) Presidency Conclusions European Council 22-23 March 2005, point

4.

17.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/97

3.2.3
The Strategy is too abstract. Having largely become an
exercise for bureaucrats and experts the Lisbon Strategy is not
a reality, either in the minds of people or in the media and the
political debate. The effects of the strategy are not visible.
Public opinion does not make a distinction between the effects
of globalisation, EU policy and national policy on their living
and working conditions. The differences and the interrelations
between different policy levels must be highlighted so that
people can have a full and clearer picture of what the EU
stands for.

3.2.4
The Strategy is a top-down process. Even if there has
sometimes been reasonable consultation, particularly in those
countries with a strong tradition of social and civil dialogue,
there is still much too little involvement of organised civil
society in the Member States. This is certainly the case with the
OMC for research and education. Consultation is often formal
level and does not give the
and restricted to the national
concerned civil society organisations at all
levels sufficient
opportunities to take part. Employers and trade unions as well
as other stakeholders have to be made more aware of their
responsibilities and roles. Low involvement also means that the
reforms undertaken may miss the target and have negative
social and economic consequences for those concerned. The
EU focuses too much on structural reforms while it still lacks
policies that empower citizens and their organisations to take
on the challenges of a changing world.

4. The re-launch of

the Lisbon Strategy — European

Council March 2005

These shortcomings and delays

led the European
4.1.
Council to re-launch the Lisbon Strategy, giving priority to
growth and employment.
its
competitiveness,
increase its growth potential and productivity and
strengthen social cohesion placing the main emphasis on knowledge,
innovation and the optimisation of human capital’ (4). And the
Council continued:

‘Europe must renew the basis of

‘A genuine dialogue must be encouraged among those directly
involved in the knowledge-based society in the public and the
private sector’ (5).

The European Council
fixed clearly defined objectives and
suggested several actions to boost knowledge and innovation (6)
twenty four integrated guidelines were established for the
period 2005-2008 indicating three areas for reform: the macro-
economic, and microeconomic spheres and employment (7).

(4) Presidency Conclusions European Council 22-23 March 2005, point

5.

(5) Idem, point 10.
(6) Idem, points 20-28.
(7) See appendix.

4.2.
In order to make the refocusing of the Lisbon Strategy
effective, the European Council called for improved governance
based on increased Member State involvement (8).

Member States were required to draw up national reform
programmes, by the 15th of October, based on consultation
with all stakeholders that will identify key priorities for action.
Contributions and responsibilities of
the main stakeholders
involved should be highlighted. However, changing political
situations in some countries have caused delays. The Open
Method of Coordination (OMC) will be used in some areas.

5. A Common European Area of Knowledge

5.1
The EESC proposes a Common European Area of
Knowledge to which the Member States and EU institutions
should commit themselves beyond 2010, in order to achieve
the Lisbon Strategy objectives through increased European
cooperation in Learning,
Innovation and Research. This
proposal was agreed with the national Economic and Social
Councils in the Luxemburg declaration (9).

5.2
The cooperation should be based on clearly defined
targets complemented by appropriate legislative and non-legis-
lative measures. A key factor will be to develop efficient
systems for transferring knowledge and exploiting best practice.

The EESC recognises that the constitutional base for the
5.3
Common European Area of Knowledge is not the same as for
the CAP, the EMU or the Internal Market. However to make
progress all the relevant provisions of the Treaty should be
fully exploited. Member States should make up for the lack of
constitutional competence by showing political determination
and put into operation common European policies through
better and more efficient cooperation in order to realise the
Common European Area of Knowledge. The Commission's role
would need to be enhanced, so as to enable it to spearhead the
process.

5.4
Civil society organisations in Member States also have a
responsibility for progress towards the Common European
Area of Knowledge. Major private stakeholders in each country
must be mobilised. In this way, they can be protagonists in the
‘genuine dialogue’ that the European Council called for and can
partly compensate for the lack of political will. They must
define key priorities and propose and implement actions on
their own and in coordination with the public authorities. In
addition, the issue of financial means must be addressed. The
social partners should try to reach agreements to promote the
knowledge society. Other sectors of organised civil society,
including higher education and the research community, must
contribute accordingly and elaborate their own platforms for
reform.

(8) Presidency Conclusions European Council 22-23 March 2005,

points 38-41.

