Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the European Year of Creativity and Innovation (2009) COM(2008) 159 final — 2008/0064 (COD)
Date: 2008-07-09
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, EU action, EU programme, European cultural event, education policy, innovation, public awareness campaign, vocational training

3.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/119

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Decision of
the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the European Year of Creativity and
Innovation (2009)’

COM(2008) 159 final — 2008/0064 (COD)

(2009/C 27/25)

On 7 April 2008, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the European Year of Creativity and
Innovation (2009).

On 21 April 2008, the Bureau of the European Economic and Social Committee instructed the Section for
Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship to prepare the Committee's work on the subject.

Given the urgent nature of the work, the European Economic and Social Committee appointed Mr Rodríguez
García-Caro as rapporteur-general at its 446th plenary session, held on 9 and 10 July 2008 (meeting of
9 July), and adopted the following opinion by 108 votes in favour, with five abstentions.

1. Conclusions

innovation among EU citizens,

1.1
The EESC fully supports any measures to encourage crea-
and
tivity and promote
welcomes the initiative to devote a European Year to supporting
and fostering creativity, through lifelong learning, as a driver for
innovation. The EESC has, on a number of occasions, stressed
the importance of encouraging innovation in order to help
achieve the goals of the Lisbon Strategy (1). However, although
the EESC supports the framework surrounding the European
Year of Creativity and Innovation, it does not believe that this
proposal
for
reaching the stated goal, on the basis of the observations made
herein.

for a decision is the best possible instrument

1.2 While other European Years have been organised with a
long timeframe, enabling proposals to be made up to two years
in advance, this time there will only be seven months from the
Commission's proposal until the beginning of the Year, during
which time the European Parliament and the Council must
adopt the decision, and the Commission and Member States
organise and coordinate the initiatives to be carried out. The
EESC considers that this process is rushed and could jeopardise
the Year, which deserves the proper preparation that befits such
an important event.

(1) EESC opinion of 13.12.2006 on Unlocking and strengthening Europe's
potential for research, development and innovation, Rapporteur: Mr Wolf
(OJ C 325, 30.12.2006).
EESC opinion of 14.12.2005 on the Proposal for a Decision of the
European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Competitiveness and
Programme, Rapporteur: Mr Welschke,
Innovation
Co-rapporteur: Ms Fusco (OJ C 65, 17.3.2006).
EESC opinion of 12.7.2007 on Investment in Knowledge and Innovation
(Lisbon Strategy), Rapporteur: Mr Wolf (OJ C 256, 27.10.2007).

Framework

The proposed decision remains very vague about two
1.3
aspects that the EESC considers highly relevant and should be
clarified in the text of the proposal: i) the funding of the Year
and ii) the reference to support or participation from other
EU policies and programmes outside the field of
lifelong
learning.

that

1.3.1
The EESC accepts the European Commission's proposal
inasmuch as there is no need to create specific budgetary appro-
priations for the Year, and agrees that use could be made of the
appropriations for the Lifelong Learning Programme, which
includes specific objectives for promoting innovation. However,
the EESC points out
the proposed decision does not
mention how much might be earmarked for this event, stating
only that the budget source is the Lifelong Learning Programme
and that other programmes (which are not mentioned or speci-
fied) will co-finance the initiatives. In view of the provisions of
the proposed decision, the Committee believes that some figures
should be provided on the likely expenditure that this initiative
will incur. The EESC therefore believes that the proposal should
include a budget estimate.

such as

It could be inferred from the text

1.3.2 When it comes to the funding support that could be
provided from other programmes and policies, the proposal is
even vaguer.
that since
promoting innovation is one of the specific objectives of other
programmes
the Entrepreneurship and Innovation
Programme and the ICT Policy Support Programme (both of
which are included in the Competitiveness and Innovation
Framework Programme), these are the types of programmes that
would co-finance European Year activities. In this context, the
EESC believes
should specify which
programmes will be used to co-finance the Year and to what
extent, and how initiatives will be coordinated between the
different co-financing programmes, which are managed by
different Commission DGs.

the proposal

that

C 27/120

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.2.2009

1.4
On the basis of these arguments, which form much of
the body of this opinion, the EESC proposes that the European
Commission reconsider its proposal and take into account the
the
comments made herein. The EESC also proposes that
European Parliament and the Council take these points into
consideration and modify the text of the decision in those areas
which require the greatest clarification.