(9) Luxemburg declaration of presidents of ESCs of European Union

and of the EESC. 26 November 2004.

C 65/98

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.3.2006

5.5
The Internal Market, remains the major cornerstone of
the integration process leading to improved economic perfor-
mance,
social progress and sustainability. The interaction
between the Common European Area of Knowledge and the
Internal Market implies synergy effects that will release new
potentials for growth. Measures to boost learning, innovation
and research will lead to higher competitiveness. A well-func-
tioning Internal Market will allow for free circulation not only
of goods, labour, services and capital but also of knowledge
and ideas.

Therefore, certain remaining obstacles to the Internal
5.5.1
Market that hamper the transition to the knowledge economy
must be removed as quickly as possible. To realise these syner-
gies and potentials, it is important to adopt the legislation on
the Community Patent and the Intellectual Property Rights
regime.

personal development, civic education and life long learning
commensurate with the challenges of the 21st century. It is a
unique opportunity to bridge existing divides and bring down
existing barriers. To this effect it is crucial that new technolo-
gies are made accessible also to disadvantaged groups such as
migrants and people with disabilities. New technologies and
innovations must therefore to a greater extent be generated by
initiatives and demand from users.

High quality basic education is fundamental.

5.6.2
is
essential that everybody masters the basic skills in order to
achieve the goal of education attainment for all. The underpin-
ning for quality childcare facilities, that will give all children,
irrespective of their social background, equal learning opportu-
nities in the earliest phases of life.

It

‘Investments of businesses and other stakeholders in
5.5.2
facilitated,
innovation and research should be
learning,
including by state aid regimes and public procurement and
within the framework of competition rules.’

6. Increased funding is needed to achieve the knowledge

society

5.5.3
A modernised EU industrial policy that is characterised
by a sectoral approach is a fundamental building block for the
knowledge society pooling excellence and providing stable and
predictable framework conditions for the industry to develop.

5.5.4
It is also important to allow higher labour mobility in
general between the Member States and to stimulate free circu-
lation of researchers and students. Mobility is a natural way to
acquire and transfer skills but has to be accompanied by decent
wages and working conditions.

Universities and vocational training institutions must
5.5.5
support
the Common European Area of Knowledge by
adapting a European approach to their activities. Existing
instruments for
the recognition of qualifications must be
promoted (10).

5.6
A Common European Area of Knowledge is based on
the fundamental right for everyone to reap the rewards of
innovation and learning. All
research, new technologies,
people, all sectors and all regions must be able to participate.
There must be adequate conditions for lifelong learning giving
everybody the opportunity to participate. Education and voca-
tional training are prerequisites for the knowledge society and,
as public goods, must be managed by the public authorities in
order to guarantee access for all, with the same rights and
opportunities.

5.6.1
The knowledge society should not be a project for the
elite convinced by the benefits of new technologies. Instead it
must be conceived as part of an overall project and articulated
with the other policies that are aimed at all citizens. It involves

(10) For instance the European Qualifications Framework (EQF), the
Europe The European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) and the Euro-
pean Credit Transfer System in Vocational Training (ECVET).

6.1
In order to realise the Common European Area of
Knowledge the EU, Member States and regions must redirect
their public spending to growth-enhancing investments in
learning, innovation and research. The EESC proposes that the
Member States, in cooperation with the private stakeholders,
commit
themselves to realising a ‘National Programme for
Boosting Knowledge’ with the aim of increasing investments in
knowledge infrastructure and learning facilities for everybody.

6.2
In doing so, Member States and regions can be backed
up by EU funding from the structural and cohesion funds. The
7th R& D framework programme will also play a crucial role.
The Competitiveness and Innovation Programme (CIP), the Life
Long Learning and the Progress programmes are important
supportive instruments.

6.3
The EESC urges that the European Commission propo-
sals concerning the 2007-13 Financial Perspectives for funding
research, innovation and learning be upheld.

6.4
The 7th R&D framework programme is a test case. The
European Commission has proposed a doubling of resources to
EUR 72 billion. The Committee urges that this level be main-
tained. Otherwise the 3 per cent target for research spending
will be jeopardised. If Member States decide to reduce the level
of EU spending originally proposed, they must compensate
through supplying additional resources at national level.

financial

The EESC urges business,

6.5
institutions and
private foundations to take their responsibility for increasing
their investments in the knowledge economy. It favours public-
private partnership arrangements at European, national and
regional level as a method of financing investment. The EESC
suggests that fiscal incentives to boost R&D through grants, tax

17.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/99

credits and loan guarantees be introduced throughout the EU
under the condition that the knowledge generated is made
accessible. Special
financial and other assistance must be
directed to SMEs, including social economy organisations, in
order for them to participate fully in the Common European
Area of Knowledge. There must also be adequate funding and
incentives for citizens and their organisations to actively take
part.

7. Improving governance

the

The

summit

EESC endorses

7.1
conclusions on
improved governance, as they respond to its persistent requests
to involve Member States' governments and all stakeholders at
regional and national level including parliamentary bodies. The
Committee trusts that National Reform programmes will be
drawn up in consultation with organised civil society, also
involving the Social and Economic Committees in those coun-
tries where they exist. The Committee will follow this consulta-
tion procedure closely.

The Integrated Guidelines decided by the Council do not
7.2
really reflect
the need for cohesion between the areas for
reform, but remain fragmented. A case in point is that around
ten guidelines are related to the knowledge society. The
Council should consider a reformulation in order to integrate
different policy initiatives that can establish a Common Euro-
pean Area of Knowledge.

7.3
The Committee emphasises management and effective
implementation as important elements of the process. This
requires, on the one hand, goals, benchmarks and timetables,
and on the other hand, clear responsibilities to develop, imple-
ment, and monitor actions.

7.4
Even if ownership of the Lisbon Strategy lies with the
Member States, the capacity of the Commission should be
strengthened in order
to give policy directions, monitor
progress and send strong reminders to countries failing to meet
their commitments under the national reform programmes for
instance by:

— coordinating the relevant Community financial resources,
programmes and agencies in an integrated EU programme
for a Common European Area of Knowledge;

— reviewing and if necessary adapting existing scoreboards to
measure progress towards a Common European Area of
Knowledge focusing in particular on targets, deadlines and
evaluation of the efforts undertaken by the Member States;

— measuring the real

involvement of stakeholders in the

elaboration of the National Reform Programmes;

— building a framework for convergence with a precise time-
table and real participation by stakeholders in the OMC

particularly those concerning research, education/training
and employment; developing indicators, benchmarks and
data that reflects citizens' concerns and aspirations;

— summarising the development
society in an Annual Report.

towards

the knowledge

The Competitiveness and Employment Councils as well
7.5
as the European Parliament and national parliaments should
discuss the Annual Report and should also involve relevant
stakeholders and the public.

7.6
The EESC suggests the launch of a permanent and struc-
tured debate to motivate decision-makers at all levels and the
further development of public dialogue,
in order to take on
board citizens' aspirations and concerns and thereby fend off
growing scepticism and lack of commitment. The debate must
also include the local, regional and European levels and use
innovative methods. Future challenges and strategic choices
have to be addressed.

7.7
National parliaments have a crucial role and must parti-
cipate. The EESC also recommends that debates on the National
Reform Programmes be organised in each parliament prior to
the debate in the Council, during the same month and,
if
possible, the same week. National economic and social councils
and similar bodies also have a responsibility in this respect and
in the countries where such councils do not exist social part-
ners and other civil society organisations have to stimulate the
debate.

taking on co-ownership of

7.8
Innovation and learning has a local base. The EESC
underlines the involvement of regional and local actors in
creating a Common European Area of Knowledge and their
responsibility for
the Lisbon
Strategy. In particular, city regions and metropolitan areas are
important in this respect, but the participation of all other
regions must also be promoted. The EESC wholeheartedly
supports the fact that one of the three priorities of the future
cohesion policy is to encourage innovation, entrepreneurship
and the knowledge economy.

8. Participation of organised civil society — how major

stakeholders can contribute

8.1
The European Council urged the EESC to set up an
interactive network of civil society initiatives with Member
States' economic and social committees and other partner orga-
nisations aimed at promoting the implementation of
the
strategy (11). This process is now underway. Cooperation on
this opinion and the Summary report is an important step in
this direction. Best practice and experience of organised civil
society participation in actions and policies to achieve the
knowledge society will be highlighted (12).

(11) Idem.
(12) A website has been opened http://www.esc.eu.int/lisbon_strategy/
index_en.asp. More details on this proposal can be found in the
EESC opinion ‘Improving the implementation of
the Lisbon
Strategy’, points 6.4.-6.9 (OJ C 120 of 20.5.2005, page 79).

C 65/100

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.3.2006

8.2
There is an urgent need to bridge the existing informa-
tion deficit between the citizens and Europe, Their aspirations
and concerns must be focused. A modern approach to commu-
nication and awareness raising is needed in order to involve,
motivate and possibly convince the public and have citizens
take responsibility. Press and media must also engage them-
selves more in the debate over the future of Europe. In this
respect the Committee refers to the Commission Action Plan
proposed by Ms Wallström, based on three principles ‘Listen,
Communicate, Go Local’ (13). The conclusions of the Stake-
holders Forum organised by the Committee in cooperation
with the Commission on 7-8 November should be followed up.

8.3
Participation also means that private stakeholders must
act and take responsibility through tangible contributions and
actions. Private-led initiatives contributing to the Common
European Area of Knowledge must be welcomed and supported
by the public authorities.

The EESC would like to highlight the potential contribu-

8.4
tion of some of the major stakeholders:

— Social dialogue is an important tool in building the knowl-
edge society.
to include SMEs in the
dialogue. Life long learning, innovation and supplementary
social protection are some of the important issues that can
be addressed in the social dialogue.

is important

It

— The social partners

in many Member States have made
important contributions,
in particular through common
declarations and collective bargaining agreements on life-
long learning. However, far from all workers are covered by
such joint agreements. Although very diverse in nature, the
actions have common strands such as the right
for all
workers to participate in continuous training and the estab-
lishment of career development schemes and qualifications
frameworks. The implementation at national
assessment
level of the framework agreement between the European
social partners concluded in 2002 merits an evaluation.

— Collective bargaining can correct the market failures of firms
that do not invest enough in training (14). Through sectoral
and nationwide collective agreements a level playing field is
established, allowing enterprises to increase investment in
training for lower-skilled workers too. Access to lifelong
learning has increased by mutualising the finance of invest-
ment in human resources.

— Businesses are key actors to create more and better jobs in
the Common European Area of Knowledge. They should
anticipate and manage change by making strategic invest-
ments in knowledge generation and knowledge application,

(13) Action Plan to Improve Communicating Europe.
(14) ‘Facing the Challenge’, Report from the High Level Group chaired

by Wim Kok, November 2004.

and openly report their actions in lifelong learning, innova-
tion and research as well as in restructuring as part of their
corporate social responsibility.

— Finance and venture capital

institutions can supply private
equity and venture capital and funds for innovative enter-
prises particularly SMEs and together with the public autho-
rities develop integrated packages of support. They should
make use of the new facilities offered by the Competitive-
ness and Innovation Programme (CIP) (15) and the European
Investment Fund (EIF) and find new financial solutions.

— Social economy organisations based on solidarity can promote
both economic and social
innovations to create employ-
ment and combat social exclusion by integrating disadvan-
taged groups.

— Non-formal learning organisations outside of the public educa-
tion system — for instance those run by the social partners
or associations — have proved to be highly efficient in
supplying and adapting lifelong learning structures and
methods to enable all social groups to take part in the
knowledge society.

— Consumers can favour and stimulate innovations and tech-
nologies aimed at improving quality of life with due regard
to social and ethical consequences.

— Young people may particularly benefit as they are open to
new knowledge and technologies. Within the Lisbon
strategy they can contribute under the Youth Pact (16).
Important areas for action are the creation of employment
facilities for students in higher education and measures to
reduce early school drop-outs.

— The professions and self-employed workers also have a role to
play in the knowledge society through the introduction of
access qualifications and life-long learning for their work
areas.

— Universities and higher education establishments must partici-
pate actively as they are key institutions for progress
towards the knowledge society. It is important to encourage
cooperation between industry and academia in order to
transfer the results of applied research and also to promote
the transnational mobility of students.

— The research community can together with the Member States
enhance the value of research as a profession, and involve
researchers
in
accordance with the European Charter for Researchers and
the code of conduct for the recruitment of researchers,
thereby making research careers more attractive.

in cooperation across national borders,

(15) Proposal

for a Decision of

the European Parliament and the
Council establishing a Competitiveness and Innovation Framework
Programme (2007-2013), COM(2005) 121 final of 6.4.2005.
(16) Presidency Conclusions, European Council, 22-23 March 2005,

point 37 and Annex I.

17.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/101

9. Four priority proposals

9.1 Create a positive macroeconomic policy framework for the knowl-

edge society

At

the summit

the European Council endorsed a
9.1.1
reform to be introduced in the Stability and Growth Pact.
According to this reform macroeconomic stability and confor-
mity with the rules remain a central concern (17). However,
redirecting public expenditure towards R&D and innovation is
one of the relevant factors to be taken into account by the EU
when assessing temporary public deficits that exceed 3 per cent
or when defining adjustment trajectories.

9.1.2
Economic growth and employment are needed as they
facilitate the achievement of most other policy goals and
cushion the impact of reforms. However, current EU policy
lacks sufficient focus on growth and employment. The policy
mix set out in the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines is out of
balance, since it is based on achieving stability at the expense
It
of growth and focused mainly on supply-side measures.
neglects the fact that reforms to increase the potential
for
growth must be supplemented by measures to stimulate effec-
tive demand.

9.1.3
Also significant in this respect is the closer coordina-
tion of economic policies between Member States as well as
linking macroeconomic dialogue to the tripartite summit of
social partners and opening up in-depth discussions with the
ECB.

Against

9.1.4
this background macroeconomic policies,
namely budgetary and tax policies, should foster the knowledge
society, particularly by giving priority to a demand pull for
new technologies.

9.2 Provide a framework and resources for lifelong learning

9.2.3
It is essential to make the conclusions of the summit
reality. The EESC reiterates its call for a Europe-wide Charter
for Lifelong Learning (19). The EU and Member States together
with the major stakeholders, have to determine the key priori-
ties and actions, giving them a legal basis and providing suffi-
cient financial resources. The Member States should commit
themselves to implementing the Charter at all levels through
‘lifelong learning pacts’ or similar arrangements. Roles and
responsibilities of both the public and private sector should be
defined within the context that lifelong learning is a service of
general interest.

There is a need to invest substantially in all phases of
9.2.4
lifelong learning,
including early childhood. Member States
should agree on a quantitative objective expressed as a percen-
tage for investment in education including lifelong learning.
However, the public budget alone will not meet the bill for
education and training and has to be supplemented by collec-
tive or other agreements between employers and workers, by
enterprise and by the individual according to his or her possibi-
lities. Private and public stakeholders have a role to motivate
and empower people to take part and make them responsible
for adapting to changing circumstances.

9.2.5
The EU and Member States should also agree on a
minimum level of resources for lifelong learning under the
structural funds, for instance at least one third of the total (20).
The funds should focus on and support ‘lifelong learning pacts’
which increase access to training for all workers as well as
initiatives that are tailor-made for the most disadvantaged
groups. Each Member State must demonstrate that it is using
the European Social Fund to help implement
the national
reform programme.

At local level, open learning centres, lifelong learning
9.2.6
pacts or similar training schemes can be established in a broad
partnership. Universities must also play a larger role in lifelong
learning.

9.2.1
sine qua non if the Lisbon objectives are to be achieved’ (18).

The spring summit stated that ‘Lifelong learning is a

9.3 User-friendly innovation and technology policies

9.2.2
It should be noted that the countries with the best
economic and social performances have the highest percentage
of the adult population in education and training, while the
opposite is true of the poorest performers. The ‘second chance’
principle should be recognised, and a contract suggested to all
those who missed the opportunity for initial training the first
forms, e.g. offering
time round. This could take different
training courses or ‘time vouchers’ valid at any stage of life in
order to refresh basic knowledge.

(17) The Committee is currently drawing up an opinion on Strength-
ening economic governance — The reform of the Stability and
Growth Pact (ECO/160).

(18) Presidency Conclusions. European Council 22-23 March 2005,

point 34.

9.3.1
The EESC strongly supports the conclusions of the
Spring summit with respect to pushing for the 7th RD frame-
work programme to fill the technological gap and the need for
Member States to develop comprehensive innovation policies
that are to be supported by the CIP in order to promote the
competitiveness of SMEs in particular.
It also supports the
proposal that Europe needs an active industrial policy through
different technological initiatives (21).

(19) EESC opinion ‘Improving the implementation of

Strategy’ OJ C 120 of 20.5.2005, page 79).

the Lisbon

(20) 37 per cent of total EU Structural Funds allocated to Ireland were

spent on investment in human resources.

(21) Presidency Conclusions European Council 22-23 March 2005,

points 13, 14 and 16.

C 65/102

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.3.2006

9.3.2
Research programmes need closer monitoring and
evaluation to make sure that resources are targeted to contri-
bute to European innovative capacity.
Innovation must be
considered an all-embracing concept and focus not only on
processes, products and technology but also on governance,
sustainable development and economic answers to social issues
in order to underpin the European model of society. Innova-
tions should permeate all societal processes. Social and civil
dialogue are important accompanying measures to further
innovation. Involving workers and other stakeholders in the
conception of new products and technologies will cushion the
effects of restructuring.

solutions,

High ambitions to foster good health, a sustainable
9.3.3
environment, quality in urban and rural infrastructure, smart
transport
safe and reorganised workplaces and
cultural heritage will bring forward new technologies and new
innovative products and services. New technologies and inno-
vation can thereby favour
life and work,
responding both to societal needs and the market, while also
taking social and ethical consequences into account.

the quality of

9.3.4
Europe needs to put much more emphasis on techno-
logical transfer, exploiting the results of the 7th framework
programme and promoting an innovation-friendly market in
order to increase competitiveness. EU and national mechanisms
for dissemination of knowledge — whether research results,
new technologies, innovative systems or learning methods —
should be given priority and more resources used for this
purpose. A new generation of public-private partnerships can
be developed as a model for promoting the dissemination of
knowledge. More efforts should be made to more rapidly trans-
form technological development into commercial products and
services.

9.3.5
The EESC calls for a more regular and systematic
dialogue with key stakeholders at all levels in order to pursue
and monitor user-friendly innovation and technology policies.
The European Commission should support such an approach
by issuing guidelines and recommendations and also bench-
marking good practice.
to
promote industrial regions, technology parks and other innova-
tive environments.

In this context,

is important

it

9.3.6
Particular attention must be paid to involving SMEs as
well as social economy enterprises and responding to their
needs, giving them access to RTD and research services as well
as engaging them in RTD activities. SMEs have an important

Brussels, 14 December 2005

role to play in creating regional clusters of excellence. Intro-
ducing measures to increase the SME share of
the public
market must also be considered, and the successful US experi-
ence of providing support for new high-tech small enterprises
can serve as a model.

9.3.7
The industry-led technology platforms launched in
2003 by stakeholders with the support of the Commission, are
set to become powerful actors in EU research policy and a base
for its industrial policy. The EESC suggests that industry should
react positively to the demand of the European Commission
that it play a still more active role in the technology platforms.
However, the EESC also suggests that the platforms be open to
social partners and other civil society organisations so that they
can also take part in defining the research agenda.

9.4 Social protection must facilitate the transition to the knowledge

society

9.4.1
A strong sense of job security is necessary to motivate
workers to actively take part in the transition to the knowledge
society. Flexibility has to be coupled with active labour market
in life long
policies encouraging workers
learning. The Danish experience of
flexicurity may be an
inspiring example.

to participate

9.4.2
New forms of social protection must be defined to
facilitate the up-grading of skills and the occupational mobility
of workers and their choices between work, training and family
life, but also for new forms of work organisations and for tran-
sitions between different statuses. Through this, labour market
contracts and conditions that threaten worker rights and have
negative impacts on their ability to participate in the knowl-
edge society can be avoided.

The Kok I (22) report suggested that employment insur-
9.4.3
ance and social protection systems have to support flexibility
by facilitating such transitions during the life-cycle of each indi-
vidual person. For instance, new forms of work-life cycle insur-
ance can be established, e.g.
through setting up personal
‘learning accounts’ partly funded by social contributions.

The

EESC suggests

9.4.4
Protection
Committee look into this matter, and should, inter alia, identify
good practice and propose guidelines for such new forms of
protection. The Committee will also contribute with its opinion
on flexicurity (23).

Social

that

the

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

(22) Report of the High Level Group on the future of the social policy

in an enlarged European Union, May 2004.

(23) Flexicurity: The case of Denmark (ECO/167), to be available in 2006.