2. Introduction

2.1
As well as highlighting the need for a European frame-
work defining the new basic skills to be provided through life-
long learning, and emphasising that people are Europe's main
asset, the conclusions of the extraordinary European Council
held in Lisbon in 2000 stressed that European education and
training systems should adapt both to the demands of
the
knowledge-based society and the need to improve the standard
and quality of employment.

identified in the Recommendation of

These basic skills or key competences

lifelong
2.2
the
learning were
the Council of 18 December
European Parliament and of
2006 (2), and can be considered an essential
factor for the
innovation, productivity and competitiveness crucial
in a
knowledge-based society. The EESC issued an opinion on the
recommendation at the time (3).

for

The conclusions of the European Council held in Brussels
2.3
on 8 and 9 March 2007 called upon the Member States and EU
institutions to continue working to create better framework
conditions for innovation and greater investment in research
and development. In the section on strengthening innovation,
research and education, the Council recognised that Member
States were ‘determined to improve the framework conditions
for innovation such as competitive markets and to mobilise
additional resources for research, development and innovation
activities’. It therefore invited the Commission and the Member
States to ‘push forward the implementation of the innovation
policy strategy’, given that education and training were ‘prere-
quisites for a well-functioning knowledge triangle (education —
research — innovation)’.

2.4
The introduction of a European Year of Creativity and
Innovation is a good way to contribute to the discussion on the
challenges facing Europe, by raising public awareness of the
innovation in
importance of creativity and a capacity for
improving personal
general
wellbeing.

development

increasing

and

3. Summary of the proposal

The proposal

3.1
for a decision establishes 2009 as the
European Year of Creativity and Innovation, with the overall
objective of supporting the efforts of the Member States to
promote creativity, through lifelong learning, as a driver for
the
innovation and as a key factor for the development of
personal, occupational, entrepreneurial and social competences
of all individuals in society. In addition to this overall objective,
it pinpoints
to
promoting creativity and a capacity for innovation.

thirteen factors which could contribute

3.2
The measures proposed to achieve the stated objectives
include conferences and initiatives to raise awareness of crea-
tivity and a capacity for innovation, campaigns to promote key
messages, identification and dissemination of examples of good
practice, and studies conducted on a Community or national
scale.

3.3
The proposal establishes the position of national coordi-
nator of the European Year, who will be responsible for organi-
sation. Activities will be coordinated at EU level through meet-
ings of national coordinators organised by the European
Commission.

3.4
Lastly, the proposal establishes that funding will come
from the Lifelong Learning Programme, without prejudice to the
support and co-financing that might be given by programmes
in other fields such as enterprise, cohesion, research and the
information society.

4. General comments on the proposal

The EESC fully supports any measures to encourage crea-
4.1
tivity and promote innovation among EU citizens.
In its
own-initiative opinion on Innovation: Impact on industrial change
and the role of the EIB (4), the EESC stated that ‘innovation must
above all build on the basis of broad education and training in
line with the criterion of lifelong learning’. Therefore, and in
line with this position, the EESC will strongly support the use of
any instruments that can help to promote creativity and innova-
tive capacity. However,
it does wish to make the following
comments on the proposal under consideration.

4.2
The EESC welcomes the initiative to devote a European
Year to supporting and promoting creativity among European
citizens, through lifelong learning, as a driver for innovation.
stressed the
The EESC has, on a number of occasions,

(2) OJ L 394, 30.12.2006.
(3) EESC opinion of 18.5.2006 on the Proposal for a Recommendation of the
European Parliament and of the Council on key competences for lifelong
learning, Rapporteur: Ms Herczog (OJ C 195, 18.8.2006).

(4) EESC opinion of 11.7.2007 on Innovation: Impact on industrial change
and the role of the EIB, Rapporteur: Mr Tóth, Co-rapporteur: Mr Calvet
Chambón (OJ C 256, 27.10.2007).

3.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/121

importance of encouraging innovation as part of the process to
achieve the goals of the Lisbon Strategy. In this context, the
Aho report (5) considered that a culture of innovation should be
promoted in order to address Europe's productivity and social
challenges.

its opinion a year before the start of the European Year (8),
which illustrates the forward planning shown by the Commis-
sion. One good example of this forward planning is the EESC's
adoption, at its plenary session of May 2008, of its opinion (9)
on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the
Council on the European Year for Combating Poverty and Social Exclu-
sion (2010) (10).

However, although the EESC supports the framework on which
the Year is based, it does not believe that the proposal for a
decision in question is the best possible instrument for reaching
the goal put forward, owing both to the content of the docu-
ment and the form in which it is being drawn up and approved.

4.3
The EESC believes that the basic approach of the initia-
tive is not the most suitable for this type of action. Point 3 of
the Explanatory Memorandum, regarding the consultation of
interested parties, states that informal discussions have been
held with Members of the European Parliament and with the
Member States. This means that the proposal has been drawn
up using a ‘top-down’ approach, from the institutions to the
citizens.

The EESC considers that a top-down approach, where members
of society and organisations have not taken part in planning
and developing the Year, is more likely to go unnoticed by the
public than if steps had been taken to seek the active involve-
ment of those whose input is ultimately essential for success.

In this context, it is worth mentioning a comment made by the
EESC in its opinion on the Communication from the Commission to
the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the implemen-
tation, results and overall assessment of the European Year of People
with Disabilities 2003 (6). In the opinion (7), the EESC called on
the European institutions to favour a bottom-up approach in
the preparations of such initiatives in the future. The EESC
therefore stresses that this methodology should be used when
preparing for the European Years.

As the European Year of Creativity and Innovation is
4.4
planned to begin on 1 January 2009, and considering the time-
frames that still remain for
its adoption by the European
Parliament and the Council (first reading), the EESC believes that
the agenda for drafting and approving this European Year is
extremely rushed. On previous occasions, the EESC adopted

(5) Creating an innovative Europe EUR 22005 ISBN 92-79-00964-8.
(6) COM(2005) 486 final.
(7) EESC opinion of 14.2.2006 on the Communication from the Commission
to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the implementation, results
and overall assessment of the European Year of People with Disabilities 2003,
point 1.2, Rapporteur: Ms Anca (OJ C 88, 11.4.2006).

It might be more sensible to postpone this initiative, without
making 2009 a European Year, than to rush into the adoption
of a decision that will not be able to meet its objectives because
there was not enough time to plan the relevant actions.

initiatives

Point 3.2. of

the Explanatory Memorandum of

the
4.5
proposal states that the Year is expected to have at least as
significant an impact as previous
the
European Year of Lifelong Learning and the European Year of
Education through Sport. However, the proposal does not make
any reference to the subsequent analysis of the results of the
actions undertaken. It can therefore be assumed that the impact
will be analysed either empirically or through indirect indicators
from the Lifelong Learning Programme or other programmes
concerned by the initiative.

such as

the specific objectives of

4.6
The EESC agrees with the Commission that the flexibility
for setting priorities on an annual or multiannual basis in the
Lifelong Learning Programme and other relevant programmes
provides a financial margin that is sufficient to ensure that sepa-
rate resources need not be earmarked for the Year. Promoting
innovation is one of
the Lifelong
Learning Programme, and others such as the Entrepreneurship
and Innovation Programme and the ICT Policy Support
Programme, both of which are included in the Competitiveness
and Innovation Framework Programme. Therefore, and although
the proposal does not explicitly mention the Framework
Programme, the EESC believes that the initiative could be orga-
nised on the basis of existing programmes and budgets as stated
in point 5 of the proposal's Explanatory Memorandum.

(8) EESC opinion of 8.12.1999 on the Proposal

the
the Council: European Year of Languages

for a Decision of

for a Decision of

European Parliament and of
2001, Rapporteur-general: Mr Rupp (OJ C 51, 23.2.2000).
the
EESC opinion of 24.4.2002 on the Proposal
European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Year of
Education through Sport 2004, Rapporteur: Mr Koryfídis (OJ C 149,
21.6.2002).
EESC opinion of 14.12.2005 on the Proposal for a Decision of the
European Parliament and the Council on the European Year of Equal
Opportunities for All (2007) — Towards a Just Society, Rapporteur:
Ms Herczog (OJ C 65, 17.3.2006).
EESC opinion of 20.4.2006 on the Proposal for a Decision of the European
Parliament and of the Council concerning the European Year of Intercultural
Dialogue (2008), Rapporteur: Ms Cser (OJ C 185, 8.8.2006).

(9) EESC opinion of 29.5.2008 on the Proposal for a Decision of the European
Parliament and of the Council on the European Year for Combating Poverty
and Social Exclusion (2010), Rapporteur: Mr Pater, Co-rapporteur:
Ms Koller. OJ C 224, 30.8.2008, p. 106.

(10) COM(2007) 797 final.

C 27/122

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.2.2009

5. Specific comments on the proposal

5.1
Article 2 of the proposal sets down the specific objective
of highlighting a number of factors which could contribute to
promoting creativity and a capacity for
innovation. These
factors are divided into three broad categories, each comprising
a number of aspects.

The EESC believes that these objectives and/or factors should be
clarified, so that the actions to be implemented focus on a
number of essential aspects relating to creativity and innovation
as key strands of the initiative, the public (particularly young
people) as targets for the actions undertaken, and educational
establishments and the socio-economic and business network as
channels for this action.

5.2
A European Year devoted to Creativity and Innovation
should comprise innovative measures to achieve its stated aims.
The measures covered in Article 3, while appropriate overall, are
those usually employed for any kind of awareness, promotion
or publicity campaign. The EESC believes that it would be most
instructive, particularly for young people,
the actions
proposed included some innovative measure, so as to achieve
the objectives of the proposal. For example a competition could
be held to find ideas for a tool to help permanently promote
creativity and innovation more visibly throughout Europe.
Another possibility would be to set up a European prize (yearly
or biennially) to enhance and encourage truly innovative ideas
and creativeness among young people, in all possible areas and
activities.

if

5.3 Without prejudice to its general comments on the
co-financing of
through the Lifelong Learning
Programme and the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework

the Year

Brussels, 9 July 2008.

Programme, the EESC believes that Article 6 of the proposal
should further clarify this aspect, which is of great importance
for its success.

5.3.1
The decision should include, at the very least, a budget
estimate. This could be expressed as a sum allocated for 2009
and subsequent financial years under the programmes co-finan-
cing the Year, or as a maximum percentage of the expenditure
under these programmes in the relevant financial years. Either
of these solutions would be fitting, as the EESC believes that it
is not advisable to leave the estimated cost of this initiative
completely undefined.

this phrase,

Article 6 of the proposal begins: ‘Without prejudice to
5.3.2
the support that may be given to the Year by programmes and
policies in other fields such as enterprise, cohesion, research and
the information society …’. The EESC considers that, owing to
the type of participation and
the ambiguity of
co-financing from other Commission DGs and programmes
relating to education, culture and lifelong learning remains
unspecified. The EESC believes that the article should define
which programmes will be used to co-finance the Year and to
what extent, and how initiatives will be coordinated between the
different co-financing programmes, which are managed by
different Commission DGs.

5.4
Last but not least, the EESC considers that the text of the
proposed decision should include a reference to the assessment
of the results and scope of the Year. At the end of the Year,
there must be an assessment of the actions carried out and the
results obtained so that lessons can be learned in order to
prepare for other European Years, and the scope and success of
the efforts made can be gauged.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS