COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Results of the open method of coordination in the youth field 2010-2018 Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Engaging, Connecting and Empowering young people: a new EU Youth Strategy
Date: 2018-05-22
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, European Commission
Subjects: EU strategy, education policy, multi-level governance, voluntary work, young person, youth movement, youth policy, youth unemployment

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 22.5.2018  SWD(2018) 168 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Results of the open method of coordination in the youth field 2010-2018  Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS   Engaging, Connecting and Empowering young people: a new EU Youth Strategy  {COM(2018) 269 final} - {SWD(2018) 169 final}  
 
 
Table of Contents 
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 3 

Section 1 – Main achievements of the youth cooperation 2016-2018 ................................................ 5 

1.1. Implementation of the EU Work Plan for Youth 2016-2018 .................................................. 5 

1.2. Towards evidence-based youth policy ............................................................................... 12 

1.3. Updates in the legal framework and youth policy in Member States ..................................... 14 

Section 2 – Lessons from the strategy’s evaluation ....................................................................... 16 

2.1. Main findings ................................................................................................................. 16 

2.2. Recommendations for the future ....................................................................................... 17 

Section 3 – Outcomes of the national reports ............................................................................... 19 

3.1. Progress towards the overall objectives and cross-sectoral cooperation................................. 19 

3.2. Mutual learning, dissemination and take-up of results ......................................................... 26 

3.3. Supporting and developing youth work ............................................................................. 36 

3.4. Cross-border mobility of young volunteers ........................................................................ 41 

3.5. Structured Dialogue with young people and youth organisations.......................................... 45 

3.6. EU programmes and funds ............................................................................................... 49 

Section 4 – Other stakeholder consultations ................................................................................. 56 

4.1. Outcomes of the consultations .......................................................................................... 56 

4.2. Views of other EU institutions and bodies ......................................................................... 61 

Section 5 – Outline of the future cooperation ............................................................................... 63 

5.1. Analysis of main changes needed for the EU Youth Strategy............................................... 63 

5.2 Priority areas of the EU Youth Strategy ............................................................................. 65 

5.3. Renewed governance mechanisms for greater impact ......................................................... 69 

Annexes ................................................................................................................................... 75 

A. Council resolutions and conclusions on youth 2010-2017 ..................................................... 75 

B. National Reports replies on the influence of the EU Youth Strategy on the national and local 
level  .................................................................................................................................... 78 

C. Evidence-based youth policy: list of studies carried out 2010-2018 ........................................ 85 

D. Mutual learning: list of expert groups and results 2010-2018 ................................................. 89 

E. Mutual learning: list of peer-learning activities and results 2014-2018 .................................... 91 

F. Structured Dialogue: list of topics per cycle 2010-2018 ......................................................... 93 

G. Structured Dialogue Cycle V - January 2016 to June 2017 (consultation numbers) .................. 94 

H. EU initiatives and action in the eight fields of action ............................................................ 96 

1 

 
 
I. Possible policy indicators for the priority areas proposed for the future cooperation over the 
period 2019-2027 ................................................................................................................ 100 

J. Possible actions for a future EU Work Plan for Youth for 2019-2021 .................................... 101 

K. Glossary ......................................................................................................................... 104 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
Introduction 

EU youth cooperation can build on 30 years of experience, starting with a funding programme 
and since 2001 supported by policy cooperation. The Council adopted the current framework 
for European cooperation in the youth field, also known as the European Union (EU) Youth 
Strategy, in 20091 for the period 2010-2018. This framework is divided into three-year work 
cycles, at the end of which the Commission draws up a EU Youth Report.  

The Commission now proposes to renew the EU Youth Strategy for 2019-2027. To support 
its  strategic  proposals  in  the  dedicated  Communication2,  the  Commission  provides  in  this 
Staff  Working  Document  an  assessment  of  the  strategy  (alongside  another  Staff  Working 
Document providing statistics on the situation of young people). 

The document notably: 

takes stock of key achievements in the 2016-2018 period (Section 1),  

 
  presents evidence from an external evaluation, Member States’ reports and outcomes of 

consultations (Sections 2-4),  

  substantiates the key proposals made for the new EU Youth Strategy (2019-2027), in 

particular on the renewed EU Youth Dialogue (Section 5), 

  proposes a list of policy indicators (Annex I), 
  proposes a draft Work Plan (2019-2021) for consideration to Council (Annex J),  

All sections are illustrated by examples of actions at EU and national level.  

During  2010-2018,  EU  youth  policy  cooperation  aimed  at  (1)  creating  more  and  equal 
opportunities for young people in education and the labour market and (2) promoting active 
citizenship, social inclusion and solidarity. To this purpose, the strategy aside from tackling 
classic  youth  topics  took  a  cross-sectoral  approach  to  emphasize  the  youth  perspective  in 
other  EU  policies  such  as  education,  health,  employment  and  social  inclusion.  The  strategy 
was implemented by gathering evidence-based, mutual learning, dialogue with young people 
and the mobilisation of relevant spending programmes.  

The interim evaluation of the Youth Strategy and stakeholder consultation during a full year 
of listening confirmed that EU youth cooperation has proven its value. It triggered both policy 
and  legislative  changes  at  national  level  and  contributed  to  the  capacity  of  organisations 
active in the youth field. Structured dialogue, mobilisation of EU funds, mutual learning and 
knowledge  building  are  seen  as  the  most  influential  instruments.  At  the  same  time,  the 
evaluation  noted  areas  for  improvement:  the  priorities  have  been  too  wide-ranging,  which 
resulted in a quasi 'a-la-carte' approach, where none of the Member States addressed all eight 
fields of action. This, coupled with the lack of strong monitoring tools, reduced the strategy’s 
effectiveness. Reaching a diverse and critical mass of young people, in particular those with 
fewer  opportunities  and  active  at  grassroots  level  remains  challenging.  Stakeholders  also 
pointed to the need to improve the impact of dialogue mechanisms and increase ownership of 
the EU Youth Strategy by greater stakeholder involvement.  

1  Council resolution of 27 November 2009 on a renewed framework for European cooperation in the youth 

field (2010-2018), OJ C 311, 19.12.2009, p. 1-11. 

2  COM(2018) 269.  

3 

 
 
                                                 
Duly  considering  the  above  lessons,  the  Commission  proposes  a  new  EU  Youth  Strategy 
(2019-2027) based on the following adaptations: 

  More focus and flexibility to adapt European priorities in national contexts; 
  Wider outreach to young people, in particular those with fewer opportunities; 
  A new approach to working across policy areas; 
 
  Multi-level and participatory governance; 
  A clearer link between EU youth policy and related EU programme activities. 

Improved transparency and monitoring framework; 

4 

 
 
 
 
Section 1 – Main achievements of the youth cooperation 2016-2018 

1.1. Implementation of the EU Work Plan for Youth 2016-2018 

In line with the strategy’s reporting requirements, this document reports on the third and last 
three-year  cycle  of  implementation  of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy.  The  Council  adopted  an  EU 
Work Plan for Youth for the period 2016-1018 covering six lines of action, as described3. 

The initiatives presented in the boxes under this section are youth related EU level actions in 
other  policy  areas  that  are  linked  to  the  priorities  of  the  EU  Work  plan  for  youth,  without 
being included within.  

Social inclusion of all young people 

The  Structured  Dialogue  from  2016  to  mid-2017  dealt  with  ‘Essential  life  skills  and 
competences  of  young  people  in  a  diverse,  connected  and  inclusive  Europe  for  active 
participation  in  community  and  working  life.’  Its  outcomes  were  reflected  in  a  Council 
resolution  on  Structured  Dialogue  in  May  2017.  The  Youth  Ministers  adopted  at  the  same 
time  Council  conclusions  on  ‘the  role  of  youth  work  in  supporting  young  people’s 
development  of  essential  life  skills  that  facilitate  their  successful  transition  to  adulthood, 
active citizenship and working life.’ 

The  Council  also  adopted  Conclusions  on  role  of  the  youth  sector  in  preventing  violent 
radicalisation  in  May  2016.  Based  on  these  conclusions,  a  Member  States’  expert  group 
examined evidence and good practice related to the role that youth work can play to promote 
active citizenship and prevent marginalisation and violent radicalisation. 

The Commission, following the results of expert cooperation on quality of youth work4 under 
the previous work plan (2014-2015) released a handbook on youth work quality systems and 
frameworks in the EU.  

Participation of all young people in democratic and civic life in Europe 

The  Commission  presented  a  study  on  the  impact  of  transnational  volunteering  through  the 
European Voluntary Service in 2017. It focused on impact both at individual level and at the 
level of organisations and local communities. It identified options to enhance the impact for 
individuals  and  organisations,  especially  for  young  people  with  fewer  opportunities.  The 
Maltese  Presidency  organised  a  Peer  Learning  Seminar  on  Democracy,  Youth  and  Sport  in 
May 2017. 

Transition of young people to adulthood, in particular into the labour market 

The EU Youth Strategy has put a strong emphasis on cross sectoral cooperation and synergies 
with  activities  developed  through  EU  employment  policies.  The  Commission  presented  a 
study on Youth work and youth entrepreneurship in 2017, which includes a mapping of youth 
work  activities  in  this  area.  A  peer  learning  activity  supported  by  Erasmus+  took  place  in 

3  All documents mentioned in this section are referenced in Annexes A, C, D and E. 
4  http://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/youth/library/reports/quality-youth-work_en.pdf  

5 

 
 
                                                 
2017  about  ‘Youth  work  as  a  recognised  tool  for  supporting  young  people’s  transition  to 
adulthood and the world of work.’ 

European Apprentices Network 

Since  the  launch  of  the  European  Alliance  for  Apprenticeships  (EAfA)  in  2013, 
greater emphasis is put on apprenticeships as a successful pathway for young people 
in  transition  from  school  to  work.  The  EAfA  joins  36  EU,  EFTA  and  candidate 
countries  and  over  230  stakeholders  (businesses,  social  partners,  chambers, 
vocational  education  and  training  providers,  regions,  youth  representatives  or  think 
tanks), to strengthen the quality, supply and image of apprenticeships in Europe, and 
to enhance apprentice mobility.  
A  Council  Recommendation  on  a  European  Framework  for  Quality  and  Effective 
Apprenticeships, adopted in March 2018, sets out 14 criteria on learning and working 
conditions,  as  well  as  on  framework  conditions,  that  improve  the  quality  and 
effectiveness of apprenticeships, to the benefit of learners, companies and society. 

In  2017  the  Commission  launched  the  European  Apprentices  Network  (EAN), 
together  with  the  European  Youth  Forum  (YFJ)  and  the  Organising  Bureau  of 
European School Student Unions (OBESSU). They agreed on the following tasks for 
the network: 

  To clarify the perception of young people on apprenticeships through exchanging 
experiences,  discussing  challenges  and  sharing  information  on  e.g.  educational 
and employment policies and research. 

  To  function  as  an  informal  consultative  body  for  the  Commission  on 
apprenticeships, particularly for the EAfA in relation to EU proposals/initiatives, 
events and meetings.  

  To  promote  apprenticeships  as  a  worthwhile  career  choice  (e.g.  through 

ambassadors for apprenticeships). 

  To  facilitate  contacts  between  youth  organisations  and  other  actors 

in 

apprenticeships, especially members of the EAfA. 

The  network  includes  fifteen  members  from  twelve  countries.  They  collectively 
identified seven priorities for the next years:  

P
I
H
S
R
U
E
N
E
R
P
E
R
T
N
E
D
N
A
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E

1)  Quality education and quality assurance 
2)  Rights, responsibilities and protection 
3)  Legally binding agreements 
4)  Representation 
5)  Promoting apprenticeships 
6)  Anti-discrimination 
7)  Accessible information 

https://apprenticesnetwork.eu/ 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Mobilising instruments to improve young people’s school to work transitions  

The  Youth  Guarantee,  launched  in  2013  and  reaffirmed  by  the  European  Pillar  of 
Social Rights, has become a reality across the EU. It gave opportunities to more than 
3.5  million  young  people  each  year  and  was  a  driver  for  structural  reforms  and 
innovation in Member States5. The Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) supported the 
implementation  of  the  Guarantee  with  a  budget  of  EUR  8.8  billion  during  2014-20 
reaching already 1.7 million young people. Further efforts are nonetheless needed to 
reach  more  young  people,  especially  those  currently  out  of  reach  and  to  get  better 
quality offers. Cooperation between the employment, education and youth sectors is 
key in this regard and has to be boosted. The Commission supports Member States to 
fully roll out their Youth Guarantee schemes: it monitors progress on the ground in 
the  context  of  the  European  Semester,  through  specific  data  collection  and  in 
cooperation  with 
the  Employment  Committee.  It  also  provides  numerous 
opportunities  for  mutual  learning,  among  others  through  a  database  of  promising 
practice and peer support to Spain and Cyprus.  

The  European  Social  Fund  supports  youth  entrepreneurship  (investment  priority 
dedicated  to  ‘self-employment,  entrepreneurship  and  business  creation’)  to  raise 
awareness, facilitate mutual learning and build capacities which is further supported 
through financial instruments for microfinance and social entrepreneurship under the 
EU Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI). 

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1079 

P
I
H
S
R
U
E
N
E
R
P
E
R
T
N
E
D
N
A
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E

5 Draft Joint Employment Report from the Commission and the Council accompanying the Communication from 
the Commission on the Annual Growth Survey 2018, COM/2017/0674 final. 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Your first EURES Job 

Your  first  EURES  Job  (YfEJ)  is  an  intra-EU  job  mobility  scheme  to  help  young 
people  aged  18  to  35  from  any  of  the  EU  countries,  Iceland  and  Norway  to  find  a 
work  placement  –  job,  traineeship  or  apprenticeship  –  in  a  different  country  from 
their  country  of  residence.  It  also  assists  employers,  particularly  SMEs,  to  find  the 
workers they need for their hard-to-fill vacancies. YfEJ is part of the 2014-2020 EU 
Programme  for  Employment  and  Social  Innovation  (EaSI)  as  a  'targeted  mobility 
scheme'.  

YfEJ  offers  direct  funding  for  target  groups  (young  people  and  employers)  for  an 
interview trip; relocation to the country of destination; a language course; recognition 
of  qualifications;  subsistence  costs  (for  trainees  and/or  apprentices),  integration 
programme for SMEs for the new mobile worker(s), trainee(s) or apprentice(s). Other 
services,  e.g.  training,  mentoring  can  be  made  available  by  employment  services 
participating  in  YfEJ  projects.  Until  June  2017  (latest  available  data),  the  scheme 
helped 7350 young people to obtain placements. 

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=1081 

P
I
H
S
R
U
E
N
E
R
P
E
R
T
N
E
D
N
A
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E

Support to young people’s health and well-being, including mental health 

A  peer  learning  activity  amongst  Member  States  addressed  ‘Participation  of  young  people 
with  mental  health  issues’  in  2016  and  2017,  with  a  focus  on  youth  empowerment  through 
untapping  their  talents  and  skills.  A  first  seminar  addressed  ‘the  role  of  youth  work’,  the 
second ‘youth worker training to assist young people with mental health issues’ and the last 
‘the role of schools in the inclusion of young people with mental health issues’. 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Tartu call for a healthy lifestyle  

During  the  2017  European  Week  of  Sport,  Commissioners  Phil  Hogan  (agriculture 
and  rural  development),  Tibor  Navracsics  (education,  culture,  youth  and  sport)  and 
Vytenis Andriukaitis (health and food safety) launched in Estonia the Tartu call for a 
healthy lifestyle that rolls out a roadmap for promoting healthy lifestyles in Europe, 
particular amongst children, over the next 2 years. The Tartu call includes: 

  More  funding  for  projects  promoting  sport  (funded  through  Erasmus+)  with  a 

focus on specific settings such as schools; 

  Encouraging  innovative  approaches  to  promoting  and  raising  awareness  for  the 
benefits  of  healthy  lifestyles  through  the  EU's  innovation  and  technology 
networks such as EIT Health and EIT Food; 

  Promoting the EU school fruit, vegetables and milk scheme launched in 2017 as 

well as educational tools such as the teachers’ resource pack; 

  Supporting campaigns to promote healthy diets and increasing the consumption of 
fruit  and  vegetables  (such  as  the  '5-a-day'  campaign)  within  the  programme  to 
promote  EU  agricultural  products  funded  each  year  through  the  Common 
Agricultural Policy. 

G
N
I
E
B

-

L
L
E
W
D
N
A
H
T
L
A
E
H

https://ec.europa.eu/sport/sites/sport/files/ewos-tartu-call_en.pdf 

Challenges and opportunities of the digital era for the youth sector and young people 

Digitalisation  is  increasingly  impacting  work  realities  including  in  youth  and  takes  up  a 
greater role in young people’s leisure time. The Council adopted conclusions on ‘promoting 
new  approaches  in  youth  work  to  uncover  and  develop  the  potential  of  young  people’  in 
November  2016  and  on  ‘smart  youth  work’  have  been  agreed  by  the  Youth  Ministers  in 
November 2017. 

The report of the expert group on ‘Addressing the risks, opportunities, and implications of 
digitalization  for  youth,  youth  work  and  youth  policy’  provided  policy  recommendations, 
training needs and good practice examples in developing digital youth work across the EU. 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Safer Internet Activities at EU level – Safer Internet Centres  

The  European  Strategy for  a  Better  Internet  for  Children  sets  out  actions  for  online 
safety,  combining  financial  support,  legislation  and  self-regulation,  involving 
Member States, industry and civil society. 

Under  this  framework,  the  EU  co-funds  a  pan-European  network  of  Safer  Internet 
Centres,  coordinated  by  Insafe  and  INHOPE,  along  with  the  core  platform 
betterinternetforkids.eu  as  a  single  entry  point  for  online  tools  and  services  for  EU 
citizens and the Safer Internet community. The Centres deliver a range of awareness-
ranging  activities,  including  developing  resources,  hosting  trainings  and  events  for 
children  and  young  people,  and  those  that  care  for  them,  such  as  parents,  carers, 
teachers, educators and other professionals in the children’s workforce. 

In  2016,  Safer  Internet  Centres  reached  over  3  million  people  through  events  and 
trainings.  Their  helplines  received  more  than  36,000  contacts  connected  to  online 
issues such as cyberbullying and sextortion.  The Commission's annual Safer Internet 
Day is now celebrated in over 140 countries on all continents and reached more than 
20 million EU citizens in 2016. 

G
N
I
E
B

-

L
L
E
W
D
N
A
H
T
L
A
E
H

https://www.betterinternetforkids.eu/web/portal/policy/insafe-inhope  

Finally, the Commission presented a study on ‘the impact of the Internet and social media 
on youth participation and youth work’ in 2018; it analyses new, alternative forms of young 
people’s  participation  alongside  new  ways  of  political  engagement  and  interaction.  It 
examines  the  role  of  youth  work  in  supporting  young  people  to  develop  digital  skills  and 
media literacy to exploit the new medium with a critical mind, together with new skills and 
competences required by youth workers in this changing context. 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Digital Education Action Plan  

The  Commission’s  Digital  Education  Action  Plan  (2018)  outlines  how  the  EU  can 
help individuals, educational institutions and education systems to better adapt for life 
and work in an age of rapid digital change by making better use of digital technology 
for teaching and learning, developing relevant digital competences6 and skills for the 
digital  transformation;  and  improving  education  through  better  data  analysis  and 
foresight. The Action Plan intends to: 

  Tackle  the  connectivity  divide  between  Member  States  regarding  the  uptake  of 

very high capacity broadband in schools  

  Support the digital readiness of both general and vocational schools 
  Provide  a  framework  for  issuing  digitally-certified  qualifications  and  validating 
digitally-acquired  skills  that  are  trusted,  multilingual  and  can  be  stored  in 
professional profiles (CVs) such as Europass 

  Create  a  Europe-wide  platform  for  digital  higher  education  and  enhanced 

cooperation 

  Strengthen  open  science  and  citizen  science  in  Europe  by  piloting  training, 
including continuous professional development courses on open science in higher 
education institutions at all levels (students, researchers, educators) 

  Bring coding classes to schools in Europe, including by schools’ participation in 

EU Code Week 

  Tackle  the  challenges  of  digital  transformation  by  launching  an  EU-wide 
awareness-raising  campaign  targeting  educators,  parents  and  learners  to  foster 
online  safety,  cyber  hygiene  and  media  literacy;  and  a  cyber-security  teaching 
initiative 

  Decrease  the  gender  gap  in  the  technology  and  entrepreneurial  sector  by 

promoting digital and entrepreneurial competences among girls. 

  Build evidence on the uptake of ICT and digital skills in schools, by publishing a 

reference study assessing progress in mainstreaming ICT in education. 

  Launch artificial intelligence and learning analytics pilots in education as of 2018 
to make better use of the huge amount of data now available and thus help address 
specific  problems  and  improve  implementation  and  monitoring  of  education 
policy;  
Initiate strategic foresight on key trends arising from digital transformation for the 
future of education systems, in close cooperation with Member State experts and 
making use of existing and future channels of EU-wide cooperation on education 
and training. 

 

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/specific-actions-digital-education-
action-plan 

G
N
I
N
I
A
R
T
D
N
A
N
O
I
T
A
C
U
D
E

6  The  European  Commission  has  developed,  together  with  stakeholders  and  experts,  the  Digital  Competence 
framework  for  citizens  defining  and  describing  21  specific  digital  competences  for  participation  in  society, 
including detailed proficiency levels.  

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Opportunities and challenges raised by the increasing numbers of young migrants and 
refugees in the EU 

An expert group on young migrants and refugees will have finalised its work by the end of 
2018. The mandate of this group foresees a collection and analysis of good practice examples 
detailing  the  specific  contribution  of  youth  work  and  non-formal  and  informal  learning,  in 
particular  to  facilitating  the  integration  process of  young  people  with  a  migrant  background 
who already reside in Europe or have recently arrived. The expert group should also provide a 
practical toolbox for youth workers and youth organisations, offering useful tips and guidance 
useable in different Member States and policy recommendations.  

Protecting Children in migration  

Over the recent years, a growing number of children in migration have arrived in the 
EU,  many  of  them  without  their  families.  This  recent  surge  in  arrivals  has  put 
national systems under pressure and exposed gaps and shortcomings. This is why in 
April 2017 the Commission adopted a Communication on the protection of children 
in migration. It sets out actions to reinforce the protection of all migrant children at 
all stages of the process.  

https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/justice-and-fundamental-rights/rights-
child/children-migration_en   

N
O
I
S
U
L
C
N
I
L
A
I
C
O
S

1.2. Towards evidence-based youth policy 

The  EU  Youth  Strategy  stresses  the  role  of  knowledge  on  the  living  conditions,  values  and 
attitudes of young women and men with a view to sharing it with other policy fields.  

The  situation  of  young  people 7 is  measured  through  a  dashboard  of  EU  youth  indicators 
developed  in  2011  with  41  indicators  spanning  eight  fields  of  action.  The  most  recent 
statistical data can be found in a youth section on Eurostat’s website8 . The Commission also 
publishes periodic Eurobarometer surveys dedicated to youth, with its latest edition released 
in January 2018. Knowledge was completed through several studies9 .  

To further develop its evidence-based approach to youth policy the Commission also works in 
partnership with the Council of Europe10, managing the Pool of European Youth Researchers 
and  the  European  Knowledge  Centre  on  Youth  Policy.  The  Commission  also  conducted  an 
interim evaluation of the current EU Youth Strategy (see section 2) to gather information on 
the implementation of the cooperation. 

7  Staff Working Document on the situation of young people (statistical part of this EU Youth Report). 
8  http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/youth/data/eu-dashboard 
9  See Annex C. 
10  http://pjp-eu.coe.int/en/web/youth-partnership/home 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
With  the  assistance  of  the  Education,  Audiovisual  and  Culture  Executive  Agency  the 
Commission  presented  the  Youth  Wiki.  This  online  platform  launched  in  2017  provides 
information on European countries’ youth policies.  

The  EU  research  Framework  Programmes  for  Research  and  Innovation  (Horizon  2020  and 
Framework  Programme  7)  have  funded  a  substantial  body  of  research  on  issues  related  to 
youth inclusion, employment, well-being, education and participation11. 

Youth Wiki 

The Youth Wiki is  Europe’s online encyclopaedia in the area of national youth policies. Its 
main purpose is to support evidence-based European cooperation by providing up-to-date and 
user-friendly information on national policies supporting young people. 

The  Youth  Wiki  collects  qualitative  information  on  youth  policies  across  Europe,  provided 
and annually updated by National Correspondents, allowing to monitor reforms and trends in 
policy orientations in the participating countries. 

The main sources of information consist of official documents from national authorities in the 
youth field, as well as studies, surveys, analyses and national data and statistics. Browse the 
Youth  Wiki  website  by  country  or  by  policy  field:  https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-
policies/youthwiki  

Youth work statistics website (Finland) 

For the purposes of data collection and evidence-based youth policy, a website titled 
www.nuorisotilastot.fi has been set up in Finland. This is a statistical service funded 
by the Ministry of Education and Culture. The statistics cover youth work services in 
different municipalities and provide information on NEET youth and the allocation of 
central government funding to youth work.  

The website was first launched in December 2015. Each of the statistical databases is 
updated  annually,  in  addition  to  which  smaller  updates  and  new  databases  are 
published monthly. The statistics are also available in English. 

www.nuorisotilastot.fi 

G
N
I
D
L
I
U
B
E
G
D
E
L
W
O
N
K

11  European Commission (2015), Their future is our future – Youth as actors of change. Research projects on 
youth inclusion, employment and participation supported by the European Union’s Research Framework 
Programmes, https://publications.europa.eu/s/enx9.  

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
1.3. Updates in the legal framework and youth policy in Member States12 

National Youth Laws 

Compared to 2010-2014, the situation has remained stable during 2016-2018. Most countries 
maintained  or  adapted  legislation  that  refers  to  youth  issues  or  contains  a  section  which 
addresses the needs and/or rights of young people. 

National Youth Strategies 

Most  countries  have  developed  dedicated  youth  strategies  and  the  situation  remained  stable 
since 2015. A number of countries have revised or updated their youth strategy, which usually 
covers  a  period  of  4  to  10  years  and  often  goes  together  with  a  specific  action  or 
implementation plan. Some Member States do not have a youth strategy as such (Greece) or 
not anymore (France, Italy, Poland) mainly due to a change of government. 

Two recent developments are noteworthy: in 2015 Netherlands has shifted the responsibility 
for  welfare,  support  and  care  for  all  citizens,  including  young  people,  to  the  local 
(municipality)  level  to  better  streamline  the  services  and  approaches  and  to  adapt  them  to 
local needs; and Cyprus introduced a youth strategy for the first time in 2017.  

Youth Law revised in 2016 (Luxembourg) 

The  Youth  Law  carries  a  clear  vision  for  youth  participation,  evidence-based  youth 
research and regular and circular policy development. 

The National Assembly of Young People has the mission to give young people and 
youth  organisations  the  possibility  to  participate  in  the  examination  of  all  issues 
related  to  youth  policy  at  national  and  European  level.  The  youth  observatory 
(observatoire  jeunesse)  is  in  charge  of  monitoring  youth  issues  with  the  mission  to 
prepare,  coordinate  and  initiate  surveys,  recommendations,  analysis,  studies  and 
reports on the different aspects of the situation of young people in Luxembourg. 

https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/en/content/youthwiki/12-national-youth-
law-luxembourg 

Y
C
I
L
O
P
H
T
U
O
Y

E
C
N
A
N
R
E
V
O
G

12  Detailed country information with hyperlinks to relevant official documents can be found in Chapter 1 of the 

Youth Wiki ‘Youth Policy Governance’ and in background information on 
https://ec.europa.eu/youth/policy/implementation/report_en 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
New National Youth Strategy (Serbia) 

In 2015, Serbia started to prepare a new National Youth Strategy, seeking inspiration 
from  the  renewed  framework  for  European  cooperation  in  the  youth  field. 
Considering times have changed since then, Serbia added Youth Safety as a strategic 
area.  The  Serbian  National  Youth  Strategy  2015-2025  contains  nine strategic  areas: 
Youth  Employment  and  Entrepreneurship;  Education,  Pedagogical  Work  With  and 
Training of Youth; Youth Activism and Active Participation; Health and Well-Being 
of  Young  People;  Youth  Safety;  Social  Inclusion  of  Youth;  Youth  Mobility; 
Informing Youth; Youth Culture and Creativity.  

Y
C
I
L
O
P
H
T
U
O
Y

E
C
N
A
N
R
E
V
O
G

http://www.mos.gov.rs/public/ck/uploads/files/Dokumenta/Omladina/zakoni-i-
strateska-dokumenta/Nacionalna%20strategija%20za%20mlade%20-%20ENG.pdf  

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Section 2 – Lessons from the strategy’s evaluation 

The  Commission  conducted  an  interim  evaluation13 of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy  and  the  2008 
Council  recommendation  on  the  mobility  of  young  volunteers  across  the  EU  for  the  period 
2010  to  mid-2015.  This  included  50  stakeholder  interviews  and  a  survey  targeted  at  young 
people (with 720 replies) and youth organisations (250 responses)14. 

In line with the EU better regulation agenda, the evaluation covered the entire scope of the EU 
Youth  Strategy,  including  the  above-mentioned  recommendation,  the  mechanisms  for 
cooperation,  implementation  instruments  and  activities  carried  out  by  Member  States  and 
stakeholders under and outside of EU cooperation. It also addressed the links between the EU 
Youth  Strategy  and  the  recommendation  and  with  EU  programmes,  such  as  Erasmus+,  its 
predecessor Youth in Action and the European Structural and Investment Funds. 

2.1. Main findings 

Relevance 

The evaluation considered the strategy overall as relevant to the needs and problems of young 
Europeans as well as to the activities of youth policy-makers in Member States. Two thirds of 
the national policy-makers and 80% of the youth organisations surveyed found the objectives 
and scope relevant to their needs and priorities. 

The EU Youth Strategy provided a broad and flexible framework for cooperation. Given the 
high  number  of  possible  actions  it  proposed,  at  least  some  topics  were  relevant  to  each 
Member  State.  Conversely,  none  of  them  addressed  all.  The  relevance  of  the  EU  Youth 
Strategy stemmed partly from the fact that Member States saw it as an ‘à la carte’ approach 
rather than a set of shared objectives, but  this was partly due to  its wide scope and flexible 
approach; relevance also depended on the understanding of youth policy in Member States. 

Coherence 

Views  are  divided  on  the  internal  coherence  of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy.  One  fifth  of  the 
stakeholders  interviewed  considered the  strategy’s  activities as  inter-related  and  building  on 
each other, while another fifth saw the need to better connect its different parts, viewed as too 
fragmented.  As  for  external  coherence  at  EU  level,  the  strategy’s  objectives  and  priorities 
were coherent with those of EU other policy areas.  

EU added value  

The  main  EU  added  value  for  Member  States  was  that  it  provided  them  with  policy 
inspiration, knowledge and expertise, leverage and legitimacy, opportunities and resources to 
move towards common objectives, increased visibility of some topics (such as volunteering) 
or processes. 

13  Commission Staff Working Document on the evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy, SWD(2017) 281 final of 
25.7.2017. External evaluation: Evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy and the Council Recommendation on 
the mobility of young volunteers across the EU, Final Report, https://ec.europa.eu/youth/news/20160531-eu-
youth-strategy-evaluation_en 

14  https://ec.europa.eu/youth/sites/youth/files/youth-strategy-mobility-evaluation-2016_en.pdf 

16 

 
 
                                                 
For instance in  Slovenia, debates  were influenced by good practices and inspired Slovenian 
youth policies. Austria or Bulgaria indicated that reform processes would have occurred but at 
a much slower pace had there not been the EU Youth Strategy. 

For 79% of the respondents to the public consultation, the EU Youth Strategy helped develop 
a youth strategy or a consistent approach to young people and youth policy at national level. 

Effectiveness  

The evaluation found the strategy partially effective in triggering concrete changes at national 
and organisational level. The impact of the cooperation depended on the youth policy history 
in each country (according to the level of policy development, it has either been perceived as 
a driver for change or only a contributing factor). 

The evaluation concluded that the most influential instruments of the EU Youth Strategy have 
been  the  Structured  Dialogue,  the  mobilisation  of  EU  programmes  and  funds,  as  well  as 
mutual learning and knowledge building at a lower level. 

Efficiency 

EU youth cooperation costs were found to be reasonable in relation to results, but there were 
limited resources available at national level to take full advantage of EU cooperation. 

2.2. Recommendations for the future 

The main recommendations of the external evaluation were the following: 

Focus on a smaller number of clearly defined objectives, and align the use of EU youth 
cooperation instruments more clearly and strategically with cooperation objectives; 

Among  the  eight  fields  of  action,  education  and  employment  seem  to  be  relevant  to  most 
young people. However, the relevance of the policy areas varies across Member States. Some 
call  for  keeping  the  focus  on  ‘burning’  issues  such  as  employment,  education  and  training. 
Others pleaded for more attention for  ‘core’ youth  topics, such as  youth work, volunteering 
and participation, which have been overshadowed in the aftermath of the crisis, but to which 
the youth cooperation framework can most meaningfully contribute.  

If the double focus of the strategy is maintained (both core youth issues and working across 
policy areas) the goals should be more focused rather than just listing possible actions in eight 
fields like in the EU Youth Strategy 2010-2018.  

Improve EU coordination of youth agenda and of the implementation instruments; align the 
use  of  cooperation  instruments  with  the  EU  Youth  Strategy’s  objectives  more  clearly  and 
strategically (including more links between funding programmes and the policy objectives) 

The objectives and priorities of the EU Youth Strategy were overall coherent to the objectives 
of  the  Europe  2020  Strategy.  However,  this  is  mainly  due  to  its  broad  coverage  rather  than 
efforts to align the two strategies. The two were often perceived as separate approaches, each 
with their own objectives, rather than part of an integrated plan.  

17 

 
 
The  evaluation  found  that  instruments  and  tools  are  most  effective  to  trigger  change  when 
joined up. This was not systematically the case; some initiatives were seen as ‘stand-alone’. 

Better involve local and regional youth policy-makers 

In  Member  States  with  a  devolved  youth  policy,  the  EU  approach  to  youth  policy  was 
considered  to  be  less  consistent  because  of  its  more  diverse  implementation.  In  such 
countries, regional and local topics were insufficiently reflected at EU level and thus stronger 
engagement of local and regional-level policy actors in EU cooperation would be needed. 

Raise the bar of EU youth cooperation and formulate more ambitious objectives; find a new 
impetus for those countries with a strong tradition of youth policy 

Member  States’  domestic  youth  policies  have  moved  forward.  As  under  the  current 
framework  period,  initial  conditions  for  youth  policy  were  created  or  advanced,  the  next 
strategy should allow adjusting to different stages of maturity. It should be of value and offer 
inspiration  also  for  the  Member  States,  which  are  already  fully  aligned  with  the  strategy’s 
principles and objectives. Some Member States are likely to have more needs and interest in 
some cooperation topics than others.  

Set  up  a  monitoring  framework  which  captures  the  achievements  of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy 
and consider developing mutual learning on progress achieved 

According to the evaluation, the dashboard of EU youth indicators and the triennial reporting 
by  Member  States  do  not  fully  capture  the  actual  contribution  of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy  to 
youth  policy.  A  monitoring  framework  closely  linked  to  the  Strategy’s  intervention  logic 
could be designed to this effect. It could reflect, among others, the follow-up to the Structured 
Dialogue,  both  at  EU  and  national  levels,  such  as  sharing  where  (which  policy  sector)  and 
how (which initiatives) the dialogue recommendations have been taken up. 

Some recommendations have already been addressed, with developments such as the Council 
EU Work Plans for Youth, resulting in a better coordinated EU youth agenda and the Youth 
Wiki, which greatly improved the availability of and access to information on national youth 
policies and can underpin to mutual learning. The other recommendations have been tackled 
in the proposals for the future EU Youth Strategy as can be seen in Section 4. 

18 

 
 
 
 
Section 3 – Outcomes of the national reports  

This section assesses progress based on Member States’ reports15 in complement to the Youth 
Wiki16. Since the latter covers the strategy’s eight fields of action, these reports concentrated 
on the strategy’s progress on its objectives and cross-sectoral issues. 

In  the  spirit  of  the  core  youth  policy  goal  of  youth  participation  in  policy-making, 
implementation and follow-up, the Commission recommended Member States to consult with 
young  people  and  their  representatives  when  filling  in  their  report.  The  European  Youth 
Forum17 was  invited  to  contribute  at  EU  level.  By  end  2017,  twenty-four  Member  States, 
Serbia and the European Youth Forum submitted reports18. 

3.1. Progress towards the overall objectives and cross-sectoral cooperation 

Progress made towards the overall objectives 

In  the  period  2010-2018,  the  overall  objectives  of  European  cooperation  in  the  youth  field 
were (i) to create more and equal opportunities for all young people in education and in the 
labour market; and (ii) to promote the active citizenship, social inclusion and solidarity of all 
young people.  

More and equal opportunities for all young people in education and in the labour market 

Out of the 24 Member States, which submitted a report, 16 considered progress towards the 
first objective as  satisfactory  both  in their country and at  EU level. Serbia shares this  view. 
Six think that progress in their country has been satisfactory, but not at EU level (Germany, 
France, Poland, Finland, Sweden, United Kingdom). Conversely, for Romania and Slovakia 
progress  at  EU  level  has  been  satisfactory,  but  not  in  their  country.  The  European  Youth 
Forum is of the view that progress towards this objective has been unsatisfactory.  

15  All EU Member States, EU candidate countries and EEA EFTA States were invited to submit national reports 

by the end of 2017, based on a questionnaire.  

16  Member States not yet covered by the Youth Wiki at end 2017 were invited to provide essential information 

on youth policy governance – based on Chapter 1 of the Youth Wiki. 

17  The European Youth Forum brings together 104 youth organisations, both national youth councils and 

international non-governmental youth organisations in Europe. In the Erasmus+ regulation (Regulation (EU) 
No 1288/2013, OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 50-73) the European Youth Forum is invited to provide the 
Commission with regular, updated information regarding its fields of activity. 

18  Reports are available at https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/publication/EUYouthReport2018. Separate 

contributions were sent by the three Communities of Belgium. 

19 

 
 
 
                                                 
Empreende Já – Creativity and innovation (Portugal) 

The Portuguese Institute of Youth and Sport runs Empreende Já, from 2016 to 2018. 
It is co-funded by the European Social Fund and developed under the framework of 
the  national  Youth  Guarantee  Implementation  Plan,  with  an  overall  budget  of 
approximately  EUR  5  million.  It  is  part  of  the  National  Reform  Programme,  under 
the framework of Promotion of Innovation in the Economy to foster entrepreneurial 
culture  and  entrepreneurship  support,  based  on  creativity  and  innovation.  This 
programme  also  intends  to  support  the  creation  and  development  of  companies  and 
social economy’s entities (third sector) and to support the creation of jobs, mainly for 
young people.  

The  programme  targets  young  ‘NEETs’  between  18  and  29  years  after  having 
completed  mandatory  education.  It  has  two  editions.  In  each  one,  315  participants 
have  250  hours  of  training  (125  hours  of  general  training  on  e.g.  accountancy  and 
business plan and 125 hours of specific training in the fields of their project/idea) and 
30 hours of tutorship. Participants receive a 6-monthly grant of EUR 695 per month 
and must develop their project within this period, individually or with colleagues. The 
90  best  projects  in  each  edition  that  effectively  created  a  company  or  a  social 
economy’s  entity  are  supported  with  seed  capital  of  EUR  10.000.  Social 
entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial projects on Green, Blue and Orange Economies 
are especially encouraged, emphasising the social and environmental responsibility of 
businesses and the need to protect the right to work and to decent work.  

https://eja.juventude.gov.pt/ 

Tearing down barriers to employment and education for young, black and 
minority ethnic carers (United Kingdom)  

Care 2 Work (C2W) was a multi-year programme that aimed to tackle the barriers 
faced by young carers from Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups (BAME) when 
accessing employment, education and training. The project started in May 2015 and 
was concluded in April 2017 and was supported by Erasmus+ (Key Action 2). This 
strategic partnership was led by the London-based organisation, IARS and was 
delivered in partnership with three European Partners, namely Anziani e Non Solo 
(Italy), Linnaeus University (Sweden) and the Family and Children Care Centre 
(Greece). 

The programme aimed to generate and pilot new knowledge on the needs of BAME 
young carers with an ultimate goal of achieving institutional and cultural change in 
the United Kingdom and Europe. We hope that this change will help break the cycle 
of poverty and disadvantage for one of the most marginalised communities of our 
society. To achieve its objectives, this innovative youth-led project developed an 
evidence based on the needs of BAME young carers and used it to develop and pilot 
accredited, youth-led training (face-to-face and online). The training targeted young 
BAME carers as well as service providers and professionals. 

http://www.care2work.org/  

P
I
H
S
R
U
E
N
E
R
P
E
R
T
N
E
D
N
A
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E

N
O
I
S
U
L
C
N
I
L
A
I
C
O
S

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Non-formal educational programme for young inmates of prisons (Latvia) 

‘Breaking the Waves’ was about making the most of non-formal learning in Latvian 
prisons. Among its major outcomes were: 

  Prison staff acquired non-formal learning methods and approaches; 
  Young inmates developed competences contributing to their re-socialisation; 
  Social inclusion was fostered by linking young inmates and youth NGOs. 

The  first  edition  of  the  project  (2012-2013)  was  co-funded  by  the  Youth  in  Action 
programme. The second edition (2014) was financed by the Republic of Latvia. 

www.jaunatne.gov.lv and http://skelotvilnus.blogspot.com/ 

Innovation and entrepreneurship (Denmark) 

Denmark  has  implemented  innovation  and  entrepreneurship  as  a  target  area  in  the 
education  system  from  primary  education  to  PhD,  in  the  spirit  of  the  EU  Youth 
Strategy’s area of action ‘Employment and Entrepreneurship’.  

www.ffe-ye.dk  

D
N
A
N
O
I
T
A
C
U
D
E

G
N
I
N
I
A
R
T

D
N
A
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E

P
I
H
S
R
U
E
N
E
R
P
E
R
T
N
E

Active citizenship, social inclusion and solidarity of all young people 

Fifteen  Member  States  and  Serbia  consider  that  progress  towards  the  second  objective  –  to 
promote the active citizenship, social inclusion and solidarity of all young people – has been 
satisfactory both in their country and at EU level. This is also the case for Belgium/Flemish 
Community  and  Belgium/French  Community.  Progress  towards  this  objective  is  considered 
as  unsatisfactory  by  8  Member  States  (Germany,  Spain,  France,  Croatia,  Poland,  Finland, 
Sweden,  United  Kingdom)  and  by  Belgium/German-speaking  Community.  For  Slovakia, 
progress in their country has not been satisfactory. For the European Youth Forum, there has 
been no satisfactory progress towards this objective either.  

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ad-hoc expert group on linking youth work to social work (Czech Republic) 

The Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports created in 2015 an expert group 
to  explore  closer  cooperation  between  youth  and  social  work  and  facilitate  the 
recognition  of  their  respective  results.  The  group  operates  under  the  ‘Youth 
Chamber’,  a  cross-sectoral  advisory  body  of  the  youth  minister  and  consists  of 
representatives  of  e.g.  youth  and  social  work  networks,  policy-makers  from  the 
Ministry  of  Education,  Youth  and  Sports  and  of  Labour  and  Social  Issues  and 
practitioners.  It  focuses  at  facilitating  social  inclusion  of  young  people  who  are 
difficult to reach.  

In the national context, youth work is covered by the Ministry of Education, Youth 
and Sports while social work is covered by the Ministry of Labour and Social Issues. 
Since  2015,  the  Youth  Department  of  the  Ministry  of  Education,  Youth  and  Sports 
has  experienced  a  new  situation  when  youth  workers  increasingly  address  young 
people’s needs for being provided with social services – while social workers provide 
more  non-formal  education  to  their  clients.  Moreover,  youth  work  urgently  needs 
social workers’ experience for reaching out to unreachable young people.  

The expert group defined both the target groups of youth work and social work and 
facilities which provide youth and social work. Currently it is mapping legislation, 
statistics, training opportunities, validation of competences and resources of financial 
support concerning both. A workshop covered its results and explored new tasks in a 
workshop in the National Youth Conference in 2017. 

Pilot projects supporting disadvantaged young people (Germany) 

The pilot project ‘Workshops for youth education and youth social welfare services 
in Lower Saxony’ involved in 2015 and 2016 19 workshops in vocational schools, in 
qualification  measures,  youth  centres,  foreign  information  fairs  and  Gesamtschulen 
(lower  secondary 
to  professional 
qualifications).  Their  aim  was  to  promote  the  participation  of  disadvantaged  young 
people in European learning mobility experiences. In total 807 young people received 
counselling  and  information.  The  activities  took  mainly  place  in  Hanover  and 
surroundings. 

level  education  offering  courses 

leading 

to  promote  counselling  of 
The  pilot  project  ‘Qualification  of  multipliers 
disadvantaged  young  people  on  European  learning  mobility  opportunities’  ran  in 
2015 and 2016. It focused on the qualification of multipliers in youth work and youth 
welfare  to  become  local  counsellors  for  mobility  programmes.  It  also  included 
counselling of  grassroots  migrants  organisations  on  European  mobility  programmes 
and application procedures. 

http://www.profondo.org/index.php/projekte/aktuelle-projekte/ich-bin-dann-kurz-
weg.html 

22 

N
O
I
S
U
L
C
N
I
L
A
I
C
O
S

N
I
O
I
S
U
L
C
N
I
L
A
I
C
O
S

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
‘Think Human!’ (Greece) 

‘Think  Human!’  involved  24  youth  workers  from  12  countries  (Egypt,  Jordan, 
Turkey,  Greece,  the  former  Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia,  Hungary,  Germany, 
France,  Sweden,  Latvia,  Ukraine  and  Georgia)  to  develop  tools  and  capacity 
addressing the social dimension of the refugee crisis. Participants were introduced to 
a  holistic  approach,  involving  policies,  measures  and  interventions  to  integrate 
refugees and migrants in their communities.  

https://thinkhumanblog.wordpress.com and 
https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/projects/eplus-project-
details/#project/40e0922c-1d99-4a1e-9d38-64a57a6337a2  

Increasing and diversifying European and international mobility (France) 

From  2013  till  2017,  France  pursued  a  Priority  Youth  Plan  adopted  by  a  Cross-
Ministerial Committee for Youth, which. served as a ‘clear and evaluable’ roadmap 
for youth policy and measures that the public authorities must take to improve young 
people’s lives. 

Beyond a set of measures designed to benefit youth, the plan aimed to renew public 
local  authorities, 
action  by  fostering  partnership  work  between  ministries, 
associations,  social  partners  and  young  people.  On  the  latter,  it  emphasised  the 
principle of youth to co-create the policies that concern them. An important feature 
was facilitating access to European and international mobility for young people with 
fewer opportunities. 

N
O
I
S
U
L
C
N
I
L
A
I
C
O
S

D
L
R
O
W
E
H
T
D
N
A
H
T
U
O
Y

Cross-sectoral cooperation 

The  EU  Youth  Strategy  advocated  a  cross-sectoral  approach  where  due  account  is  taken  of 
youth  issues  when  formulating,  implementing  and  evaluating  policies  and  actions  in  other 
policy fields which have a significant impact on young people.  

Based  on  the  analysis  of  the  Youth  Wiki,  Section  1.5  ‘Cross-sectoral  approach  with  other 
Ministries’,  most  Member  States  have  one  or  more  institutional  mechanisms  to  ensure 
mainstreaming,  for  instance  inter-ministerial  meetings  or  working  groups,  interdepartmental 
coordination  bodies  or  cross-sectoral  committees.  These  either  deal  with  youth  policy  in 
general or were set up to monitor specific policy measures (for instance the Youth Guarantee). 
It  seems  nevertheless  that  not  all  cooperation  on  youth  matters  is  formalised;  cross-sectoral 
cooperation also takes place ad hoc.  

According to the European Youth Forum, while not intending to achieve such a success from 
a  cross-sectoral  perspective,  in  reality  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  is  achieving  a  cross-
sectoral  approach  for  youth,  bringing  in  such  sectors  as  youth,  employment,  education,  and 
emergency support mechanisms.  

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Cross-sectoral approach in youth policy-making (Belgium/German-speaking 
Community) 

The EU Youth Strategy paved the way for a cross-sectoral approach. A Decree from 
2011 governing the funding of youth work foresaw the adoption and implementation 
of  a  cross-sectoral  youth  strategy  for  each  legislative  period.  Under  the  decree,  the 
Government engages youth NGOs, the Youth Council and young people in drawing 
up the strategy.  

legislative  period 

the  Government  adopts  and 

For  each 
implements  a 
multidisciplinary Strategy Plan. It documents the environment of young people in the 
German-speaking  Community  and  lays  down  targets  and  tasks  to  improve  the 
situation of young people. [...] The Government involves youth centres and the Youth 
Council of the German-speaking Community as well as young people in drawing up 
the Strategy Plan. This includes the results of the analysis of the current situation and 
evaluation  of  the  previous  Strategy  Plan  to  be  carried  out  once  in  each  legislative 
period by the Government as well as the social space analyses to be drawn up by the 
Open  Youth  Work  agencies.  A  Steering  Group  to  support  the  implementation  is 
composed of representatives of the youth sector, the Government and the Ministry. 

H
C
A
O
R
P
P
A
L
A
R
O
T
C
E
S
-
S
S
O
R
C

www.jugendstrategieplan.be 

Recommendations for the future 

The reports addressed the question: ‘In the future, what would be the best way of youth policy 
to effectively influence other policy fields at European, national, regional/local level?’  

In  general  terms,  there  is  agreement  about  the  benefit  of  stakeholder  cooperation  and  that 
coordination  should  be  improved.  Youth  strategies  and  policies  should  be  comprehensive 
(Germany,  Italy,  Austria,  Sweden).  Whilst  some  Member  States  think  that  ideally,  other 
policy fields should proactively seek cooperation with the youth sector and not the other way 
around  (Czech  Republic),  others  believe  that  strong  coordination  mechanisms  (Germany, 
Austria) or one public authority (France, Serbia) are needed, and that the youth sector should 
strengthen  its  visibility  and  be  more  vocal  on  the  core  areas  and  positive  impact  of  youth 
policy (Belgium, Cyprus, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Romania). 

To  increase  capacity,  coordinators  from  different  sectoral  policies  should  be  trained 
(Slovenia)  and  a  mainstreaming  tool-kit  could  be  developed  to  monitor  how  other  policies 
take  account  of  children’s  and  young  people’s  concerns  –  inspired  by  good  practice 
(Denmark). Luxembourg points out that debate with other policy fields must be concrete and 
clearly  focused  on  what  changes  are  looked  for.  If  cross-sectoral  projects  are  launched,  all 
stakeholders must be included in the discussions from the start. In general, enough time and 
human resources are necessary for dialogue. 

Involving  young  people  is  paramount.  Coordination  mechanisms  should  include  youth 
representatives (Austria), while participation mechanisms should be extended to other policy 
fields  (Spain,  Poland).  The  European  Youth  Forum  sees  the  Structured  Dialogue  as  a  very 
useful tool in the pursuit of a cross-sectoral approach at EU, national, regional and local level. 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
The  Forum’s  proposals  for  a  new  Structured  Dialogue  would  allow  policy-makers  from 
different areas to take the lead depending on the topic of a given cycle. 

More  specifically  at  EU  level,  stronger  links  between  the  EU  Youth  Strategy  and  other  EU 
agendas  are  needed  (Austria,  Slovenia).  Youth  should  be  addressed  in  all  EU  policies 
(Netherlands).  Young  people  should  be  consulted  in  other  EU  structures  and  policy  areas 
dealing with youth as well (Estonia) and be involved in all stages of the EU Youth Strategy 
(Austria).  EU  youth  policy  should  be  youth-friendly,  in  particular  its  essence  should  be 
explained to young people in a youth-friendly language (Latvia). Other proposals include the 
organisation  of  mixed  Council  of  Ministers  meetings  and  cross-sectoral  expert  groups 
(Belgium/French  Community)  and  an  EU  youth  programme  which  could  finance  cross-
sectoral  projects  while  having  a  focus  on  youth  and  youth  work  in  all  other  programmes 
(Austria).  There  is  a  need  for  more  collaborative  practice,  to  gain  more  experience  and 
develop models for closer cooperation with other sectors working with young people. These 
links and the existing practice should be mapped, monitored and evaluated and lesson learnt 
should be shared across Europe (Estonia). 

The European Youth Forum calls on all youth stakeholders to achieve a truly cross-sectoral 
approach. ‘The cross-sectoral approach should be outlined in each work plan created within 
the  framework  for  cooperation;  in  the  annex  of  each  work  plan,  we  propose  to  outline  the 
project, where the funding comes from and the partner that we need to work with. These work 
plans  would  have  been  pre-discussed  and  proposed  to  the  relevant  partners  to  ensure  their 
buy-in at an early stage (…) and supplemented by a “youth check” on all proposals’ (to assess 
their impact on young people)19.  

19  Full proposals: http://www.youthforum.org/assets/2017/09/PARTICIPATORY-CROSS-

SECTORALPOLICY-MAKING-.pdf  

25 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
3.2. Mutual learning, dissemination and take-up of results 

Mutual learning 

Mutual learning is seen as a key element in the cooperation. It allows identifying and learning 
from good practices in different Member States. Mutual learning is carried out through peer 
learning,  conferences  and  seminars,  high-level  fora  or  expert  groups  supported  by  studies, 
analyses and web-based networks, involving different stakeholders.  

Types of activities 

Twenty-four Member States, as well as Serbia and the European Youth Forum, reported that 
they  have  engaged  in  mutual  learning  under  the  renewed  framework  since  2010.  Fifteen 
Member States have hosted a mutual learning activity: Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, 
Estonia,  France,  Cyprus,  Latvia,  Lithuania,  Luxembourg,  Malta,  Netherlands,  Austria, 
Poland, Finland and Sweden20.  

Mutual learning activities mentioned by the Member States 

Expert groups set up under the European Union Work Plans for Youth21 
Peer-learning activities, such as those under the European Union Work Plans for Youth22 
Bilateral and multilateral cooperation projects23  

Transnational cooperation activities (TCA), which enable Erasmus+ National Agencies to 
collaborate and share best practice across Europe 

Strategic partnerships under Erasmus+ 

Policy debate on issues that matter to young people at the Education, Youth, Culture and 
Sports Council meeting in November 201724 

Bilateral cooperation on youth affairs, such as between Estonia and Belgium/Flemish 
Community and with Finland 

Networks, such as the European Youth Information and Counselling Agency (ERYICA)  

International conferences, seminars and high-level learning exchanges 

Working groups or peer-learning activities taking place within the strategic framework for 
European cooperation in education and training (‘ET 2020’) 

International cooperation agreements in the education sector 

Seminars organised in the framework of the cooperation between the Visegrad Group and 

20  Only Romania reported not being involved due to lack of internal human resources. 
21  See Annex D. 
22  See Annex E. 
23  See examples in Table 5 in Staff Working Document: Results of the open method of coordination in the youth 

field with a special focus on the second cycle (2013-2015), SWD(2015) 168 of 15.9.2015. 

24  Ministers discussed young people's concerns in Europe while following live tweets from young people via 
Twitter with #youthministers (https://video.consilium.europa.eu/en/webcast/3a9a25be-777c-42d3-8761-
42dc27b1a4db).  

26 

 
 
                                                 
Eastern Partnership Countries in the youth field, such as those by Czech Republic and 
Poland 

European Youth Work Conventions organised by Belgium 

Partnership between the European Union and the Council of Europe in the youth field, 
including the European Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy (EKCYP) 

Motivation for mutual learning 

Based on the reports, the reasons for engaging in mutual learning are manifold and Member 
States  put  forward  different  aspects.  Mutual  learning  is  seen  as  useful  to  learn  about  good 
practices  or  difficulties  encountered  elsewhere.  It  provides  valuable  input  for  developing 
national,  regional  and  local  youth  policies  and  can  help  check  –  or  reinforce  –  one’s  own 
policy in a given field. Another motivation is the interest in assessing the international ‘state 
of the art’ knowledge in a given field. Further incitements are working together, networking 
and seeking synergies with other Member States, or individual benefits for participants. 

The European Youth Forum valued invitations to participate in expert groups, which they saw 
as  fora  to  exchange  and  share  good  practices  with  decision-makers  and  other  stakeholders; 
and a space to network with Member State experts. 

To  engage  in  future,  Member  States  note  that  they  need  to  consider  several  issues  before 
engaging in mutual learning. First, the topic and objectives of a mutual learning activity must 
be  clearly  defined.  If  the  topic  is  not  reflecting  national  policies  and  priorities,  engaging  in 
such an exchange is not relevant. The link to youth work at local level should be stronger.  

Another  prerequisite  is  related  to  resources.  There  should  be  staff  available;  the  number  of 
meetings should be limited and virtual exchanges favoured; individual learning experiences of 
participants should be transferred to the respective organisations and systems, for instance by 
enhancing  national  reflection  processes;  the  participation  of  Member  States  should  be  kept 
voluntary.  As  regards  funding,  there  is  need  for  simple  and  flexible  access  to  funds  and 
sufficient  resources;  there  should  be  a  stronger  link  between  EU  youth  policy  and  the  EU 
funding in the youth field – for instance, the activities organised by the Commission and the 
Presidencies  and  the  transnational  cooperation  activities  (TCA)  and  the  SALTO-YOUTH 
resource centres should work in synergy. 

The  outcomes  of  mutual  learning  should  be  relevant  to  youth  policy  and  the  youth  sector. 
They should not only be made visible at European, national, regional, local and cross-sectoral 
level, but also taken on board by EU institutions and bodies. The topics should reflect the EU 
youth policy, which in turn should be aligned to national policies. 

Thematic expert groups 

Under the framework for cooperation and the EU Work Plans for Youth, six thematic expert 
groups were set up25 with voluntary participation of Member States. For each group, around 
20 Member States joined. Asked about the relevance and usefulness of these, most Member 
States consider them relevant or highly relevant, as illustrated by the following examples. 

25  See Annex D. 

27 

 
 
 
                                                 
a)  The  expert  group  report  ‘The  contribution  of  youth  work  to  address  the  challenges 
young  people  are  facing,  in  particular  the  transition  from  education  to  employment’ 
was presented and discussed for the Austrian context at a national stakeholder meeting, 
which  the  Austrian  National  Agency  and  the  Austrian  National  Youth  Council 
organised  in  the  framework  of  the  2016  National  Year  of  Youth  Work  (Jahr  der 
Jugendarbeit).  

b)  The  expert  group’s  work  on  ‘The  contribution  of  youth  work  to  preventing 
marginalisation and violent radicalisation’ helped build a bilateral partnership between 
Belgium and France. It was taken into consideration when planning activities within a 
common declaration signed by the three Belgian and the French Youth Ministers on 30 
May 2016. 

c)  The  handbook  ‘Improving  youth  work:  your  guide  to  quality  development’  is 
highlighted  by  the  Czech  Republic  as  a  good  example  of  using  the  full  potential  of 
expert group results26 and the guide seen as a valuable source of inspiration.  

In  case  where  expert  group  outcomes  were  not  considered  relevant  or  not  used,  reasons  are 
not always given. Where this is the case, Member States highlight different aspects, such as 
the lack of relevance at national level, insufficient alignment to the national reality, or the fact 
that  the results were  too general and  – as  the highest  common factor of  all  Member States’ 
challenges – too abstract. 

The  European  Youth  Forum  considers  –  in  line  with  their  role  as  NGO  –  facilitated  the 
outcomes rather than used them. The Forum shared knowledge, expertise and studies on the 
relevant topics in expert groups which were included in the outcomes of the groups. 

Recommendations for future expert groups 

Regarding efficiency of expert groups, the evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy27 noted that 
mandates and objectives were insufficiently clear from the onset, participants were not always 
the most relevant or representative, the degree of commitment varied and there were language 
barriers. Member States acknowledge that by end 2017 improvements have been made (such 
as clearer mandates and time frames, profile of experts, better alignment with the EU Work 
Plan  priorities,  focus  on  practical  tools).  To  get  more  out  of  future  expert  groups  national 
reports made the following proposals. 

Membership 

Criteria to select the experts should be specific; yet a mix of researchers, policy-makers and 
practitioners has proved valuable. The nominated experts’ working experience and their link 
to  the  topic  should  be  shared  with  the  whole  group,  so  that  potential  contributions  of 

26   The handbook is a direct result of the expert group on ‘Youth work quality systems in EU Member States and 

the role of common indicators or frameworks’. 

27   External evaluation: Evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy and the Council Recommendation on the mobility 
of  young  volunteers  across  the  EU,  Final  Report,  https://ec.europa.eu/youth/news/20160531-eu-youth-
strategy-evaluation_en;  Staff  Working  Document  on  the  evaluation  of  the  EU  youth  strategy,  SWD(2017) 
281, 25.7.2017.  

28 

 
 
                                                 
individuals  can  be  identified  (drafting,  resource  person).  Experts  should  be  motivated  to 
devote their time and expertise to the topic and take part in meetings.  

In  addition  to  experts  nominated  by  the  Member  States 28 ,  other  experts  with  specific 
knowledge  should  be  included.  It  is  important  to  involve  the  local  level  and  stakeholders. 
Young  people  should  be  involved,  either  as  experts  or  as  a  ‘youth  panel’  or  through  the 
national  youth  councils.  A  representative  of  the  European  Youth  Forum  should  be  a 
permanent guest of the group.  

Mandate 

The topic should be defined more concretely from the onset and linked to the EU youth policy 
agenda. In addition to the Council Working Party on Youth, the necessity, goals and expected 
results  of  expert  groups  should  be  raised  at  Directors-General  for  Youth  meetings.  The 
mandate  of  a  specific  expert  group  should  be  finalised  jointly  by  the  Commission  and  the 
Member States interested in joining the group. Duplication of work between the EU level and 
the  partnership  between  the  EU  and  the  Council  of  Europe  in  the  youth  field  should  be 
avoided.  There  should  be  more  cross-sectoral  expert  groups  to  foster  a  global  approach  of 
youth policies. 

Expert groups’ assignments should be clear-cut and realistic and the groups should know the 
target group for which they produce their outcomes. Expert group mandates should primarily 
focus on the formulation of technical recommendations and good practice examples related to 
youth work and youth policy.  

Working procedures 

There will always be some time needed to find common ground, which could be done with 
help  of  external  facilitators  and  expectations  from  the  chairperson(s)  should  be  spelled  out. 
The  chairperson(s)  should  have  a  good  knowledge  of  the  composition  and  potential  of  the 
expert  group,  and  could  be  active  during  the  whole  mandate  and  between  meetings.  Expert 
groups should draw more on the Erasmus+ and other relevant projects. If possible, meetings 
should be organised at different locations to allow field visits. 

At national level preparatory meetings should be held to share outcomes of the ongoing work 
and prepare meetings. Professional drafting and editing assistance should be provided. Better 
financial  support  would  lead  to  the  participation  of  all  Member  States.  Meetings  should  be 
interpreted  in  the  working  languages  of  the  European  Commission  (English,  French  and 
German). 

Reporting and information 

There  should  be  a  clear  idea  of  the  outlook  of  the  final  product  from  the  start  (toolkit, 
recommendations, compendium, report, etc.). 

28  The  current  principles  relating  to  the  membership  and  functioning  of  expert  groups  established  in  the 
framework  of  the  EU  Work  Plan  for  Youth  stipulate  that  other  participants  can  be  invited  under  certain 
conditions. Commission expert groups are subject to the horizontal rules established by Commission decision 
C(2016)3301. 

29 

 
 
                                                 
The Council Working Party on Youth should be regularly informed and outputs should feed 
Council discussions. 

There should also be a clear approach to sharing knowledge and insights (including in various 
languages  and  with  the  support  of  communication  experts).  Where  relevant,  the  outcomes 
need to be translated to the individual needs of youth organisations and practitioners; national 
support for dissemination is needed to reach all stakeholders. Dissemination activities should 
be supported with some funding and experts could contribute on communication, for instance 
by  participating  in  events.  It  would  be  useful  to  organise  seminars  on  the  results,  possibly 
with the Commission Representations. Dissemination should include the candidate countries.  

Bilateral partnership on preventing radicalisation (Belgium/French 
Community) 

A  bilateral  partnership  with  France  on  preventing  radicalisation  resulted  in  three 
seminars  in  Paris,  Mechelen  and  Brussels  and  allowed  the  three  Communities  of 
Belgium and French colleagues to improve understanding of the problems related to 
disseminate educational tools and foster partnerships between organisations. 

http://www.wbi.be/fr/news/news-item/france-trois-communautes-belgique-unies-
contre-radicalisation-jeunes#.WqKC9aIo1Ew  

G
N
I
N
R
A
E
L
L
A
U
T
U
M

Dissemination and take-up of results 

The  dissemination  of  results  is  an  implementation  instrument  of  the  framework  for 
cooperation  aiming  for  broad  dissemination  of  outcomes  among  stakeholders  to  enhance 
visibility and impact of cooperation at local, regional, national and European level. 

Dissemination 

The  evaluation  of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy29 found  that  in  some  countries  the  outcomes  of 
expert groups, for instance, were insufficiently disseminated notably at local level, but rather 
‘kept within the walls of ministries’. Croatia mentions the lack of dissemination towards local 
and regional self-governments. Slovenia regrets that publicity about youth policies, European 
or national, is still relatively modest and limited to the youth sector and the media targeted at 
young people, youth organisations and youth stakeholders. Nevertheless, the national reports 
show  that  a  wide  range  of  stakeholders  were  informed  about  the  results  of  the  renewed 
framework for European cooperation in the youth field (2010-2018). 

Relevant stakeholders informed about the results of the framework for cooperation 

Youth 
stakeholders 

All relevant colleagues in the youth ministry and personal offices of the 
ministers 

National working groups set up for the implementation of the strategy, such 
as the National Working Group for the renewed framework for European 

29  See Section 2. 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Relevant stakeholders informed about the results of the framework for cooperation 

cooperation in the youth field in Austria and the Federal Advisory Board on 
the Implementation of the EU Youth Strategy in Germany 

Government’s advisory bodies, such as the Advisory Board for Youth of 
the Government of the Republic of Croatia, the Youth Council of Serbia or 
the Committee for EU Affairs’ sub-committee on youth and sports affairs 
in Finland 

Policy-makers at local, regional, national and international level, for 
instance municipalities in the Netherlands and in Finland, department-level 
services in France and the partnership between the European Union and the 
Council of Europe in the youth field 

National youth and/or children councils councils and their member 
organisations, as well as youth councils at regional or local level 

Youth organisations; Youth centres; Youth services and youth information 
centres 

Youth delegates; Youth parliaments; Youth stakeholders involved in local 
projects 

Paid and volunteer youth workers and their national networks; other 
practitioners (non-formal education, early childhood education and care, 
school social workers, people working with young refugees and migrants, 
etc.) 

The voluntary, community and social enterprise sector 

Erasmus+ National Agencies 

Beneficiaries of the Erasmus+ programme 

Youth research and knowledge institutes 

Training institutes 

National Working Groups for the Structured Dialogue 

Young people 

Stakeholders 
from other 
sectors 

European institutions (European Parliament, Council of the European 
Union, European Commission) and bodies (Committee of the Regions, 
European Economic and Social Committee) 

The Permanent Representation to the EU 

Relevant ministries, mainly in the field of employment, education, social 
affairs, health, culture, sports, environment 

Institutional mechanisms aimed at cross-sectoral youth policy, such as the 
Cross-sectoral Youth Chamber in the Czech Republic or the 
Interdepartmental State Youth Policy Group in Slovakia 

Relevant actors at regional level, for instance teachers, coordinators of 
apprenticeships, job insertion projects, career guidance organisations, and 

31 

 
 
Relevant stakeholders informed about the results of the framework for cooperation 

services and organisations in the social field 

Private sector enterprises; actors from the sports sector; national and local 
media 

Civil society 

The  non-exhaustive  list  below  illustrates  the  variety  of  dissemination  tools,  means  and 
methods  by  the  Member  States  and  the  European  Youth  Forum  to  reach  out  to  youth 
stakeholders not involved in the framework or relevant stakeholders from other sectors. 

Dissemination of information via existing institutional mechanisms or multiplier 
networks 

Institutional mechanisms aimed at cross-sectoral youth policy 

Government’s advisory bodies 

National Working Groups for the Structured Dialogue 

International youth organisations 

Youth council meetings 

Structured meetings, such as the debriefing after each EU Council meeting of ministers for 
youth with youth stakeholders and all relevant colleagues in the ministry 
(Belgium/German-speaking Community) or the ‘Roadmap for youth associations’ meetings 
regularly held by the Secretaries of State for Youth and Sport and the Portuguese Institute 
for Youth and Sport (IPDJ) 

Regular meetings between ministries, the Permanent Representation to the EU, National 
Agencies and youth councils of the three Communities of Belgium 

National action plans for youth, like in Luxembourg 

Cooperation of German-speaking National Agencies of all educational fields 

Funding mechanisms of Erasmus+ Youth in Action 

National information network for young people, for instance in Portugal 

National activities related to the Structured Dialogue: Structured Dialogue Ambassadors in 
Spain, national conferences on the Structured Dialogue in Lithuania 

Eurodesk 

Communication channels 

Websites; newsletters; social media posts; specific internet portals, such as the section for 
youth work professionals on the French portal http://decouvrirlemonde.jeunes.gouv.fr/, the 
youth portal http://mlad.si/ created by the Slovenian Office for Youth, the Latvian portal 
www.jaunatneslietas.lv, or the portal for socio-educational instructors in Germany, 
www.jugendhilfeportal.de; collaborative platforms, such as the internal platform for contact 

32 

 
 
 
 
persons on radicalisation in France; e-mail; videos; articles in media and magazines; 
exhibitions; publications and reports, such as the European Youth Forum’s Shadow Report 
on Youth Policy; consultations; competitions, for instance ‘EDUinspiracje’, organised in 
Poland to disseminate the results of educational projects; face-to-face meetings with 
relevant stakeholders (information, presentations, discussions and debates, round tables, 
working groups, role plays and simulations). 

Events (examples) 

National Youth Conferences organised in the Czech Republic every 3 years (latest one: 
March 2017) or in Germany within the national youth strategy 

German Child and Youth Welfare Congress (DJHT), which included an expert programme 
with presentations, workshops and debates 

Symposia organised by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Families and Youth under the 
heading ‘Youth.Politics.Europe.Austria’ between May 2011 and November 2012 

Annual conference for national and municipal stakeholders organised by the Swedish 
Agency for Youth and Civil Society (the 2017 conference included a workshop on the 
Handbook on improving youth work, with the Swedish member of the expert group) 

Youth Development Academy (ADJ) held in Portugal in 2015 and 2017, a week for the 
training and qualification of the young, youth organisations and public bodies working with 
and for youth 

Annual youth organisations’ day on 30 April in Portugal 

Events taking place during the European Youth Weeks 

International training courses 

Take-up of results 

For  a  majority  of  Member  States,  the  framework  for  cooperation  has  reached,  inspired  and 
empowered national or local policy-makers in the youth field30 . There is clear evidence that 
the  EU  Youth  Strategy  was  a  source  of  inspiration  for  national  youth  strategies  or  plans 
(Czech  Republic,  France,  Malta,  Austria,  Portugal,  Slovakia,  and  Serbia).  A  more  cross-
sectoral  approach  towards  young  people  is  mentioned  as  an  added  value  of  the  European 
cooperation (Czech Republic, France, Latvia, Slovenia, United Kingdom). The validation of 
non-formal  and  informal  learning,  the  development  of  youth  work  and  consultations  and 
Structured Dialogue with young people and youth organisations, are also highlighted several 
times. However, as Finland points out, the influence is not going in one direction only, or is 
difficult to assess (Netherlands, Poland). EU youth policy is often complementary to national 
discussions  and  national  objectives  and  results  have  successfully  contributed  to  European 
discussions  and  objectives.  Overall,  the  exchange  and  mutual  learning  with  European 
counterparts seems to be appreciated. 

30  See Annex B. 

33 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
For the European Youth Forum, ‘the Structured Dialogue recommendations have been one of 
the  most  tangible  and  concrete  outcomes  of  this  cooperation  framework.  While  many 
countries  are  already  working  on  elements  addressed  under  the  eight  fields  of  action,  the 
Structured  Dialogue  is  identified  as  uniquely  European  and  solely  as  part  of  the  European 
cooperation  framework.  While  the  outcomes  and  results  of  the  Structured  Dialogue  have 
reached policy-makers, the follow-up has been low at national and local levels. The lack of 
awareness of the Structured Dialogue at local level is an important reason for this.’ 

EU Youth Strategy on Tour (Austria) 

Following the launch of the EU Youth Strategy, the Federal Ministry of Families and 
Youth, promoted a tour of the federal states during 2011 and 2012 under the heading 
‘Youth.Politics.Europe.Austria’. It included symposia in 5 Länder. Together with the 
respective Youth Department, specific fields of action of the EU Youth Strategy were 
highlighted  and  examined  with  the  respective  players  from  that  field.  Both  the 
contents of the EU Youth Strategy and the cross-sectional approach to youth policy 
were  promoted.  Apart  from  decision-makers,  practitioners  and  multipliers  were 
invited to join. 

  Symposium  ‘Youth  and  labour  market’,  2011,  Innsbruck  -  Field  of  action 

‘Education and training as well as ‘Employment and entrepreneurship’; 

  Symposium ‘where I am in demand, I stay! Ensuring youth participation', 2011, 

Graz - Field of action ‘Participation’; 

  Symposium ‘Well-being in Vorarlberg', 2012, Bregenz  - Field of action ‘Health 

and well-being’; 

  Symposium  ‘andersGLEICH’  (differentSAME),  2012,  Linz  -  Field  of  action 

‘Social inclusion’; 

  Symposium  ‘The  young  world  and  Salzburg  –  Young  Salzburg  and  the  world', 

2012, Salzburg - Field of action ‘Youth and the world’. 

The events aimed to bring the European topics to the national and local levels and to 
join  various  players  around  a  chosen  topic  to  promote  youth  policy  as  a  cross-
sectional  matter.  Accordingly,  apart  from  youth  workers,  representatives  of  the 
Public  Employment  Service,  the  Chamber  of  Commerce,  the  Chamber  of  Labour, 
entrepreneurs,  school  principals,  school  inspectors,  municipal  youth  officers, 
Regional Management teams as well as representatives of the district councils and the 
Chamber of Agriculture were present. 

YouTubers informing about youth policy (Lithuania) 

In  Lithuania  an  agreement  has  been  signed  with  the  most  popular  and  best  known 
YouTubers of the country, to spread information about the different actors in youth 
policy. The information provided is convenient, interesting and attractive for youth. It 
could  also  be  used  as  publicity  for  young  people.  By  the  contract,  the  YouTubers 
must  create  at  least  6  movies  in  their  YouTube  channel,  presenting  youth  policy  in 
Lithuania  in  an  attractive  way.  The  movies  on  YouTube  had  more  than  120  000 
views. 

N
O
I
T
A
N
I
M
E
S
S
I
D

N
O
I
T
A
N
I
M
E
S
S
I
D

34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
3.3. Supporting and developing youth work 

Under  the  framework  for  cooperation,  supporting  and  developing  youth  work  should  be 
regarded as cross-sectoral issues. The ways in which youth work can contribute to achieving 
the  overall  objectives  –  as  well  as  be  supported  and  recognised  as  an  added  value  for  its 
economic and social contribution – should be further examined and discussed. 

Lessons drawn from the youth work issues addressed 

For the 2018 EU Youth Report, Member States were asked about the lessons drawn from the 
youth work issues examined and discussed under the framework for cooperation.  

Youth work in general 

The  discussions  on  youth  work  at  EU  level  revealed  that  different  Member  States  tend  to 
share  the  same  societal  challenges  and  that  results  of  European  cooperation  can  provide 
valuable stimuli (Germany). In this country, the search for common ground at European level 
has triggered discussions on the concept of youth work (‘Jugendhilfe’) at national level. The 
diversity of youth work in Europe makes the cooperation interesting for Malta, although it can 
hinder the creation of a common understanding and position on youth work.  

A number of Member States refer to the local responsibility for youth work (Sweden, United 
Kingdom) and to the financial needs at local level (Italy, Poland). Denmark feels that greater 
synergy,  coordination  and  dissemination  of  results  between  programmes  and  projects  on 
national,  regional  and  local  level  are  needed.  Austria  calls  on  policy-makers  to  include  the 
know-how of youth work practitioners, whilst Slovenia considers that the youth work sector 
must adapt to the growing trend towards measuring impact in education. 

Appropriate training for youth workers and leaders 

Some countries point to a looming or actual shortage or high dropout rate of youth workers 
(Belgium/German-speaking Community, Luxembourg) and stress the need for quality training 
(Austria). The working conditions of youth workers should also be improved (Luxembourg). 

In  Belgium,  the  European  cooperation  has  had  a  positive  impact.  For  instance,  training  of 
youth  workers  is  now  more  competence-based  in  the  Flemish  Community.  The  German-
speaking  Community  provides  another  example:  based  on  the  Government’s  Regional 
Development Concept ‘Ostbelgien Leben 2025’ which tackles the shortage of qualified youth 
workers, a professional training will be developed. It will meet the standards of the National 
Qualifications  Framework  and  thus  ensure  recognition  of  the  certificate  outside  the  youth 
sector. As a starting point, a specific competence profile of youth workers will be drawn up 
based on the Austrian competence framework (http://www.kompetenzrahmen.at/). 

Austria deplores that a clear definition of youth work as a profession is still lacking. In Latvia, 
regulations on training of youth work specialists specify their training system, including the 
necessary skills, competences and knowledge. Portugal would like to see a common identity 
of the youth work profession in Europe with the possibility of transferring equivalent training 
(as in the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System ECTS). Youth work courses at 
university are desirable as well. Spain also regrets that there is no EU-wide common view on 
youth  work,  which  makes  its  professional  development  more  difficult.  Youth  workers, 

35 

 
 
especially  voluntary  ones,  should  benefit  from  lifelong  learning  to  improve  their  skills 
(Spain).  Estonia  identifies  an  emerging  need  for  cross-sectoral  education  and  training  for 
youth professionals in general. 

Within  Erasmus+  Youth,  the  development  of  youth  workers’  competences  is  on  track.  For 
example,  a  seminar  in  201631 brought  together  experienced  training  actors  to  reflect  on  the 
‘ETS’ competence model for youth workers to work internationally. 

Recognition of skills 

One of the strongest demands of youth workers and leaders is the recognition of their work, 
not  only  at  European  level,  but  also  at  national  level  (Spain).  In  Latvia,  regulations  on  the 
recognition of non-formal education in youth work are being elaborated to ensure recognition, 
quality and financial support. Since there is no formal status and legal framework for youth 
workers  in  Croatia,  the  recognition  of  skills  acquired  in  Erasmus+  international  mobility  is 
predominantly done via Youthpass. Austria also calls for governmental recognition of youth 
workers’  skills.  Validation  of  non-formal  and  informal  learning  and  the  European 
Qualifications  Framework  (EQF)  can  be  valuable  tools  for this.  To  do so,  it  is  necessary to 
raise  the  awareness  and  make  innovative  changes,  on  national  and  regional  level,  of  youth 
work and the parts of the education sector which are linked to youth work. 

Support for the mobility of youth workers and leaders 

Erasmus+  Youth  has  been  fundamental  to  support  youth  workers  and  leaders  (Portugal). 
According to Austria, funding for international mobility of youth workers is one of the most 
popular strands of this part of the programme; more funds could be used up easily. Based on 
the  RAY32 research  done  in  the  programme,  the  competence development  of  youth  workers 
through  their  participation  in  international  projects  is  verified.  It is  important  to  support  the 
mobility  of  youth  workers  and  leaders  in  order  to  contribute  to  the  quality  development  of 
youth work (Finland). The European Youth Forum also calls  for an increased investment in 
the mobility of youth workers in the future programme. 

Promotion of innovative services and approaches for youth work 

The  need  to  incorporate  and  to  use  more  effectively  digital  media  and  technology  in  youth 
work  and  to  promote  new  techniques,  services  and  approaches  for  youth  work  are  also 
amongst  the  lessons  drawn  from  the  youth  work  issues  examined  and  discussed  under  the 
framework for cooperation (Estonia, Spain, Cyprus, Netherlands). 

31  http://trainings.salto-youth.net/5407 
32  RAY – research-based analysis and monitoring of Erasmus+ Youth programme, 

http://www.researchyouth.eu/. 

36 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
What worked well under the current framework 

The assessment of national reports shows that the framework for cooperation has had many 
beneficial effects when it comes to supporting and developing youth work. The exchange of 
good practices through all kinds of mutual learning activities is one of them.  

Erasmus+  and  other  EU  programmes  and  funds  are  considered  as  crucial  support  for  youth 
work, not only at international level, but also at national and even local level. In this context, 
international  mobility  of  youth  workers,  transnational  cooperation  activities  (TCA),  the 
SALTO-YOUTH resource centres and the Eurodesk network are mentioned.  

With  regard  to  youth  workers,  their  competence  development  through  their  participation  in 
international projects and training  courses  has  been  of undeniable value. The same  goes  for 
other useful tools developed and promoted by the SALTO-YOUTH resource centres and the 
partnership between the European Union and the Council of Europe in the youth field. 

The majority of Member States also acclaim the increased recognition of the value of youth 
work and its contribution to society. Youth work now has a prominent place on the political 
agenda at European level, also thanks to the European Youth Work Conventions organised by 
Belgium in 2010 and 2015. 

The  Youth  Wiki  contains  a  wealth of  information  on  youth  work  at  national  level scattered 
across  different  sections 33 .  A  background  document  has  been  prepared  to  highlight  this 
information34. 

Recommendations for the future 

In  their  reports  Member  States  Serbia  and  the  European  Youth  Forum,  made  concrete 
proposals for the future framework for cooperation. These recommendations, however, do not 
all  go  in  the  same  direction.  For  example,  there  is  a  call  for  EU-level  standards  or 
requirements on the one hand, and need for flexibility on the other hand – in order to reflect 
different national realities and traditions. 

Youth work in general 

Not  only  should  the  support  and  development  of  youth  work  continue  in  future  EU  youth 
strategies and programmes (Belgium/German-speaking Community, Malta, Finland), but as a 
pillar of youth policy (Romania) a more ambitious plan or strategy on youth work is needed. 
Youth work should not only  be regarded as a horizontal issue but also as  an individual and 
important field of action (Estonia, Germany, Malta, Slovenia). There should be a distinction 
between youth policy and youth work, which should be equally covered (Czech Republic).  

It is important to set clear and realistic goals for European cooperation (Finland). The actions 
and  plans  for  youth  work  should  be  more  concrete  and  measurable  (Cyprus).  Cooperation 

33  1.7 Funding youth policy; 4.7 Youth work to foster social inclusion; 5.6 Supporting youth organisations; 5.7 
‘Learning to participate’ through formal, non-formal and informal learning; 6.4 Validation of non-formal and 
informal learning; 6.9 Awareness-raising about non-formal and informal learning and quality youth work; 9.6 
Intercontinental youth work and development cooperation. 
34  https://ec.europa.eu/youth/policy/implementation/report_en  

37 

 
 
                                                 
with  regional  government  authorities  and  other  youth  sector  actors  should  be  intensified.  In 
order  to  do so,  there should  be more strategic use  of funding instruments and a clearer link 
between policy decisions and programmes (Finland). Estonia calls for action plans to involve 
youth  through  youth  work  under  the  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds.  Horizon 
2020 should be effectively used for research in the youth (work) field (Estonia). Knowledge 
on  certain  topics,  including  on  the  history  of  youth  work  in  Europe,  should  be  deepened 
(Belgium/Flemish Community). A better coordination of activities between the EU level and 
the partnership between the European Union and the Council of Europe in the youth field is 
desirable (France). 

Quality youth work 

Austria  suggests  that  key  competences  for  youth  workers  should  be  part  of  the  EU  Youth 
Strategy.  Portugal  suggests  to  establish  ‘professional  and  volunteer  profile  requirements  for 
the exercise of activity in youth projects between European, national and local levels’. Quality 
standards for youth work defined at EU level to be adapted to national realities (Croatia). 

Peer-learning  activities and  peer  reviews  will  help  developing  practices  and  policies  around 
youth work (Czech Republic, Estonia). Under the framework for cooperation concrete policy 
experimentation  projects35 should  be  carried  out,  for  instance  on  the  professionalisation  of 
youth workers, such as knowledge transfer from France to other countries interested in their 
legal framework regarding youth workers as salaried employees.  

Platforms  for  dialogue,  sustainable  networks  and  partnerships  could  foster  more  exchange 
among  youth  work  actors  across  Europe  (Estonia).  Youth  workers  and  leaders  should  have 
access to clear information channels activities (Spain).  

Recognition of youth work 

Member  States  still  insist  on  raising  awareness  of  the  value  of  youth  work  to  gain  more 
recognition  (Estonia,  Slovakia).  This  includes  devoting  more  time  for  dissemination  and 
implementation  (Belgium/French  Community)  and  for  supporting  a  2020  European  Youth 
Work  Convention  (European  Youth  Forum).  Cross-sectoral  cooperation  should  be 
strengthened (Germany, Lithuania, Austria, Slovakia) in particular  between formal and non-
formal education (Italy, Portugal). 

An  institutional  platform  (e.g.  a  working  group)  would  underpin  discussions  on  national 
implementation of the EQF and validation of non-formal and informal learning within youth 
work;  both  governmental  and  non-governmental  representatives  could  take  part  (Austria). 
There  should  be  closer  cooperation  between  authorities  and  youth  workers  (Romania). 
Sweden  suggests  developing  strategies  and  measures  for  National  Agencies  of  Erasmus+ 
Youth in Action to support youth work.  

35  European policy experimentations under Erasmus+ Key Action 3 (Support for policy reform) - Initiatives for 
policy  aims  to  support  transnational  cooperation  with  a  view  to  implement  innovative  policies  under  the 
leadership of high-level public authorities. 

38 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Digital youth work 

The role of youth work in a changing world should be at the centre of EU youth cooperation 
(Germany). Its potential to offer new services tailored to the needs of young people should be 
further examined (Serbia). 

Youth work would benefit from support step up its capacity to respond to challenges and reap 
opportunities  stemming  from  new  technologies  and  digital  media  (Estonia).  This  could 
include  digital  youth  work  reaching  out  to  youngsters  via  Internet  (Luxembourg).  More 
attention is needed for the development of online tools and e-learning in youth work (Poland). 

The ‘Easy Street’ Project (Ireland) 

‘Easy  Street’  engages  and  works  with  gang  members  to  support  positive  change 
within  its  members  and  to  facilitate  their  reintegration  into  the  community.  A 
dedicated  outreach  team  of  youth  workers  builds  relationships  with  young  people 
who  are  in  gangs  and  encourages  young  people  to  look  critically  at  their  actions, 
reflect  on  the  consequences  and  provides  them  with  alternative  options  for  their 
behaviour. 

Easy  Street  engages  the  gang  members,  identifies  and  harnesses  the  positive 
attributes within the gang and, using a youth work approach, provides the opportunity 
for  those  positive  attributes  to  be  experienced  by  the  gang  members  and  seen  by 
others in the community in a more positive light. 

Through this process  young people start to  see and  believe that they have strengths 
and  are  not  just  a  nuisance  to  society  and  therefore  should  behave  that  way.  Easy 
Street  provides  programmes  and  interventions  that  facilitate  new  experiences,  in 
which  needs  are  met  in  new  ways  that  result  in  long  term  better  outcomes  for  the 
gang members. 

Easy  Street  is  also  based  on  and  supported  by  community-based  role  models  who 
have  turned  their  lives  around  by  choosing  healthy,  positive,  alternative  lifestyles. 
Some  young  people,  supported  by  Easy  Street,  have  completely  changed  their 
lifestyles from what they eat, to when they sleep, to what they put into their body in 
terms of substances, to how they behave in their community, to how they are seen in 
their  family  and  in  turn  how  they  impact  on  their  younger and  in  some  cases  older 
sibling. 

https://publications.europa.eu/s/fnrL 

Youth Work Profession Act (Malta) 

The  Youth  Work  Profession  Act  of  2015  gives  formal  professional  recognition  and 
status to youth workers. It regulates the profession and determines the qualifications 
and conditions for recognition.  

http://www.justiceservices.gov.mt/DownloadDocument.aspx?app=lom&itemid=1219
8&l=1  

K
R
O
W
H
T
U
O
Y

K
R
O
W
H
T
U
O
Y

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Development of youth work (Croatia) 

The  Ministry  of  Demography,  Family,  Youth  and  Social  Policy  recognises  the 
importance of  youth  work  development,  as  well as  a  need  for  building  the  skills of 
youth workers and their professional development.  

In accordance with the National Youth Programme for the period from 2014 to 2017, 
in order to gain an insight into the organisation and implementation of youth work in 
Croatia,  the  Ministry  of  Demography,  Family,  Youth  and  Social  Policy  has 
established a Working Group to analyse possibilities of professionalising youth work. 

Day of youth work (Netherlands) 

The  National  Day  of  youth  work  took  place  on  25  April  2017  (Dag  van  het 
Jongerenwerk).  The  event  was  a  work  and  exchange  meeting  of,  by  and  for  250 
youth  workers  from  all  over  the  Netherlands.  Central  theme  of  the  day  was 
‘Connecting’:  the  youth  worker  connecting  young  people  in  the  neighbourhood; 
connecting network partners such as the neighbourhood’s police officer, social team, 
school and work; connecting youth workers with each other 

https://www.aanmelden.nl/92866 

K
R
O
W
H
T
U
O
Y

K
R
O
W
H
T
U
O
Y

3.4. Cross-border mobility of young volunteers 

The  framework  for  youth  cooperation  includes  the  promotion  of  learning  mobility  of  all 
young people and of cross-border mobility of young volunteers in and outside of Europe. The 
Member States were  asked what currently  works well and what they would recommend for 
the future. 

Achievements under the current framework for cooperation 

The  cross-border  youth  mobility  programmes,  including  youth  exchanges  and  cross-border 
volunteering,  are  unanimously  seen  as  a  great  success  under  Erasmus+36 with  an  extremely 
high interest among young people and an important unmet demand in some countries. 

National reports highlight a series of success factors, such as: 

  High quality standards under the European Voluntary Service (EVS) (Lithuania, Austria); 
  Support tools under the EVS (Latvia, Lithuania); 
  Good  knowledge  management  and  the  dissemination  of  good  practices  by  National 

Agencies (Poland, Slovakia); 

  Variety  of  duration  and  placements,  which  allowed  engagement  of  a  diverse  group  of 

young people (Lithuania, Malta, Sweden); 

36  For programmes available to young people who wish to participate in volunteering in a foreign country see 

Youth Wiki, Section 2.6 ‘Cross-border mobility programmes’, https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-
policies/en/content/youthwiki/2-voluntary-activities-overview. 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
  A  single  brand  name  (Denmark)  and  good  promotion  by  Eurodesk  and  other  youth 
networks and organisations at regional and local level (Spain, France, Poland, Slovakia); 
  A relatively simple and transparent implementation structure, which allowed both less and 

more experienced organisations to participate (Denmark, Croatia); 

  Dissemination of results from research and studies on the benefits of mobility (Sweden) 
  Concept  that  mobility  is  for  all  (Italy)  coupled  with  a  learner-centred  approach  and 

empowerment of young people (European Youth Forum). 

Beside  the  impact  of  cross-border  mobility  on  individuals,  some  reports  stress  the  positive 
outcomes  at  institutional  and  systemic  level.  In  particular,  the  internationalisation  of  local 
organisations  (Malta)  and  enhanced  capacity  of  youth  organisations  and  workers  (Slovenia) 
are seen as important benefits for participating organisations. 

Mobility  has  become  an  integral  part  of  national  youth  policy  agendas  in  Germany  and 
Estonia.  The  EU  agenda  inspired  national  initiatives  around  cross-border  mobility,  for 
instance  JiVE 37 in  Germany,  which  promotes  the  participation  of  young  people  from  all 
backgrounds in a mobility experience.  

The role of the 2008 Council recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers across the 
EU38 was acknowledged as an important contribution to national policy-making (France). In 
Austria, it resulted in legislative changes, notably the creation of a legal status of volunteers. 
In this context, greater compliance with the Visa Directive39 applying to EVS volunteers was 
also highlighted (Belgium/French Community).  

The expert groups and policy recommendations at EU level and in individual projects are seen 
useful (France, Italy). The cooperation framework is helpful in increasing understanding and 
dialogue among policy-makers, experts, educators and practitioners (Italy). 

Recommendations for the future 

In light of the above, the reports stress the need to build on the achievements of the current 
framework for cooperation and cross-border mobility programmes (Czech Republic, Austria). 
Continuity is seen as particularly important with regard to the establishment of the European 
Solidarity Corps. A series of concrete recommendations for the future have been made: 

Adequate funding 

Given  the  important  unmet  demand,  several  reports  emphasise  the  need  to  ensure  adequate 
funding  by  a  separate  budget  line  (Slovenia)  and  increased  allocations  (France),  whilst  the 
possibility of drawing on national and/or regional funds (Italy, Lithuania) should be explored. 

37  https://www.jive-international.de/ 
38  OJ C 319, 13.12.2008, p. 8-10. 
39  Directive (EU) 2016/801 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the conditions of 
entry  and  residence  of  third-country  nationals  for  the  purposes  of  research,  studies,  training,  voluntary 
service, pupil exchange schemes or educational projects and au pairing, OJ L 132, 21.5.2016, p. 21-57. 

41 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Greater outreach 

While  cross-border  mobility  actions  have  already  reached  a  significant  number  of  young 
people,  there  seems  to  be  a  consensus  on  the  need  to  increase  outreach  further.  Some 
suggestions go as far as every young person should have an opportunity for a mobility action 
for at least 6  months (Serbia, European Youth Forum).  At  the same time, the risk of losing 
quality as a result of too much focus on quantity was raised (Sweden).  

The  reports  call  for  involving  more  young  people  with  fewer  opportunities  (Spain,  Latvia, 
Luxembourg,  Netherlands,  Austria,  Poland,  Finland,  Sweden)  and  allowing  young  people 
from  different  backgrounds  to  meet  each  other  (Luxembourg).  The  programme  should 
become more inclusive and more accessible, while engaging non-organised young people is 
more  costly  (Estonia).  Introducing  financial  incentives  (Sweden)  and  providing  additional 
funding could help remove financial barriers to participation and ensure greater involvement 
of smaller organisations (Malta). The formats on offer should be further diversified to better 
respond to young people’s  needs. A pathway approach,  including  short-term and  in-country 
mobility  as  a  step  forward  to  transnational  mobility  (Germany,  Spain,  Latvia,  Austria, 
Finland) would be particularly useful for disadvantaged young people. The novel features of 
the European Solidarity Corps, with opportunities for in-country placements, were welcome. 

More promotion is also needed to increase outreach (Belgium/Flemish Community, Cyprus), 
for  instance  by  encouraging  networks  (e.g.  Eurodesk,  European  Youth  Information  and 
Counselling  Agencies,  European  Youth  Card  Association)  to  develop  information  tools  and 
step  up  their  information  activities  (Portugal).  The  multipliers  network  should  be  further 
expanded and volunteering organisations operating in countries should be supported in their 
transition  to  international  level  (Slovakia).  Youth  organisations  should  make  better  use  of 
digital tools and use more social networks/media (Slovakia). 

Quality and recognition of cross-border mobility of young people 

Member  States  stress  that  the  benefits  of  international  mobility  should  be  better  valued 
(Croatia, Italy) and its positive impact should be communicated more at local level (France). 
Awareness-raising, including sharing data with stakeholders (Slovakia), could be useful. It is 
also  important  to  stay  focused  on  quality  and  dissemination  of  good  practice  (Spain).  The 
validation of competences should be further supported, for instance by promoting recognition 
tools, such as Youthpass. There is a need to develop a greater awareness by employers about 
the added value of non-formal learning mobility (France). 

Simplified implementation 

The implementation mechanism of cross-border mobility actions is seen as relatively simple, 
accessible and transparent (Poland) and the simplified reporting requirements are appreciated 
(Denmark).  Yet,  some  reports  see  scope 
to  further  reduce  administrative  burden 
(Luxembourg,  Austria,  Finland).  Among  the  administrative  barriers  highlighted  are 
difficulties  engaging  young  people  registered  with  the  national  employment  office  and 
lengthy  visa  procedures.  In  this  context,  it  was  suggested that  all  young  people  on mobility 
should  benefit  from  the  simplified  visa  application  process  (Lithuania).  The  importance  of 
greater flexibility was also stressed (United Kingdom). 

42 

 
 
Reinforced policy cooperation 

With  the  steady  increase  of  cross-border  mobility  actions  and  the  establishment  of  the 
European Solidarity Corps, there is a need for better cooperation on volunteering at EU level 
(Austria).  A  clearer  status  of  volunteers  would  be  an  important  step  (Sweden)  and  further 
administrative and legal obstacles should be removed. It is also important to take account of 
national context and focus on local impact (Slovenia). 

Lifting young people out of exclusion through volunteering (Sweden) 

Since 2011 the organisation ‘ITER’ has sent 69 young volunteers (15 to 20 each year) 
abroad. It is geared towards young people not yet established on the labour market or 
lacking a natural point of entry. It aims to prevent long-term exclusion from the job 
market  and  society  and  to  make  the  young  people  active,  independent  and 
employable. 

Before the exchange, they take part in networking meetings and training sessions on 
local  culture,  English  language  and  voluntary  work,  and  receive  guidance  from  the 
staff.  Then  they  travel  abroad  individually  and  work  for  between  two  weeks  and 
twelve  months  at  one  of  the  project’s  partner  organisations.  A  support  worker 
accompanies  them  and  stays  for  the  first  one  or  two  nights.  On  completing  the 
volunteering  period,  the  young  people  meet  again  in  network  meetings  to  share 
experiences.  The  City  of  Gothenburg  uses  this  information  for  planning  both  the 
programme  and  the  person’s  next  step  towards  gaining  employment  or  starting 
education. 

The  City  of  Gothenburg  has  broadened  its  working  methods  and  learning  from  its 
work with the international partner organisations. It has been pushed to become more 
flexible and adaptable and keep up-to-date in a different way. These experiences from 
international  work  have  a  knock-on  effect  on  other  managers  and  colleagues  in  the 
organisation. 

82% of participants have gone on to work or study after participating in the project. 
This lifts many young people out of exclusion and crime, providing great benefits to 
society.  ITER,  prioritised  socially  excluded  young  people  or  young  people  with 
special needs. 

Erasmus+ was used to the necessary contacts currently with partner organisations 
abroad. It is likely that the municipality would not have contributed financially if the 
EU had not been involved in financing it and it would have been a one-off project 
instead of the continuity that ITER has become. 

S
E
I
T
I
V
I
T
C
A
Y
R
A
T
N
U
L
O
V

43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3.5. Structured Dialogue with young people and youth organisations 

Building on initial dialogue attempts, structured dialogue has mainly taken off in 2010 and is 
now well-recognised, reaching  tens of thousands  young people who discuss  a specific topic 
every year all over Europe40. It inspired many participatory processes at different governance 
levels.  Some  shortcomings  have  also  been  identified,  the  2015  EU  Youth  Report  already 
concluded  that  the  structured  dialogue  must  reach  a  much  wider  audience  of  youth  groups, 
especially those that have not engaged in the dialogue so far.  

In its ‘Resolution on the Structured Dialogue and the future development of the dialogue with 
young  people  in  the  context  of  policies  for  European  cooperation  in  the  youth  field,  post 
2018’ 41 ,  the  Council  invited  the  Commission,  ‘based  on  the  evidence,  evaluation  and 
consultations’,  to  ‘propose  a  renewed  Structured  Dialogue  process  as  part  of  the  European 
Cooperation in the Youth Field – post 2018.’  

This  section  takes  stock  of  Member  States’  most  recent  experiences  with  the  Structured 
Dialogue42. General information about the opportunities available to young citizens in Europe 
to participate in politics and civil society can be found in Chapter 5 of the Youth Wiki43 . 

New engagement tools 

Broadly  speaking,  Member  States  affirm  to  have  introduced  new  engagement  tools  during 
Cycle  V  (2016  –  mid-2017)  though  in  various  ways  and  with  varying  degrees  of  success. 
Imprecise  and  abstractly  formulated  questions  were  often  identified  as  a  root  cause  of  low 
response rates (Belgium/French Community, Czech Republic, Germany), with a need to adapt 
the  questions  to  national  or  even  a  local  context  (Austria,  European  Youth  Forum).  Young 
people  should  be  encouraged  to  express  themselves  and  overcome  communication  barriers 
(Romania).  Timing  of  consultations  was  sometimes  seen  as  an  issue  (Germany,  Czech 
Republic).  Lack  of  awareness  and  information  appears  to  be  a  recurrent  issue  (Germany, 
Spain, France, Slovenia), as well as poor visibility and lack of recognition of the Structured 
Dialogue (Croatia).  

If the Structured Dialogue is ‘too structured’ there is a risk that the process takes priority over 
the  content  (Luxembourg).  Reaching  NEETS  (Sweden)  and  other  disadvantaged  young 
people  (Cyprus)  or  even  all  those  who  are  just  less  active  (Poland)  was  seen  as  the  single 
biggest  challenge  (Cyprus,  Sweden).  On  the  other  hand,  some  responses  indicated  that  no 
major difficulties or obstacles had been encountered (Netherlands) and many replies indicated 
a rich experience based on diverse and innovative solutions invented nationally and locally, 
including partnerships with broadcasters (Austria), online (Finland) as well as offline (Malta) 
tools, pointing to the need for a mixed methodology.  Street  counselling in cooperation with 
trainers  from  the  National  Youth  Council  (Slovenia)  has  the  potential  to  reach  out  to  the 

40  List of topics per cycle and participation numbers for Cycle V in Annexes F and G. 
41  OJ C 189, 15.6.2017, p. 1-4. 
42  Reply to questionnaire 'EU Youth Report 2018 – National Report' 
(https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/publication/EUYouthReport2018)  

43  https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/en/content/youthwiki/5-participation-overview. This chapter 
includes, amongst others, sections on youth representation bodies; young people's participation in policy-
making; national strategies to increase youth participation; support for youth organisations; and e-
participation. 

44 

 
 
                                                 
harder-to-reach young people, with traditional media (including newspapers, magazines, TV 
channels)  retaining  an  important  role  as  opposed  to  new  media  outlets  (social  networks, 
portals,  e-blogs,  etc.)  (Austria).  Hardcopy  documents  including  ‘action  cards’  (Czech 
Republic) and postcards (Slovenia) are useful in some national contexts. Reaching out young 
people with face-to-face questioning in the margin of other free time or educational activities 
like festivals, NGOs fairs and linked topics fairs (Czech Republic, Austria, Romania) appears 
to be particularly successful with disadvantaged young people. 

Changes made to the Structured Dialogue since its inception 

Recent changes to the Structured Dialogue are judged differently by Member States, making 
it  hard  to  detect  a  unifying  trend,  except  that  more  structure  in  an  18-month  cycle  (United 
Kingdom)  appears  to  enjoy  broad  support.  The  introduction  of  grants  paid  to  the  National 
Working Groups was welcomed (Czech Republic, France, Croatia, Italy, Latvia, Netherlands, 
Austria,  Poland,  Slovenia,  Finland,  European  Youth  Forum),  as  they  are  seen  as  having 
enabled  more  structural  and  systematic  cooperation  and  inclusion  of  more  partners  (Czech 
Republic). Some doubt if the grants are sufficient (Austria) and also wonder if they should be 
extended to international non-governmental youth organisations (Slovenia). 

Still,  not  all  Member  States  use  online  tools,  while  Slovakia  added  to  appreciate  the 
involvement of new actors, such as Erasmus+ National Agencies at the EU youth conference. 
Not all used the online tool available in the European Youth Portal (Austria, Belgium/Flemish 
Community  Germany)  as  they  preferred  a  national  tool  either  as  it  was  more  apt  to  reach 
specific  target  groups  or  because  it  offered  more  functionalities  (Germany).  One  reply 
indicated that "a simple translation of the guiding questions is not  useful for young people" 
and  would  require  redrafting  (Belgium/Flemish  Community),  while  another  expressed 
unconditional support for the EU-wide tool (Sweden). Germany added that successful youth 
participation  would  always  depend  upon  a  mix  of  offline  and  online  elements,  noting  that 
"online tools  alone  do not  provide for  better  participation".  Luxembourg  found  the  tools  on 
offer ‘really not useful’, suggesting to ‘give recommendations and support for using the tools 
that  young  people  already  use  (Snapchat,  Instagram,  etc.).  Germany  indicated  that  the 
perceived superiority of the national online participation tool was due to the built-in protocol. 
Such  questions  need  to  be  addressed  as  they  raise  the  question  of  how  a  uniform 
implementation of the Structured Dialogue can be ensured at all.  

Need for improvements in the future dialogue 

The  Czech  Republic  considers  longer  grants  for  National  Working  Groups  crucial  in 
improving  the  Structured  Dialogue  along  with  vastly  improved  reporting  and  feedback:  ‘So 
far, there is no clear reporting by States on how conclusions are implemented. Many young 
people  all  over  Europe  participate  in  the  process  and  raise  their  voices.  They  should  know 
what  political  follow-up  was  given  to  their  input  to  develop  trust  in  political  systems.  The 
absence  of  feedback  can  lead  to  frustration.  The  political  commitment  to  work  on 
implementation,  provide  feedback  in  a  real  dialogue  with  young  people  and  to  focus  on 
evaluation  and  monitoring  results  are  crucial  (Austria).  For  maximal  impact  and  a  credible 
participatory  policy-making  process,  architecture  and  timing  are  crucial.  The  topic  and 
objectives  should  be  clear  from  the  start  and  the  process  should  support  reaching  those 
objectives  (Belgium/Flemish  Community).  The  process  lacks  transparency  at  European  and 
often also national level. This puts into question the dialogue’s legitimacy even if the process 

45 

 
 
as such has a big positive impact. The complexity and complicated nature of the dialogue is 
hard  to  bring  close  to  average  young  people  and  youth  workers  (Czech  Republic).  Also 
indicators  as  to  the  impact  of  recommendations  at  European  level  are  missing  (Portugal). 
There was a call for more ‘scrutiny around implementation, as it is unclear who is accountable 
for what follow-up. Another parallel process/grant to focus solemnly on implementation will 
make  the  process  truly  worthy,  increasing  significantly  its  importance  and  impact’  (United 
Kingdom). 

Mental health project (Belgium/Flemish Community) 

The Flemish Youth Council – the official advisory body of the Flemish Government 
on all  matters concerning children and young people  –  makes use  of the  Structured 
Dialogue process to  put issues on the political agenda and to  make  them visible. In 
the last cycle, for instance, mental health problems of young people were put forward.  

https://vlaamsejeugdraad.be/psychisch-welzijn-project-2016-2017 

-

L
L
E
W
D
N
A
H
T
L
A
E
H

G
N
I
E
B

Structured Dialogue Ambassadors (Spain) 

On  national  level,  the  Structured  Dialogue  is  significant  to  foster  cooperation 
between  different  youth  policy  actors.  Since  2010  the  implication  of  the  Structured 
Dialogue  has  gained  in  importance.  Spain  developed  a  system  of  ‘Structured 
Dialogue  Ambassadors’  in  every  region  linked  to  the  youth  councils  and  the  DGs 
(political  level)  on  youth  issues.  A  system  of  trainings,  events  and  consultations  at 
different levels (national, regional and local) have fostered cooperation and dialogue 
between authorities and young people.  

Since  2015,  the  Structured  Dialogue  in  Spain  has  included  a  national  event,  apart 
from the regional ones, between young people and the DGs to work on the Structured 
Dialogue cycle recommendations. But this has been the basis of a deep cooperation 
and a joint work on the regional level. Numerous joint projects and events have been 
carried out since then. 

E
U
G
O
L
A
I
D
D
E
R
U
T
C
U
R
T
S

www.dialogoestructurado.cje.org  

46 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Youth Municipal Councils (Italy) 

Numerous Italian municipalities have formally set up a Youth Municipal Council, an 
organ that involves the young people in the civil life of the communities, with the 
following goals: 

  To promote information of public level activities among young people; 
  To design projects together with similar organisations in other municipalities; 
  To cooperate with the administration to realise programmes and initiatives for 

young people. 

Annual public consultation of young people (Cyprus) 

A good practice that illustrates the impact of the framework of cooperation in Cyprus 
is the decision of the Youth Board of Cyprus (with the recognition and authorisation 
of  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Culture  and  the  President  of  the  Republic  of 
Cyprus)  to  organise,  on  an  annual  basis,  a  public  consultation  for  all  young  people 
and  discussing  matters  either  arising  from  the  EU  Youth  Strategy  (2010-2018)  or 
other issues that concern young people. This allows young people to be heard, as the 
results of the consultation are given to the Ministry of Education and Culture and the 
State in general. In this way, more emphasis is given to youth participation in many 
aspects of the society. 

http://onek.org.cy/en/home-page/news/  

N
O
I
T
A
P
I
C
I
T
R
A
P

N
O
I
T
A
P
I
C
I
T
R
A
P

National Working Group for the Structured Dialogue (Poland) 

One  of  the  visible  effects  of  European  youth  cooperation  is  the  involvement  of 
Poland  in  activities  related  to  the  promotion  and  implementation  of  the  Structured 
Dialogue.  

To  this  purpose,  the  National  Working  Group  for  the  Structured  Dialogue  includes 
representatives  of  the  Ministry  of  National  Education,  the  Polish  Council  of  Youth 
Organisations  (PROM)  and  the  Foundation  for  the  Development  of  the  Education 
System.  Currently,  the  involvement  of  representatives  of  the  Polish  Children  and 
Youth Council, operating since 2016 under the authority of the Minister of National 
Education, in the works of the above-mentioned working group is being considered. 

D
E
R
U
T
C
U
R
T
S

E
U
G
O
L
A
I
D

47 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Paying more attention to citizenship education (European Youth Forum) 

At EU level, in 2017, young people could present a recommendation from Cycle IV 
of the Structured Dialogue to the European Parliament’s Committee on Culture and 
Education. It focused on citizenship education, a topic that is not addressed enough at 
EU level. These representatives could raise more attention at EU level and take a step 
to include the European Parliament in the Structured Dialogue, which rarely happens. 
As citizenship education is a growing area of interest for policy-makers in light of the 
need to engage more young people in politics and society as a whole, this topic was 
very timely.  

The  European  Youth  Forum  hopes  that  this  will  lead  to  greater  attention  to 
citizenship education and more involvement of the European Parliament in Structured 
Dialogue.  

http://www.youthforum.org/latest-news/discussions-on-the-structured-dialogue-with-
the-committee-on-culture-and-education/ 

E
U
G
O
L
A
I
D
D
E
R
U
T
C
U
R
T
S

3.6. EU programmes and funds 

The framework for cooperation suggests that effective use be made of EU funds, such as the 
European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds,  Erasmus+,  Creative  Europe,  the  programme  for 
Employment  and  Social  Innovation  (EaSI),  Erasmus  for  Young  Entrepreneurs  and  relevant 
EU programmes and funds in the areas of external relations and development cooperation. 

Use of available EU funds 

Analysis of information in the Youth Wiki, Section 1.7 ‘Funding youth policy’44, shows that 
Erasmus+  Youth  and  the  Youth  Employment  Initiative  linked  to  the  European  Social  Fund 
make up by far the two most important EU funding sources for youth. A number of other EU 
programmes are also mentioned: 

  Other  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds,  namely  the  European  Regional 

Development Fund (ERDF) and the Cohesion Fund (CF); 

  Creative Europe; 
  Erasmus  for  Young  Entrepreneurs  (part  of  COSME, 

competitiveness of enterprises and SMEs 2014-2020). 

the  programme  for 

the 

In addition, many projects focusing on young people feed into youth policy development on 
national and European level.  

Most  frequently  mentioned  are  ESF  funded  national  projects 45 .  In  several  countries  EU 
traineeships  and 
focusing  on  youth  employment  are  supporting 
funded  projects 

44  Section 1.7 Funding youth policy  
  https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/en/content/youthwiki/1-youth-policy-governance-overview  
45  Examples  include:  Keys  for  Life  –  Developing  Key  Competences  in  Leisure-Time  and  Non-Formal 
Education (Czech Republic); JUGEND STÄRKEN im Quartier (Germany); Complex development in the field 
of  youth  –  New  generation  reloaded  (Hungary);  Swiss-Latvian  cooperation  programme  ‘Support  for  the 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
apprenticeships at national level (Czech Republic, Estonia, Portugal, Finland, Sweden, United 
Kingdom). 

Drawing policy recommendations out of successful projects 

Member States were asked what they would suggest to better draw policy recommendations 
out of the results of successful projects on the ground.  

Connection between EU funded projects and the EU Youth Strategy 

Almost  all  reports 46 highlight  the  need  to  connect  the  results  of  EU  funded  projects,  in 
particular  Erasmus+  and  youth  policy  at  EU,  national  and  local  level.  Among  the  most 
frequent  suggestions  is  better  drawing  policy  recommendations  from  successful  projects  on 
the ground. The EU Youth Strategy should more often address the need to use EU funding to 
support  the  positive  development  of  young  people  and  the  youth  sector  (Estonia,  Croatia, 
Austria). In the same vein, relevant EU funding programmes should build on the EU Youth 
Strategy  and  corresponding  budget  should  be  earmarked  (Germany)  and  its  themes  and 
objectives of should be reflected in Erasmus+ Youth (Germany). Funding guidelines need to 
be  aligned  with  policy  aims  and  policy  needs  to  build  on  projects  results  (Cyprus).  Many 
countries (Croatia, Cyprus and Latvia) point to the potential in Erasmus+ projects under Key 
Action 2 and 3 to provide policy recommendations at both local and EU level.  

Consultations with beneficiaries are crucial input for policy recommendations and decisions 
to renew programmes should build on the experiences of organisations active in youth (Czech 
Republic,  Denmark,  Luxembourg,  Austria,  Portugal),  for  instance  through  dialogues  with 
stakeholders,  networks  at  national,  European  or 
level  or  systematic 
dissemination of projects results. A few countries find listening to the views of disadvantaged 
young people particularly important in such processes (Netherlands, Austria).  

international 

A  few  countries  call  for  common  quality  standards  of  national  strategic  and  programme 
documents. For Croatia and Italy, the Commission should continue to support recognition of 
non-formal and informal learning and promote the use of national recognition tools. 

Development of  Youth Initiatives  in Peripheral or Disadvantaged  Regions’ (Latvia); Outreach  Youth Work 
(Luxembourg); Business Perception and Management Network’ (Portugal);  KomPrax (Slovakia); PRAKTIK 
(Slovakia); Temagruppen Unga i arbetslivet (Sweden). 

46  Reply to questionnaire 'EU Youth Report 2018 – National Report' 
(https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/publication/EUYouthReport2018).  

49 

 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                      
The impact of Erasmus+ on policy-making in Slovenia 

Erasmus+  influenced  the  understanding  of  youth  policy  by  solidifying  a  horizontal  youth 
policy approach. It triggered initiatives pursuing professionalisation and recognition of youth 
work  as  an  occupational  qualification,  promotion  and  comprehension  of  learning  mobility, 
etc. In many ways it has become the tool for renewing policy mechanisms, testing new ideas 
and  innovative  approaches.  Issues  are  frequently  placed  on  the  policy  agenda  thanks  to 
Erasmus+. Hence, the programme has had a significant systemic impact and is an important 
driver for policy-making, although, to many, it proves to be less pivotal and influential than 
the  previous  one,  also  due  to  integration  of  youth  in  the  bigger  Erasmus+.  Nevertheless, 
Erasmus+  achieves  clear  synergetic  effects  with  the  national  call  for  activities  to  promote 
youth work. 

Networks and information sharing on national and international level 

The  need  for  the  Commission  to  stimulate  cooperation  among  youth  actors,  stepping  up 
opportunities  for  exchange  of  good  practices  and  experiences  to  help  improve  programmes 
was  frequently  noted  (Italy,  Malta  and  Serbia).  At  national  level,  programmes  would  also 
benefit  from  regular  networking  and  information-sharing  (Lithuania).  These  networks  could 
allow organisations, already at the time of final project evaluation, to draw conclusions that 
could  feed  policy-shaping  and  could  be  used  to  disseminate  information  about  policy 
development  at  grassroot  level  (Belgium/German-speaking  Community,  Cyprus).  National 
authorities  should  jointly  favour  projects  that  provide  European  added  value  and  that  these 
projects  feed  policy  development  (Austria).  For  Germany,  supporting  structures  are  key  to 
ensure  a  communication  flow  between  projects  and  decision-makers,  and  between  different 
levels (European, national, regional, local) for an effective transfer of results. 

Malta  points  to  findings  from  the  RAY  network 47 that  projects  supporting  cross-sectoral 
cooperation achieved better quality results and had more impact on the participants in terms 
of  acquisition  and  recognition  of  skills  and  competences.  The  flexibility  afforded  by 
Erasmus+ allows new organisations and informal groups to benefit from funding, particularly 
in  activities  involving  mobility.  In  a  national  context  (Malta),  this  has  allowed  experienced 
organisations further enhance their network of cooperation and through capacity-building be 
able  to  engage  in  larger  projects.  At  the  same  time,  new  organisations  extend  the  reach  of 
Erasmus+ to new communities of young people at grass-roots level. 

Member States point out that before developing new networks, the links to be created should 
be identified and how these should complement each other in order to achieve results and get 
political  support  at  EU  level.  Member  States  should  be  consulted  on  changes  in  the 
programme and be evidence-based (Czech Republic, Spain, Luxembourg).  

More Europe-wide research and impact evaluation 

A concrete suggestion on improving use of policy recommendations from successful projects 
is the need for more research-based analysis of the effects on youth policy development and 

47  RAY  – 

research-based  analysis  and  monitoring  of  Erasmus+  programme 

(Youth  chapter) 

http://www.researchyouth.eu/. 

50 

 
 
 
                                                 
youth work practices (France, Croatia, Lithuania, Malta, Austria, Portugal, Finland, Sweden, 
United Kingdom). 

Today the RAY network produces evidence of the impact of Erasmus+ Youth on participants, 
project  leaders  and  organisations,  but  Member  States  are  missing  research  on  the  EU 
programmes’ effects on youth policy development and youth work practices (Finland). Since 
the instruments are implemented through different institutions and organisations it is difficult 
to get a full overview (Lithuania). A more systematic involvement of stakeholders (Austria) 
and  continuous  and  comprehensive  monitoring  of  the  long-term  impact  of  the  programmes 
(Czech  Republic,  Portugal,  Sweden)  will  enable  evidence-based  policy-making  on  both 
national and European level. In this context, Germany is in favour of reintroducing a specific 
programme committee for Erasmus+ Youth. 

Sustainable dissemination of projects results 

The  Erasmus+  Project  Results  Platform  gives  access  to  descriptions,  results  and  contact 
information of projects funded under the Erasmus+ programme (see box). 

The  dissemination  of  projects  to  may  eventually  result  in  the  transformation  of  well-
functioning  initiatives  into  universally  applicable  solutions.  Many  Member  States  highlight 
that  better  visibility  would  help  make  strategic  use  of  successful  projects  (Belgium/French 
Community, Denmark, Spain, France, Austria, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Sweden). Austria 
calls  for  seminars  and  conferences  to  present specific  projects  and  greater  promotion  of  the 
Erasmus+ Project Results Platform. Finland points out that merely collecting good practices is 
not  adequate,  as  analyses  of  why  a  certain  project  was  successful  and  whether  it  could  be 
replicated in different circumstances should also be produced. 

Erasmus+ Project Results Platform 

This database provides access to descriptions, results and contact information of all projects 
funded  under  Erasmus+  and  under  its  predecessor  programmes  in  the  fields  of  education, 
training,  youth  and  sports.  It  includes  a  pool  of  good  practices  and  success  stories,  i.e. 
projects that distinguished themselves in terms of policy relevance, communication potential, 
impact or design. 

Why use the Erasmus+ Projects Results? 

  Explore past funded projects. 
  Enhance the visibility of your project. 
  Share the results of your project with other people interested in the same topics. 
  Find inspiration. 
  Find partners for future projects 

http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/projects/  

Investing in youth across sectors 

The European Youth Forum calls for a cross-sectoral approach to youth policy and a need to 
prioritise investment in the human and social capital of young people within the EU budget. 
The Forum deplores that although education and youth policy are vital to creating inclusive 

51 

 
 
 
societies, ‘by allocating only 0.8% of the total budget to education and youth-related issues, 
investment remains nevertheless timid within the current Multiannual Financial Framework. 

Lithuania suggests to increase the support for policy reform in funding instruments, especially 
Erasmus+  Youth.  Estonia  suggests  address  youth  and  youth  work  in  the  future  operational 
programmes  post  2020.  Operational  programmes  are  detailed  plans  in  which  the  Member 
States  set  out  how  the  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds  will  be  spent  during  the 
programming period.  

Creativity and culture - IN THE PALACE volunteer programme (Bulgaria) 

The  volunteer  programme  IN  THE  PALACE  offers  6  young  people  from  different 
countries  the  chance  to  get  an  inside  touch  of  the  organisation  of  established  short 
film events such as International Short Film Festival IN THE PALACE, its parallel 
programmes in film training PLUG-IN and industry meetings FILMER FORGE, its 
accompanying  film  forums  and  other  initiatives.  The  project  is  implemented  by 
Format SFF Foundation.  

The project lasts for 15 months and the volunteers will spend 10 months in Bulgaria 
to  participate  in  the  preparation  and  conduct  of  the  festival  and  its  parallel  events. 
They will also lend a hand to the organisation in its daily activities and lead volunteer 
teams  before,  during  and  after  the  festival  events.  Volunteers  are  engaged  in  tasks 
related  to  promotion,  getting  familiar  with  the  atmosphere  and  the  venues  of  the 
events,  and  tasks,  developing  creativity  in  the  fields  of  cinema,  journalism,  design 
and  photography.  Leading  goal  is  to  quickly  adapt  to  the  environment  and  form  a 
specific  attitude  for  the  upcoming  events.  Analysis  and  assessment  of  personal 
qualities and interests is important, since based on them will be done the distribution 
in activities. In the phase of actual conduct of the events the tasks of the volunteers 
are  related  to  specific  details  in  organising  events.  In  this  way  they  will  be  able  to 
explore in detail the organisation of a major international event and to acquire more 
and new knowledge and skills.  

http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/projects/eplus-project-
details/#project/a13c3381-b9d7-4e1d-9be2-a4f8df3a2cc6 

S
D
N
U
F
D
N
A
S
E
M
M
A
R
G
O
R
P
U
E

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Uniting vocation, active citizenship and entrepreneurship in youth work 
(Hungary) 

The  strategic  partnership  ‘proVOCAting  innovaTION  -  uniting  vocation,  active 
citizenship  and  entrepreneurship  in  youth  work’  is  designed  to  develop  and 
implement innovative approaches in youth work through exchanging experience and 
co-developing an educational curriculum and related teaching and learning material. 
It  focuses  on  three  topics:  authentic  vocation,  active  citizenship  and  social 
entrepreneurship. 

The project responds to the need for an educational programme and relevant material, 
which  combines  these  three  areas.  The  project  thus  aims  to  realise  the  often 
separately  treated  areas  of  vocation,  active  citizenship  and  entrepreneurship 
simultaneously to empower young people to become initiators of sustainable projects, 
which  not  only  support  themselves  but  also  contribute  to  creating  a  democratic, 
inclusive, just, sustainable and creative European society. 

Through gathering four organisations (Pandora Association from Hungary, GetActive 
from  Austria,  Paradiso  Ritrovato  from  Italy  and  oikos  Lebenskunst  e.V.  from 
Germany)  across  Europe  the  project  pursues  a  multilevel  approach,  which  includes 
exchange  of  best  practices,  non-formal  education,  know-how  and  youth  work 
methodologies, the development of innovative educational material such as a course 
curriculum,  a  handbook,  a  Creative  Coaching  Kit  and  a  project  website.  Young 
people,  youth  workers  and  professionals  active  on  the  field  of  youth  work  will  be 
involved at all levels. 

http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/projects/eplus-project-
details/#project/0cc9d919-9723-4870-a34b-4260fc08bd30  

S
D
N
U
F
D
N
A
S
E
M
M
A
R
G
O
R
P
U
E

Skills development in youth work (Slovakia) 

In 2011-2015, the Slovak Youth Institute implemented the ESF project ‘KomPrax  - 
Competence  for  Practice’.  It  aims  to  give  people  and  youth  workers  access  to 
acquiring  competences  in  youth  work  and  provide  counselling  services.  The  ESF 
national project PRAKTIK (Practical Skills through Non-Formal Education in Youth 
Work) was implemented by the Slovak Youth Institute and focused on practical skills 
in youth work. 

KomPrax - https://www.iuventa.sk/sk/KomPrax/Home.alej  

PRAKTIK - https://www.iuventa.sk/sk/sub/projektpraktik/novinky-1.alej  

D
N
A
S
E
M
M
A
R
G
O
R
P
U
E

S
D
N
U
F

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Youthpass – Useful or Useless? Let’s Debate (Romania) 

‘Youthpass – Useful or Useless? Let’s Debate’ was a youth exchange in 2017 held in 
Busteni,  Romania,  with  45  participants  from  8  countries:  Bulgaria,  Cyprus,  Italy, 
Latvia,  Greece,  Lithuania,  Poland,  Romania  including  18  youngsters  with  fewer 
opportunities. 

The project aimed to address youth unemployment and misunderstanding of role of 
key  competences  and  the  Youthpass  certificate  for  getting  a  job.  It  wanted  to  raise 
awareness  if  youngsters  for  the  value  of  key  competences  in  their  personal  and 
professional  development  and  of  using  the  Youthpass  certificate  to  valorise  the 
competences assimilated through voluntary service and non-formal education. 

http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/projects/eplus-project-
details/#project/b6e2f392-c676-4e1e-8ee3-c79a8f26de7e  

S
D
N
U
F
D
N
A
S
E
M
M
A
R
G
O
R
P
U
E

54 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Section 4 – Other stakeholder consultations  

4.1. Outcomes of the consultations 

During  more  than  a  year,  the  Commission  has  gathered  views  from  stakeholders  and  the 
general  public  on  the  EU  Youth  Strategy,  in  a  ‘year  of  listening’.  This  exercise  included 
several  consultations:  online  targeted  surveys,  a  public  consultation,  focus  groups,  a 
stakeholder conference, debates organised under the ‘New Narrative for Europe’ initiative and 
a cycle of Structured Dialogue with young people. 

Online public consultation 

A  public  consultation48 in  2016  allowed  to  check  the  results  of  the  evaluation  on  the  EU 
Youth Strategy. It included 15 questions about the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and EU 
added value of the EU Youth Strategy and the Council Recommendation on the mobility of 
young volunteers. The online consultation included future-oriented questions, with a view to 
use  the  outcomes  when  preparing  the  post-2018  youth  policy  cooperation.  There  were  269 
respondents: 175 individuals and 94 organisations.  

Most  respondents  knew  the  EU  Youth  Strategy:  roughly  9  out  of  10.  Two  thirds  had 
participated in at least one activity under the EU Youth Strategy since 2010. At least 7 out of 
10 respondents believed that the EU Youth Strategy helped national and regional policies as 
well  as  youth  organisations  and  young  people  in  some  way.  A  great  majority  deemed  the 
objectives of the EU Youth Strategy to be in line with national policies (84%). 

Most  respondents  perceived  an  added  value  of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy  in  comparison  with 
local,  regional  or  national  measures  in  every  aspect  mentioned.  Respondents  were  most 
positive  about  the  strategy’s  additional  benefit  as  regards  the  development  of  a  consistent 
approach on youth (79% believed that the EU Youth Strategy helped develop a youth strategy 
or  a  consistent  approach  to  young  people  and  youth  policy  at  national  level);  for  75%  the 
strategy made national/regional and EU-wide youth-related measures more coherent, and for 
74%  it  helped  to  place  young  people  higher  on  the  EU  political  agenda  and  the  coherence 
between national, regional and EU-wide measures. 

The respondents were also asked about future priorities for EU youth policy cooperation. The 
areas  with  the  highest  support  were  ‘Lowering  youth  unemployment  and  inactivity’  and 
‘Improving the social situation of young people at risk of poverty or exclusion’. Respectively 
83% and 79% of the respondents have indicated that these areas should be a ‘high priority’. 
Other areas, such as ‘Supporting and developing youth work and non-formal learning’ (73% 
of  total  respondents),  ‘Preventing  marginalisation  or  violent  radicalisation  among  young 
people’ (72%) and ‘Supporting the involvement of youth organisations and young people in 
policy-making and other democratic processes’ (70%) followed closely thereafter. 

According  to  a  majority  of  respondents  (53%),  EU  youth  policy  cooperation  should  focus 
both  on  policies  and  actions  specifically  targeted  at  young  people  and  on  mainstreaming 
youth issues into other policy areas. 

48  The main outcomes are available at https://ec.europa.eu/youth/sites/youth/files/online-consultation-

results_en.pdf.  

55 

 
 
                                                 
In order to improve the effectiveness of EU policy action in the youth field, most respondents 
believed that increased efforts should be made so as to encourage broader participation in EU 
policy activities  by local and regional youth  policy-makers and to  develop deeper synergies 
between EU and national measures. 

New Narrative for Europe 

Under the ‘New Narrative for Europe’, no less than 18 debates were held with young people 
across Europe, in partnership with youth organisations, for young people to have their say on 
the  future  of  the  EU.  Delegates  from  these  debates,  as  well  as  from  ‘Ideas  Labs’  organised 
ahead  of  the  2017  European  Youth  Week,  were  invited  to  share  the  outcomes  of  these 
discussions at the conference organised in May 2017 on the future of EU youth cooperation.  

They  also  attended  the  signing  of  a  declaration  (‘YOUrope  for  Youth  Declaration’)  which 
was  offered  to  Commissioner  Navracsics  in  2018 49.This  declaration  puts  forwards  young 
people’s  ideas  on  the  future  of  Europe  around  four  key  areas:  freedom  of  movement  and 
security,  civic  engagement,  employment  and  green  planet  Europe.  According  to  the 
declaration, the EU is a community of values, which must continue to aim at promoting peace 
and  prosperity  in  Europe  and  beyond.  More  young  people  should  participate  in  decision-
making, so that Europe is better prepared to address its challenges. There should also be more 
opportunities  to  involve  those  who  are  reluctant  to  engage  with  politics  by  developing  a 
curriculum on civic education in national and local education systems and by generalising the 
vote  at  16.  The  declaration  underlines  that  all  young  people  should  have  access  to  mobility 
and  learning  opportunities  as  well  as  to  a  wide  range  of  internships,  traineeships  and 
apprenticeships,  across  Europe.  It  stresses  that  all  policies  should  conform  to  the  EU 
sustainability  standards,  that  the  EU  should  manage  equal  access  to  healthy  and  affordable 
food and promote citizen education about environmental sustainability. 

Questions to test the outcomes of debates with more young people, a Eurobarometer survey 
on European Youth included special questions on this in 201850.  he most mentioned priority 
topics for the EU are education and skills (53%), protection of the environment and the fight 
against  climate  change  (50%),  employment  (42%)  and  the  management  of  migratory  flows 
and integration of refugees (40%). A large majority of respondents (89%) agree that national 
governments  should  strengthen  school  education  about  rights  and  responsibilities  as  EU 
citizens.  For  83%  of  interviewees,  learning  about  European  matters  should  be  part  of 
compulsory  school  education.  Over  two  thirds  agree  European  programmes  and  initiatives 
such as Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps make them feel more European. 

The  three  ideas  for  the  future  of  Europe  that  young  people  most  agree  with  –  based  on  a 
multiple choice list of topics stemming from the ‘New narrative for Europe’ initiative  – are: 
the promotion of critical thinking and the ability to search for information in order to combat 
fake news and extremism; easy access to information for young people who want to move and 
work abroad in order to encourage youth employment (both 49%); and promoting behaviour 
change  through  environmentally-friendly  projects  such  as  sustainable  transport  or  recycling 
systems across Europe (40%).  

49  http://europa.eu/youth/have-your-say/new-narrative-for-europe_en  
50  Flash Eurobarometer 455. 

56 

 
 
                                                 
Focus groups 

The  Commission  organised  six  focus  groups 51  in  Brussels  in  2017,  bringing  together 
stakeholders from youth  organisations and national governments to  discuss  topics  identified 
through  the  mid-term  evaluation  of  the  current  EU  Youth  Strategy.  The  outcomes  of  these 
groups inspired the stakeholder conference.  

Stakeholder conference 

In  May  2017,  340  participants  from  all  over  Europe  gathered,  with  young  people,  youth 
workers, volunteering organisations, youth policy-makers, researchers, national agencies from 
the Erasmus+ programme, etc. 

The main conclusions52 were as follows: 

  Young  people  appreciate  the  value  of  cross-border  mobility  and  volunteering  and  are 

eager to see a continuation and potential expansion of Erasmus+. 

  Common  areas  of  interest  from  young  people  as  regards  future  policy-making  include 
education,  mobility  opportunities,  civic  participation,  employment  and  labour  market 
issues, human rights and social inclusion. As regards education, delegates emphasised the 
need  to  understand  and  integrate  non-formal  learning  in  education  and  training  systems 
and  frameworks,  echoing  the  2012  Council  Recommendation  on  the  validation  of  non-
formal  and  informal  learning53.  Participants  called  for  a  greater  range  of  mobility  and 
volunteering  opportunities  to  a  wider  circle  of  beneficiaries,  using  multipliers  to  raise 
awareness throughout the EU.   

  The debates highlighted the value young people attach to democratic participation. Youth 
call for reinvigorated democratic processes at national and EU level, deepening the role of 
the  European  Parliament  and  raising  awareness  of  mechanisms  such  as  the  European 
Citizen  initiative  or  the  Structured  Dialogue.  Young  people  emphasised  the  links  with 
other  policy  areas  such  as  human  rights,  environmental  challenges  and  social  inclusion. 
An  important  pre-condition  for  the  inclusion  and  participation  of  young  people  is  their 
economic  independence,  which  in  turn  requires  a  stable  work  situation  and  decent 
housing. This is not available to a number of young people across the EU. 

Structured Dialogue Cycle VI: Youth in Europe: What’s Next? 

The Council Resolution of May 2017 ‘on the Structured Dialogue and the future development 
of the dialogue with young people in the context of policies for European cooperation in the 
youth field post 2018’ stated that the overall priority for the Structured Dialogue with young 
people and youth organisations for Cycle VI (July 2017 to December 2018) should focus on 
the  future  framework  for  the  European  cooperation  in  the  youth  field.  ‘Youth  in  Europe: 
What’s Next?’ is the title. 

51  See reports at https://ec.europa.eu/youth/sites/youth/files/youth-strategy-report_en.pdf.  
52  See report at https://ec.europa.eu/youth/sites/youth/files/youth-strategy-report_en.pdf.  
53  Council Recommendation of 20 December 2012 on the validation of non-formal and informal learning, 

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32012H1222%2801%29.  

57 

 
 
                                                 
Youth  representatives  and  decision-makers  met  at  the  EU  youth  conference  in  Tallinn  in 
October 2017 to focus on youth priorities and how they want to see the Europe in the future. 
These  discussions  served  as  the  basis  for  the  consultations  which  took  place  between 
November  2017  and  February  2018  (see  graphic  below  for  the  timeline  of  the  cycle),  and 
were complemented with the setting up of youth goals in the EU Youth Conference in April 
2018. 

Source: Estonian Presidency of the Council of the EU, 2017 

Specific positions taken by NGOs or networks 

Position  paper  European  Youth  Forum,  Proposal  for  the  governance  of  the  EU  Youth 
Strategy, 2017 
This paper underlines five principles that should guide the future strategy's governance should 
apply  (participatory,  strategic,  multi-level,  clear  in  responsibilities  and  accountable,  cross-
sectoral and resourceful). 
http://www.youthforum.org/assets/2017/12/YFJ-proposal-EUYS-Governance.pdf 

Position  paper  'Engage.  Inform.  Empower',  2017,  by  European  Youth  Information  and 
Counselling Agency (ERYICA), European Youth Card Association (EYCA), and EURODESK  
This  paper  addresses  the  challenges  facing  young  people,  and  offers  recommendations  on 
how  youth  information  and  mobility  can  help  young  people  make  the  most  of  the 
opportunities and information available to them. 
https://www.eryica.org/advocacy 

58 

 
 
 
 
 
European  Confederation  of  Youth  Clubs’  recommendations for  the  next EU  Youth  Strategy, 
2018 
This  paper  addresses  in  particular  the  need  to  develop  a  European  policy  framework  to 
support  and  promote  youth  work,  as  well  as  to  foster  the  creation  of  national,  regional  and 
local youth work policies by recognising the provision of youth work. 
https://www.ecyc.org/ 

59 

 
 
4.2. Views of other EU institutions and bodies 

Council of the European Union 

The Council adopted conclusions in May 2017 about the post-2018 youth policy cooperation 
that underline the crucial role of youth work, non-formal and informal learning in contributing 
to developing young people’s competences. They call for the following lines of action: 

  Cross-sectoral, flexible, responsive and transparent framework; 
  Main  focus  on  core  youth  policy  themes  (which  are  the  competence  of  structures 
responsible  for  youth)  while  strengthening  initiatives  in  related  policy  fields  to  ensure 
cross-sectoral cooperation; 

  Stronger link with Erasmus+ and other programmes; 
  Review structured dialogue with youth for innovative, meaningful and targeted dialogue; 
  Further  considering  competences  and  values  needed  by  youth,  having  regard  to  role  of 

Internet, social media and digitalisation. 

In May 2017, the Council also adopted a resolution on the development of the dialogue with 
young people in the context of policies for European cooperation in the youth field post 2018. 
The  resolution  calls  for  a  review  to  improve  this  dialogue  and  make  it  more  effective.  It 
emphasizes  the  importance  of  a  constructive  dialogue  and  cooperation  with  young  people 
from diverse backgrounds, youth researchers, policymakers and interested parties from other 
related sectors. 

European Parliament 

The European Parliament provided several opinions on the EU Youth Strategy in recent years. 
The Parliament will adopt a report on the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy in Spring 
2018, based on the Culture Committee report by MEP Eider Gardiazabal Rubial. 

The draft report welcomes the progress of European youth cooperation and acknowledges the 
achievements  of  the  strategy  though  cross-sectoral  actions  and  the  structured  dialogue  that 
involves  young  people.  It  also  welcomes  specific  policy  initiatives  such  as  Investing  in 
Europe’s  Youth,  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  and  the  Youth  Employment  Initiative  but 
believes these should be better connected to the strategy, and follow a bottom-up approach. It 
calls  on  Commission  to  encourage  young  people  to  fully  participate  in  democratic  life, 
believes  the  EU  should  mainstream  volunteering  and  develop  new  tools  to  empower  young 
people, and recommends for the future strategy to be both centred around young people and 
participatory. 

The  Parliament  adopted  a  report54 on  the  assessment  of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy  2013-2015 
(rapporteur: MEP Andrea Bocskor) in July 2016. The Parliament's resolution ‘views the open 
method  of  coordination  as  an  appropriate  but  still  insufficient  means  for  framing  youth 
policies  that  needs  to  be  complemented  by  other  measures;  reiterates  its  call  for  closer 
cooperation and exchange of best practices on youth issues at local, regional, national and EU 
level; urges the Member States to agree on clear indicators and benchmarks in order to allow 

54  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+REPORT+A8-2016-

0250+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=en  

60 

 
 
                                                 
for  monitoring  of  the  progress  made.’  The  resolution  also  stresses  the  ‘importance  of 
involving young people and youth organisations in shaping the priorities and drafting a new 
EU Youth Cooperation Framework after 2018’. 

Committee of the Regions 

The  Committee  of  the  Regions  (CoR)  adopted  an  opinion55 on  the  implementation  of  the 
renewed  framework  for  European  cooperation  in  the  youth  field  (2010-2018)  in  February 
2016.  In  its  opinion,  based  on  the  SEDEC  (Commission  for  Social  Policy,  Education, 
Employment, Research and Culture) report by Csaba Borboly, the Committee ‘insists that in 
the  future,  ensuring  equal  opportunities,  promoting  social  integration  and  improving  the 
competitiveness  of  young  people  on  the  labour  market,  while  fostering  active  citizenship 
(youth  participation),  the  strengthening  of  youth  work,  non-discrimination  and  intercultural 
understanding,  should  remain  the  key  objectives  of  youth  policy’.  It  expressed  concern  that 
‘the Commission fails to mention the role of local and regional authorities in relation to youth 
policy’;  it  also  underlined  the  need  to  support  the  recognition  of  non-formal  and  informal 
learning  in  youth  work  and  ‘deemed  it  necessary  to  bolster  the  role  of  young  people  in  the 
democratic process, to make their voices heard’. 

European Economic and Social Committee 

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) did not recently issue an opinion on 
the EU Youth Strategy, but some of its activities or opinions address the situation of young 
people  and  youth  policy.  For  instance,  the  EESC  adopted  in  2017  an  opinion 56  on 
‘Cooperation  with  civil  society  to  prevent  the  radicalisation  of  young  people’  (rapporteur: 
Christian  Moos).  The  Committee  therein  highlights  the  importance  of  inclusive  formal  and 
non-formal education, which is essential for active participation in a diverse society, teaching 
critical thinking and media literacy. The EESC calls for a higher priority to be given to greater 
investment  in  combating  poverty  and  to  the  integration  of  young  people  into  society,  the 
education system and the labour market. 

The  EESC  also  adopted  an  opinion57 on  the  proposal  for  a  Regulation  laying  down  a  legal 
framework  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  (rapporteur:  Pavel  Trantina)  in  2017.  The 
opinion  welcomes  the  Commission’s  proposal  as  a  good  start  for  a  broader  discussion,  but 
with a lot of elements to clarify and improve. It considers that the added value of the projects 
‘lies  in  the  fact  that  they  seek  to  establish  among  participants  and  the  communities  hosting 
them a full awareness of European citizenship and a sense of belonging to one Union’. 

55  https://www.borbolycsaba.ro/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/EN_FINAL-OPINION_European-cooperation-in-

the-youth-field-2010-2018.pdf  

56  http://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/our-work/opinions-information-reports/opinions/prevention-radicalisation  
57  http://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/our-work/opinions-information-reports/opinions/european-solidarity-corps  

61 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Section 5 – Outline of the future cooperation 

5.1. Analysis of main changes needed for the EU Youth Strategy 

The evaluation and consultations outcomes point to a similar direction; the stakeholders seem 
to  share  views  about  the  future  of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy  and  the  needs  for  improving  its 
current processes. 

Cross-sectoral dimension of youth policy 

There is broad consensus between stakeholders that taking into account youth voices across 
policy areas should be made more effective and that youth strategies and policies should be 
comprehensive. Many Member States underlined the need for strong coordination (Germany, 
Austria, France) and that the youth sector should strengthen its visibility and be more vocal on 
the  core  areas  and  positive  impact  of  youth  policy  (Belgium,  Cyprus,  Lithuania,  Poland, 
Portugal, Romania).  

In Eurobarometer 455, the most mentioned youth priority topics for the EU are education and 
skills  (53%),  protection  of  the  environment  and  the  fight  against  climate  change  (50%), 
employment  (42%)  and  the  management  of  migratory  flows  and  integration  of  refugees 
(40%). In the online public consultation, the respondents were also asked about the priorities 
for the EU to contribute to in the future youth policy cooperation, and the policy areas with 
the  highest  overall  support  were  ‘Lowering  youth  unemployment  and  inactivity’  (83%)  and 
‘Improving the social  situation of young people at risk of poverty  or  exclusion’ (79%) they 
were  closely  followed  by  ‘Supporting  and  developing  youth  work  and  non-formal  learning’ 
(73% of total respondents), ‘Preventing marginalisation or violent radicalisation among young 
people’ (72%) and ‘Supporting the involvement of youth organisations and young people in 
policy-making and other democratic processes’. 

Focus and flexibility 

The  consultations  and  evaluation  indicate  the  need  for  both  more  focused  and  flexible 
cooperation.  The  European  Youth  Forum’s  position  paper  on  the  strategy’s  governance 58 
states that the future strategy ‘should focus on fewer priorities and to introduce a dual system 
with fixed and flexible priorities to be able to tackle sudden social and economic challenges.’ 

The  respondents  to  the  online  consultation  were  a  majority  to  believe  that  European  youth 
policy  cooperation  should  focus  both  on  the  promotion  of  policies  and  actions  specifically 
targeted  at  young  people  and  on  taking  into  account  youth  issues  better  into  other  policy 
areas. 

The May 2017 Council conclusions about the future post 2018 youth policy cooperation also 
call  for  a  cross-sectoral,  flexible,  responsive  and  transparent  framework,  with  a  focus  on 
specific youth policy themes. 

58  http://www.youthforum.org/assets/2017/12/YFJ-proposal-EUYS-Governance.pdf  

62 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Focus on youth specific themes (participation, youth mobility and volunteering, youth 
work) while strengthening cross-sectoral approach 

This dual approach (youth specific areas and a cross-sectoral perspective) is a strong message 
shared  by  most  stakeholders,  including  the  Council  and  the  Member  States,  as  well  as  the 
European Parliament and youth organisations.  

The debates in the May 2017 stakeholder conference called for a strong focus on democracy 
and  civic  participation;  this  was  also  part  of  the  recommendations  of  the  Committee  of  the 
Regions’  opinion  in  2016,  which  asked  to  increase  the  role  of  the  young  people  in  the 
democratic process.  

The  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  highlighted  the  importance  of  inclusive 
formal and informal education and youth volunteering. The May 2017 conference participants 
called for an expanded range of mobility and  volunteering opportunities to a wider circle of 
beneficiaries. 

The need for more focus on youth work and volunteering was mentioned in the evaluation. 

Link between EU youth policy implementation and related EU programme activities 

The need for more synergies between policy cooperation and EU youth-related programmes 
has been underlined in the evaluation. Similarly, almost all reports stressed the importance of 
a  connection  between  the  results  of  EU  funded  projects,  the  EU  youth  policy  and  policy 
making at national and regional level. This was also one of the calls of the focus groups, the 
stakeholder conference and the May 2017 Council conclusions, and has been requested in the 
European Parliament debates. 

Improving the structured dialogue, including with a wider and more diverse outreach to 
young people 

The wish to both keep and improve the dialogue mechanism is a very widely shared position 
among the various stakeholders. In their national reports, the Member States often underline 
that  reaching  disadvantaged  young  people  is  crucial  but  also  very  challenging.  The  need  to 
improve  the  reporting  and  feedback  mechanisms  is  also  stressed  in  these  reports,  as  in  the 
May 2017 Council conclusions (calling for an innovative, meaningful and targeted dialogue) 
or  the  European  Parliament’s  works.  The  European  Youth  Forum  also  proposed  a  new 
structured  dialogue,  based  on  a  bottom  up  approach  to  better  reach  out  to  young  people  at 
local level, a better feed-back and monitoring, a mix of online-offline spaces and tools and a 
stronger cross-sectoral dimension. 

Participatory governance 

Many  stakeholders  advocated  for  youth  participation  in  decision  making,  such  as  the 
European  Youth  Forum,  and  this  approach  was  also  promoted  in  reports  of  the  European 
Parliament.  The  declaration  issued  in  January  2018  under  the  ‘New  Narrative  for  Europe’ 
process underlined that such participation is key so that Europe is better prepared to address 
its challenges. 

63 

 
 
 
 
Reaching out more locally to reach a more diverse population of young people 

The  importance  of  including  a  local  dimension  was  mentioned  both  in  the  evaluation  and 
consultations,  the  Committee  of  the  Regions’  2016  opinion  and  the  May  2017  stakeholder 
conference.  This  is  based  on  the  fact  that  youth  policy  is  managed  at  local  level  in  many 
countries and that this level is most appropriate to reach disadvantaged young people. 

Need for a monitoring framework 

The evaluation stressed the need for a monitoring framework that captures the achievements 
of  the  strategy.  The  European  Parliament  made  similar  calls.  The  European  Youth  Forum 
would even favour ‘a benchmarking system for countries to commit to certain indicators.  

Need for reinforced mutual learning  

As  the  evaluation,  the  reports  lend  their  support  to  mutual  learning  and  expanding  such 
activities in future, while indicating needs for improvement (Section 3.2). 

5.2 Priority areas of the EU Youth Strategy 

In  line  with  these  findings,  the  Communication  proposes youth-specific  policy  priorities  for 
the  future  cooperation  over  the  period  2019-2027,  while  including  mechanisms  for  cross-
sector cooperation in the proposed governance. An interim evaluation will allow for a review 
of these areas in 2023-2024 if need be. 

ENGAGE: Fostering youth participation in democratic life; 

CONNECT: Bringing young people together across the EU and beyond to foster voluntary 
engagement, learning mobility, solidarity and intercultural understanding;  

EMPOWER: Supporting youth empowerment through quality, innovation and recognition of 
youth work. 

ENGAGE: Fostering youth participation in democratic life  

A key tool: the new EU Youth Dialogue59 

The new EU Youth Strategy should aim to open up Europe to the voices of young people and 
incorporate  their  concerns  in  all  policy  areas,  such  as  education,  entrepreneurship, 
employment, climate change, social affairs, citizenship, culture or digital policies.  

In the May 2017 Council resolution on the Structured Dialogue, the Council invited Member 
States  and  Commission  ‘to  undertake  a  review  of  the  Structured  Dialogue  process  and  its 
objectives  for  the  European  Cooperation  in  the  Youth  Field  Post  2018  and  consider 
innovative  and  effective  ways  of  promoting  meaningful  and  constructive  dialogue  and 

59  See also Annexes F and G. 

64 

 
 
 
                                                 
engagement  with  young  people  from  diverse  background,  youth  organisations,  youth 
researchers and policy makers including stakeholders from other relevant sectors.’ It invited 
the  Commission  ‘based  on  the  evidence,  evaluation  and  consultations  to  propose  a  new 
Structured  Dialogue.  The  strategy  should  combine  a  new  EU  Youth  Dialogue  aiming  at 
reaching  all  young  people,  together  with  a  dedicated  Youth  Coordinator  within  the 
Commission  and  an  online  entry  point  via  the  European  Youth  Portal.  A  particular  effort 
would be made to involve hard-to-reach young people, e.g. through specific projects and local 
discussions. 

The EU Youth Dialogue will replace the current Structured Dialogue as from 2019 to achieve 
more in terms of: 

  Diversity of voices, with local outreach; 
  Delivery of concrete and refreshing ideas; 
  Follow-up and implementation into the cycle; 
  Transparency of process, input and outreach; 
  Clear and lean governance. 

The  cycle  will  run  over  9  years  in  cycles  of  18  months  (led  by  Trio  Presidencies)  and  will 
broadly  follow  the  strategic  agenda  of  the  Council  EU  Work  Plans  for  Youth  with  the 
following proposed stages: 

1.a 

1.b 

1.c 

2.a 

2.b 

2.c 

3.a 

3.b 

Local discussions online and offline on topics relevant to the strategic agenda, the 
results of which to be captured by national working groups 

First youth conference: Blue Sky thinking with diverse young people, selected 
through their input in local discussions and their background. Some institutional 
actors participate as ‘listeners’ or ‘resource persons’ 

Results processed and shared by National Working Groups via online fora and 
considered at EU level 

National Working Groups select and prepare inputs for in-depth consideration and 
look for good practice 

Second youth conference: Opinion boulevard where representatives of National 
Working groups attend to present and discuss national inputs, consider relevant good 
practice and select the best ideas and action proposals. Some ‘institutional’ actors 
join to question the ideas and help test their feasibility. 

Results are shared nationally and discussed at EU level insofar appropriate 

National and European actors are invited to reflect on follow-up 

Third youth conference: Time to act whereby European and national decision-
makers, as well as youth representatives at EU and national levels, agree on an action 
plan for implementation and agree on indicators to measure progress. 

3.c 

Results are endorsed under responsibility of the presidency (Council conclusions)  

65 

 
 
 
Figure 1: EU Youth Dialogue 18 months cycle 

CONNECT: Connecting young people across the EU and beyond to foster voluntary 
engagement, learning mobility, solidarity and intercultural understanding 

A policy framework for youth solidarity 

Youth policy cooperation can provide a supportive policy context for the European Solidarity 
Corps. Building on the past cooperation on youth volunteering, it should be put in a broader 
frame  around  solidarity  and  involve  national  partners,  removing  legal  and  administrative 
obstacles to volunteering, promoting national schemes and associating them to the Corps.  

In  light  of  growing  demand  for  solidarity  opportunities,  the  EU  must  live  up  to  young 
people’s  expectations.  The  momentum  created  by  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  can  give 
further impetus, if supported by an appropriate policy environment at European, national and 
local  levels.  Linking  the  Corps  to  national  similar  initiatives  to  create  more  synergy  and 
coherence  across  the  EU  is  embedded  as  a  principle  in  the  legal  base  for  the  future  Corps. 
Several  stakeholders,  including  representatives  of  European  Parliament,  have  called  for 

66 

 
 
 
 
 
reinforced policy cooperation in the field of volunteering and some Member States expressed 
similar request in their reports60 end 2017. 

At  present,  in  the  absence  of  a  European  statute,  volunteers  may  find  themselves  in 
disadvantageous  or  even  legally  irregular  situations,  since  they  are  not  protected  by  EU 
legislation applying to the free movement of workers. For instance, they may lose their rights 
to  social  and  unemployment  benefits,  etc.,  which  could  have  an  important  deterring  effect. 
There  are  only  limited  possibilities  to  volunteer  abroad  with  full  cost  coverage;  some 
programmes even charge the volunteer. 

The  2008  Council  Recommendation  on  the  cross-border  mobility  of  young  volunteers 61 
provides  a  good  basis  for  cooperation  among  Member  States  in  the  field  of  volunteering. 
However,  in  its  current  form,  it  has  not  proved  effective  enough  to  make  a  decisive  impact 
and  is  not  adapted  to  the  new  political  and  institutional  context  created  by  the  European 
Solidarity  Corps.  The  mid-term  evaluation  of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy  found  that  all  action 
lines  of  the  Council  Recommendation  are  still  highly  relevant  to  the  current  needs  and 
problems of young volunteers and to those of volunteering organisations, but not adequately 
implemented.  Moreover,  youth  organisations  considered  that  the  Council  Recommendation 
was not ambitious enough in its scope and objectives. 

EMPOWER: Supporting youth empowerment through quality, innovation and 
recognition of youth work 

A youth work agenda 

Under the current EU Youth Strategy, supporting and developing youth work are regarded as 
cross-sectoral issues. Since 2010, an impressive number of initiatives62 have addressed youth-
work, including in reaction to new priorities, such as the prevention of violent radicalisation. 
The youth work agenda can capitalise on these valuable results in terms of clear policy targets 
and  concrete  EU  deliverables.  The  future  youth  work  agenda  can  help  youth  work  adapt  to 
challenges  including  the  digital  transformation  or  new  expectations  towards  young  people 
(building  resilience,  transversal  skills,  etc.).  Youth  workers  generally  need  to  upgrade  their 
own  digital  competences  and  keep  up  with  evolving  needs  and  interests  of  young  people. 
They  also  still  struggle  to  valorise  the  outcomes  of  their  efforts  outside  their  sector,  and 
overall  the  sector  lacks  funds  that  prevent  them  from  investing  in  the  much  needed  change 
management. Building on studies and mutual learning from past years, the youth work agenda 
should be built around quality standards, recognition of learning outcomes and innovation in 
youth work. 

Young people should derive maximum benefit from their participation in quality youth work, 
which should be relevant and responsive to their interests, needs and experiences. 

Action  is  needed  to  ensure  youth  work  is  more  systematically  applying  quality  tools  and 
systems  that  are  strategic,  evidence-based  and  outcomes-focused.  Youth  worker  training 

60  https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/publication/EUYouthReport2018 
61  Council recommendation of 20 November 2008 on the mobility of young volunteers across the European 

Union, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32008H1213%2801%29.  

62  See website at https://ec.europa.eu/youth 

67 

 
 
                                                 
provision  should  include  such  approaches  and  correspond  to  the  realities  of  youth  work  at 
different  levels  and  ensure  responsiveness  to  trends  and  changing  circumstances  of  young 
people's  lives.  Such  quality  tools  and  systems  have  great  potential  to  contribute  to  an 
enhanced credibility and recognition of the youth work sector as a whole. 

Youth work should valorise learning outcomes by recognition tools that are accepted within 
and beyond the sector. 

Action is needed to enhance the awareness of the contribution of youth work to the lives of 
individuals and society as a whole. There is still a lack of data about the scale and scope of 
youth  work  and  a  lack  of  visibility  on  quantitative  and  qualitative  aspects  of  youth  work. 
Member States need to support broader efforts to ensure appropriate and accepted recognition 
tools for youth work, also in the context of delivering on the Council Recommendation on the 
validation  of  non-formal  and  informal  learning.  The  connection  with  other  sectors  must  be 
strengthened; cross-sectoral approaches are not yet common practice.  

Youth work should invest in digital opportunities and skills for youth workers to accompany 
the young people they work with. 

Action  is  needed  to  develop  the  youth  sector’s  structure,  working  methods  and  channels  of 
communication  so  as  to  reach  out  to  more  young  people. Conditions  for  digital  youth  work 
should be created and improved. Youth work should make use of technology and pedagogical 
practices to increase access and break down barriers for all young people to participation in 
society. Digital youth work should be incorporated into youth worker training, national youth 
work occupational standards and youth worker competence standards. 

5.3. Renewed governance mechanisms for greater impact 

In  line  with  the  evaluation  and  consultations,  the  Communication  proposes  to  review  the 
current  governance  mechanisms  to  improve  their  effectiveness  and  coordination  of  the 
strategy. It proposes to increase the participatory and cross-sectoral dimension at EU level. 

The strategy puts forward the following key innovations: 

Addressing the needs of young people across sectors 

There  is  consensus  between  stakeholders  to  keep  and  reinforce  a  cross-sectoral  policy 
approach and mainstream the youth dimension in policies that matter to young people. At the 
same  time,  experience  from  the  2010-18  cycle  shows  that  not  all  fields  of  actions  have  the 
same relevance for all Member States and if policy priorities are defined too broadly, the lack 
of  focus  may  hamper  youth  policies  in  delivering  results.  This  requires  a  certain  level  of 
flexibility, while the overall intervention logic and coherence of the Youth Strategy need to be 
maintained.   

Therefore the renewed Youth Strategy proposes a dual approach.  

1)  A reinforced attention at EU level including the following key actions:  

68 

 
 
Tracking EU spending on youth under the next Financial Framework. This would concern 
funding from the most relevant programmes63 targeting individuals, using also estimates 
in order to avoid creating extra administrative burden on reporting and data collection.  

  A  newly  established  European  Union  Youth  Coordinator  (a  European  Commission 

contact and visible reference point for young people). 

  The European Youth Portal will be consolidated to act as a single digital entry point. 

2)  Targeted actions on specific areas, translating European priorities in national context: 

  Member  States  should  establish  European  priorities  in  a  national  context  in  National 

Action Plans, drawing on a menu of priority areas established in the strategy; 

  Member States will be encouraged to commit to and carry out targeted actions in the 
priority areas and concentrate EU funding (e.g. ESF, Erasmus+) supported by relevant 
EU programmes; 

  The  actions  should  pursue  a  cross-sectorial  approach,  where  youth  policy  tools  and 
instruments  are  exploited  (e.g.  involvement  of  youth  workers,  involvement  of  young 
people on the design and implementation).  

Throughout the consultation process, the following priority areas have been identified, which 
serve as an indicative menu of priority areas: 

  Education and training; 
  Youth employment and entrepreneurship;  
  Health including mental health; 
  Youth poverty and social inclusion; 
 
  Digitalisation, internet and media; 
  Sustainability and climate change. 

Integration of young people with a migrant background; 

Cross-sectorial  cooperation  will  also  be  enhanced  thanks  to  a  EU  Youth  Strategy  platform, 
which will allow exchanges among stakeholders cutting across policy areas. 

EU Youth Strategy Platform 

The  EU  Youth  Strategy  Platform  will  enable  stakeholders,  including  representatives  of  EU 
institutions,  youth  organisations,  researchers,  National  Agencies,  to  share  information  and 
review progress on the implementation of the strategy, including on the results of the  Youth 
Dialogue.  The  platform  will  gather  once  a  year  (with  possible  stakeholder  meetings  in 
between),  taking  into  account  the  important  milestones  of  the  cooperation  process.  The 

63 notably  for  programmes  such  as  currently  named  Erasmus+;  European  Solidarity  Corps;  Employment  and 
Social  innovation  Programme;  Horizon  2020;  Creative  Europe;  Europe  for  Citizens;  Rights,  Equality  and 
Citizens; EU Health Programme; Erasmus for Entrepreneurs (COSME); Youth Employment Initiative; European 
Structural and Investment Funds;  Young Farmers' Scheme (Common Agricultural Policy); EU Aid Volunteer; 
European Neighbourhood Instrument. 

69 

 
 
                                                 
platform  should  enhance  transparency  about  the  implementation  of  the  Youth  Strategy  and 
create greater ownership of the process by greater stakeholder involvement.  

Mutual learning 

The Commission envisages using various methods in order to develop and reinforce mutual 
learning under the youth strategy, in cooperation with the Member States: 

  Expert  groups  on  particular  subjects,  aimed  at  delivering  policy  recommendations 
and/or concrete guidelines for the youth sector, including both ministries and external 
experts; 

  Peer-learning  focussing  on  shared  youth  policy  priorities  and  sectoral  priority  areas 

established in the triannual work plans.  

  Peer-counselling as a new tool to help Member States address a specific challenge and 
learn  from  other  countries  and  experts  (inspired  by  the  successful  model  under  the 
strategic  framework  for  cooperation  in  education  and  training  ET 2020).  Peer 
counselling should be initiated by the Member State requesting support.   

  Transnational  cooperation  activities  organised  between  National  Agencies  with 
practical  outcomes  or  deliverables.  These  should  be  aligned  to  national  priorities 
identified in the National Action Plans. 

National Action Plans  

The  Member  States  will  be  invited  to  present  action  plans,  in  which  they  will  explain  how 
they intend to achieve the three priority areas of the European youth cooperation over the next 
3  years.  As  far  as  work  across  policy  areas  is  concerned,  the  National  Action  Plans  will 
identify priority areas for actions (from the list included in the Communication) on which the 
country intends to focus its efforts. Member States will be encouraged to set concrete goals 
and outline the main actions foreseen to achieve those. The European youth cooperation tools 
should be used to support the efforts of the Member States regarding all these priorities. 

Monitoring 

The Commission could build on the existing dashboard of EU youth indicators as a yardstick 
to steer evidence. In addition, policy indicators may be needed to measure if Member States 
deliver on their policy intentions, as mentioned by several key actors in consultations. In this 
context, as mentioned in the Communication, the Commission envisages to set up an expert 
group in charge of devising policy indicators64.  

Reporting 

A  joint  report  will  continue  to  be  elaborated  every  3  years,  based  on  the  Youth  Wiki,  very 
short national questionnaires on the fixed and flexible priorities, Eurobarometer surveys and 
Eurostat data to review progress made in the implementation of the Strategy. In addition, the 

64  See Annex I. 

70 

 
 
                                                 
2024  Report  will  be  more  forward-looking  in  nature  and  propose  a  possible  review  of  the 
Strategy for the last cycle (2025-2027). 

71 

 
 
 
 
Figure 2: Highlights in the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy (2019-2027) 

Dissemination 

Dissemination  will  be  strengthened  through  better  exploiting  the  potential  of  existing 
networks,  (National  Agencies,  SALTO  resource  centres,  Eurodesk)  including  reinforced 
cooperation mechanisms and more strategic steer of activities. Outcomes and deliverables of 
the European cooperation in the youth field should be made accessible to a broad audience, 
which  might  require  translations  into  national  languages  and  adaptation  of  tools,  as 
appropriate. 

EU triennial work plans 

The Communication underlines the added value of the Council work plans that have been set 
up  since  2014,  in  order  to  achieve  a  better  coordination  of  the  strategy’s  instruments  and 
agenda. Annex J of this document provides some possible actions for a future EU Work Plan 
for Youth for 2019-2021. 

Links with the programmes  

The Commission has received clear messages from the evaluation and consultations about the 
need  to  reinforce  the  connection  between  youth  policy  cooperation  and  Erasmus+,  the 
European  Solidarity  Corps  and  other  EU  funding  sources.  Figure  3  below  illustrates  all  the 
potential synergies to develop and exploit between policy cooperation and programmes. 

72 

 
 
 
 
 
Figure 3: Positive cycle of synergies youth policy and programmes 

73 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Annexes 

A. Council resolutions and conclusions on youth 2010-2017 

11 May 2010 

Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, on the active inclusion of young people: combating 
unemployment and poverty, OJ C 137, 27.5.2010, p. 1-6 

19 November 2010 

Council conclusions of 19 November 2010 on the European and International Policy Agendas 
on Children, Youth and Children’s Rights, OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, p. 1-1 

Council conclusions of 19 November 2010 on access of young people to culture, OJ C 326, 
3.12.2010, p. 2-3 

Council conclusions of 19 November 2010 on the ‘Youth on the Move’ initiative — an 
integrated approach in response to the challenges young people face, OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, p. 
9-11 

Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, on youth work, OJ C 327, 4.12.2010, p. 1-5 

19 May 2011 

Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, on the Structured Dialogue with young people on youth 
employment, OJ C 164, 2.6.2011, p. 1-4 

Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, on encouraging new and effective forms of participation 
of all young people in democratic life in Europe, OJ C 169, 9.6.2011, p. 1-5 

28 November 2011 

Council conclusions on the eastern dimension of youth participation and mobility, OJ C 372, 
20.12.2011, p. 10-14 

11 May 2012 

Council conclusions of 11 May 2012 on fostering the creative and innovative potential of 
young people, OJ C 169, 15.6.2012, p. 1-4 

27 November 2012 

74 

 
 
 
Resolution of the Council and of the representatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, on the overview of the Structured Dialogue with young 
people on youth participation in democratic life in Europe, OJ C 380, 11.12.2012, p. 1-4 

Conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, of 27 November 2012 on the participation and social 
inclusion of young people with emphasis on those with a migrant background, OJ C 393, 
19.12.2012, p. 15-19 

16 May 2013  

Council conclusions on the contribution of quality youth work to the development, well-being 
and social inclusion of young people, OJ C 168, 14.6.2013, p. 5-9  

Council conclusions on maximising the potential of youth policy in addressing the goals of 
the Europe 2020 strategy, OJ C 224, 3.8.2013, p. 2-6  

25 November 2013 

Council conclusions on enhancing the social inclusion of young people not in employment, 
education or training, OJ C 30, 1.2.2014, p. 5-8 

20 May 2014 

Resolution of the Council and of the representatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, of 20 May 2014 on the overview of the Structured 
Dialogue process including social inclusion of young people, OJ C 183, 14.6.2014, p. 1-4  

Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, of 20 May 2014 on a European Union Work Plan for 
Youth for 2014-2015, OJ C 183, 14.6.2014, p. 5-11  

Council conclusions of 20 May 2014 on promoting youth entrepreneurship to foster social 
inclusion of young people, OJ C 183, 14.6.2014, p. 18-21  

12 December 2014 

Council conclusions on promoting young people’s access to rights in order to foster their 
autonomy and participation in civil society, OJ C 18, 21.1.2015, p. 1-4 

18 May 2015 

Council conclusions on reinforcing youth work to ensure cohesive societies, OJ C 170, 
23.5.2015, p. 2-3 

Council conclusions on enhancing cross-sectorial policy cooperation to effectively address 
socio-economic challenges facing young people, OJ C 172, 27.5.2015, p. 3-7 

75 

 
 
23 November 2015 

2015 Joint Report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the renewed 
framework for European cooperation in the youth field (2010-18), OJ C 417, 15.12.2015, p. 
17-24 

Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, on a European Union Work Plan for Youth for 2016-
2018, OJ C 417, 15.12.2015, p. 1-9 

Council Resolution on encouraging political participation of young people in democratic life 
in Europe, OJ C 417, 15.12.2015, p. 10–16 

30 May 2016 

Conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, on the role of the youth sector in an integrated and cross-
sectoral approach to preventing and combating violent radicalisation of young people, OJ C 
213, 14.6.2016, p. 1-5 

21 November 2016 

Conclusions of the Council and of the representatives of the Governments of the Member 
States, meeting within the Council, on promoting new approaches in youth work to uncover 
and develop the potential of young people, OJ C 467, 15.12.2016, p. 8-11 

May 2017 

Council Resolution on the Structured Dialogue and the future development of the dialogue 
with young people in the context of policies for European cooperation in the youth field, post 
2018, OJ C 189, 15.6.2017, p. 1-4 

Council Conclusions on the role of youth work in supporting young people’s development of 
essential life skills that facilitate their successful transition to adulthood, active citizenship 
and working life, OJ C 189, 15.6.2017, p. 30-34 

Council conclusions on strategic perspectives for European cooperation in the youth field 
post-2018, OJ C 189, 15.6.2017, p. 35-37 

20 November 2017 

Council conclusions on smart youth work, OJ C 418, 7.12.2017, p. 2-5 

76 

 
 
 
 
 
B. National Reports replies on the influence of the EU Youth Strategy on the national 
and local level 65 

Influence of the framework for cooperation on the national and local level 

Belgium 

Flemish Community: The results of the European cooperation are often 
complementary to our national discussions and therefore inspiring to 
and influencing our strategic policy planning at the level of the 
Flemish Community. We have less instruments to reach the local level. 

French Community: The reflection on radicalisation has inspired our 
Minister to build a bilateral partnership with France. It has also given 
some guidelines to the policies in that field. Once a topic is studied 
(any of them), it forces us to look deeper on the subject, to collect good 
practices from the field and exchange views, internally as well as 
internationally. It helps us to know better what is really ongoing on 
that topic in our society and in the grassroots organisations. 

German-speaking Community: The results of the European 
cooperation are inspiring the strategic planning of our own youth 
policy-making. We also invest a lot in our Erasmus+ National Agency 
to strengthen the implementation of the framework in the German-
speaking Community. Like the European programmes, the framework 
for cooperation is a window to Europe for us and an invitation for 
European colleagues to get to know a small community as ours. 

Czech 
Republic 

The EU Youth Strategy, especially its priority areas, played an 
important role in drafting the National Youth Strategy (2014-2020). 

The multilateral cooperation project ‘European Peer Learning on 
Youth Policy’ (2011-2013) initiated by Germany enabled the officials 
from the Czech Youth Department to gain valuable knowledge they 
could use in the development and drafting of the National Youth 
Strategy (2014-2020). 

The 2012 EU youth reporting exercise allowed the Youth Department 
to come together with their counterparts from different Ministries, to 
establish closer links and thus essentially strengthen cross-sectoral 
cooperation. 

Denmark 

The national Danish initiatives on different youth topics are in general 
originated in a national policy agenda more than caused by the EU 
Youth Strategy. As long as there are correlation between the work 
plan, the EU Youth Strategy and the national Danish policy agenda it 
will make the implementation easier. 

65  Roman alphabetical order of the countries’ geographical names in the original language(s). Information not 

available for Bulgaria, Ireland, Greece, Hungary. 

77 

 
 
 
                                                 
Influence of the framework for cooperation on the national and local level 

Germany 

Estonia 

The European cooperation has inspired decision-makers at technical 
and political level. For example, based on the Council 
Recommendation of 20 December 2012 on the validation of non-
formal and informal learning, the following two aspects were 
thoroughly discussed: a) developing general guidelines for recognition 
systems which help young people and young adults realise what they 
have learned in the framework of youth work opportunities; b) 
strengthening the recognition of the competences acquired by young 
people and young adults as well as learning opportunities offered 
through youth work and other out-of-school education. Another 
example is the multilateral cooperation project ‘Youthpart – youth 
participation in the digital society’ (2011-2014) which produced, 
amongst other things, guidelines for successful e-participation widely 
used at local, regional, national and European level. 

At national level, dealing with the themes of the European cooperation 
became a lot more common. This is also demonstrated by the fact that 
the 2014 and 2017 editions of the German Child and Youth Welfare 
Congress (DJHT) included European themes as well as a special focus 
on European youth policy. 

The results of the European cooperation have also inspired policy-
makers at regional level (Länder). In the city state of Berlin measures 
were taken in the area of transition to work, integration of refugees, 
prevention of violent radicalisation as well as promotion of youth work 
and youth participation. For instance, Berlin has set up a youth 
employment agency (Jugendberufsagentur) with youth welfare as a 
strong partner. Thanks to the results of the European cooperation, the 
state of Lower Saxony has increased the cross-border mobility of 
young people who are in the transition from education to employment. 
Together with the youth welfare offices of Bremen, Hamburg, 
Mecklenburg-West Pomerania and Schleswig-Holstein, Lower Saxony 
is part of the initiative ‘Take five for Europe’, which organises 
dialogue meetings with young people and decision-makers. 

The following perspectives were adopted for setting the goals of the 
current ‘Noortevaldkonna arengukava 2014-2020’ (Youth Field 
Development Plan 2014-2020): a) the situation of young people and its 
trends of change; b) developments in society and the challenges the 
state is facing, including goals in coherent policies; c) the current 
situation of the youth field, including youth work and youth policy: 
work done so far, principles and development needs; and d) trends in 
Europe and around the world, including objectives of the EU. 

78 

 
 
Influence of the framework for cooperation on the national and local level 

Spain 

France 

Croatia 

Italy 

Cyprus 

Youth policies in Spain are framed within the objectives and priorities 
of the Europe 2020 strategy, and within these, through some of its 
flagship initiatives: Youth on the move, Digital agenda for Europe, 
European platform against poverty. 

Apart from the work we currently do about participation, education 
(formal and non-formal), youth employment, etc., the Structured 
Dialogue is another aspect related to the framework for cooperation 
that we have developed in the period 2010-2017. Thanks to the 
Structured Dialogue Embassies and the engagement of the young 
people and member organisations, we have had the possibility to 
inspire new projects in the local and regional youth field. Just as an 
example, the Youth Council from Navarra has started the Youth 
Parliament in Navarra to empower young people and have influence in 
the public policy from their territory. 

The European cooperation had a real impact on French policy since the 
Priority Youth Plan (‘Plan Priorité Jeunesse’) was inspired by the 
eight fields of action and the cross-sectoral vision of the EU Youth 
Strategy. The principle of a structured dialogue with young people and 
the adoption of an annual youth report also stemmed from the 
framework for cooperation. 

The framework for cooperation is directed to the development of youth 
work. In accordance with the National Youth Programme (2014-2017) 
the Ministry of Demography, Family, Youth and Social Policy has 
established a working group to analyse possibilities of 
professionalising youth work. 

According to the assessment of the Croatian Youth Network, relevant 
impact from the European cooperation in the youth field is significant 
in the field of employment (in particular the Youth Guarantee), the 
development of youth work and the implementation of the Structured 
Dialogue. In other fields, the impact was limited. 

Some local/regional laws and/or programmes/initiatives have been 
inspired by the results of European cooperation in the youth field. 

The results of the European cooperation have influenced a lot since 
new projects have been developed from the Youth Board of Cyprus 
that have to do with the empowerment of all young people and the 
enhancement of their participation in society (for instance the decision 
to have a public consultation every year). We had an increase in the 
number of municipal youth councils since young people are more 
interested in the local level. 

79 

 
 
Influence of the framework for cooperation on the national and local level 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

The EU Youth Strategy gave impulse to propose at the national level a 
cross-sectoral approach with both short and long-term actions. Local 
policy-makers needed additional support to link their work with the 
European framework but those provided with advice used it to develop 
their own policy strategies based on the framework. 

Many processes related to the framework for cooperation are still 
ongoing, ranging from education to employment. Examples: Awarding 
extra points for competences acquired through non-formal learning or 
volunteering quality assurance; implementation of Structured Dialogue 
mechanisms; knowledge transfer, especially in tackling topics of 
inclusion and diversity; engagement schemes, especially the Youth 
Guarantee scheme which has fostered closer cooperation between 
actors working in different sectors. 

Luxembourg 

Peer learning, good practices, development of national policy 
instruments like the strong collaboration with a university to get 
evidence-based content, impetus for stronger Structured Dialogue 
mechanisms, clear visibility of youth issues and youth policy within 
the Ministry of Education. 

Malta 

The ‘National Youth Policy Towards 2020 A Shared Vision for the 
Future of Young People’ was inspired and modelled on the renewed 
framework for European cooperation in the youth field. It has a policy 
and strategic approaches and also includes similar fields of action. 

Netherlands 

There is certainly a connection; however, for the Dutch situation more 
emphasis on the local level is desirable. 

80 

 
 
Influence of the framework for cooperation on the national and local level 

Austria 

The National Youth Strategy was based on the EU Youth Strategy. 

In the frame of the symposia ‘Youth.Politics.Europe.Austria’ (see 
above under events) regional policy-makers selected the topic of the 
EU Youth Strategy most relevant to them.  

The legal recognition of volunteering increased as a national law on 
volunteering was established in 2012. Since 2016 it is possible to 
volunteer on a long-term basis (voluntary social year) as an alternative 
to the regular civilian service (alternative service for national military 
service). 

Digital youth work became a regional focus, strengthened by the 
results of the Screenagers study and input is being given by the 
chairperson of the EU expert group on digitalisation and youth. 

By establishing a national coordination unit for the Structured 
Dialogue, more visibility and importance was given to the process. On 
federal, regional and local level new ideas of how to involve young 
people in the dialogue and models were discussed together. 

The youth area-related ministries have been involved in the preparation 
of the national report on the implementation of the renewed framework 
for European cooperation in the field of youth. In the submitted 
contributions, the ministries inform on the youth-related activities 
completed within the specified time, which are in accordance with the 
objectives of the framework for cooperation. However, it is difficult to 
clearly assess the impact of the EU Youth Strategy on national 
initiatives, which are mainly taken by following the needs, possibilities 
and current socio-economic situation in the country. 

The European cooperation is being crucial in setting up youth 
strategies at national and local levels. This is demonstrated the fact that 
more and more local authorities are creating autonomous youth 
services and projects led by youth organisations and municipalities. 

European cooperation in the youth field had several positive impacts 
on the national reality. The preparation of the White Paper on Youth is 
certainly one of those more obvious results. On the other hand, the 
development of a professional profile for youth workers and 
appropriate RVCC (Recognition, Validation and Certification of 
Competences) also resulted from contacts with other European partners 
and observing their practices in this area, but always adapted to the 
specific national context. One can also mention the efforts made in 
order to enhance non-formal education and promote youth 
entrepreneurship. 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Low impact. More efforts have to be put in the future. 

81 

 
 
Influence of the framework for cooperation on the national and local level 

Slovenia 

Slovakia 

Finland 

Sweden 

Until 2013, Slovenian youth policy had a strong vertical dimension; it 
gained a new impetus through the European Youth Pact, EU 
resolutions and the EU Youth Strategy that promote a holistic youth 
policy. With the adoption of the National Youth Programme in 2013 
Slovenia has a more holistic and intersectoral youth policy. Inspiration 
how to make a horizontal youth policy more effective, very often 
comes from EU peer learning activities. 

The Strategy of the Slovak Republic for Youth (2014-2020) is based 
on the eight priority fields of the EU Youth Strategy. We have also 
drawn some inspiration from the results of the European cooperation 
when drafting a Concept Paper on Supporting Youth Work 2016-2020 
and the subsequent Action Plan for its implementation. We have also 
tackled some invitations to Member States from several adopted 
Council conclusions; more precisely they were addressed through calls 
for proposals under our grant scheme for Youth NGOs ‘Programmes 
for Youth 2014-2020’. We are also trying to get involved more the 
local policy-makers, mainly through a scheme called ‘Community of 
Youth’. 

The influence on national policies has not been assessed, but the 
influence is not one-directional: national objectives and results have 
also been successfully contributed to European discussions and 
integrated in joint objectives. 

At national level. EU youth policy recommendations are incorporated, 
where applicable, in the preparation of national policy documents. 
European cooperation was addressed in the preparation of the National 
Youth Work and Policy Programme, and a separate chapter has been 
dedicated to international and EU cooperation. 

The main themes for the Swedish youth policy during 2010-2018 have 
been the following: transition from school to work and society, mainly 
relating to employment, education and housing; young people’s power 
and participation; young people’s leisure time, organising and well-
being. 

82 

 
 
Influence of the framework for cooperation on the national and local level 

United 
Kingdom 

The EU Youth Strategy has encouraged national governments to 
consider the wider range of needs among young people when 
formulating their own national policies and strategies. This means that 
official statements over recent years in the UK (for example) have been 
based on a more holistic understanding of young people’s situation – 
beyond simply economic and social factors. 

The EU Youth Strategy has helped bring new programmes in to being 
(such as, Erasmus+), in turn bringing new opportunities to develop 
knowledge, skills and experience to wider populations of young 
people. 

The EU Youth Strategy itself is less a subject of interest and discussion 
than the policies / strategies it has prompted, or the opportunities these 
have led to. Nevertheless, there is interest from national authorities and 
leading youth organisations in supporting review and revision of the 
existing strategy. 

Serbia 

Special attention was paid on the results of the European cooperation 
during the drafting of the National Youth Strategy (2015-2025). Local 
authorities also have the results in mind when preparing their local 
youth action plans. 

Source: Reply to questionnaire ‘EU Youth Report 2018 – National Report’ 
(https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/publication/EUYouthReport2018) 

83 

 
 
 
 
C. Evidence-based youth policy: list of studies carried out 2010-2018 

European Commission 

European Commission (2011), Youth on the move: Youth participation and volunteering, 
Flash Eurobarometer 319a, 
http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/flash/fl_319a_en.pdf  

European Commission (2011), Youth on the move: Learning mobility and entrepreneurship, 
Flash Eurobarometer 319b, 
http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/flash/fl_319b_en.pdf  

European Commission (2013), Assessing practices for using indicators in fields related to 
youth, https://publications.europa.eu/s/enx8  

European Commission (2013), European Youth: Participation in democratic life, 
http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/flash/fl_375_en.pdf  

European Commission (2013), Youthpass impact study. Young people’s personal 
development and employability and the recognition of youth work,  
https://www.youthpass.eu/en/youthpass/downloads/youthpass-impact-study/  

European Commission (2013), Youth participation in democratic life, LSE, 
http://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/youth/policy/youth_strategy/documents/youth-participation-
study_en.pdf 

European Commission (2014), Working with young people: the value of youth work in the 
European Union, ICF GHK, https://publications.europa.eu/s/dlxl  

European Commission (2015), European Youth, Flash Eurobarometer 408, 
http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/flash/fl_408_en.pdf 

European Commission (2015), Their future is our future – Youth as actors of change. 
Research projects on youth inclusion, employment and participation supported by the 
European Union’s Research Framework Programmes, https://publications.europa.eu/s/enx9 

European Commission (2017), Study on the impact of transnational volunteering through the 
European Voluntary Service, https://publications.europa.eu/s/esfp  

European Commission (2017), Taking the future into their own hands – Youth work and 
entrepreneurial learning, https://publications.europa.eu/s/enya  

European Commission (2018), European Youth, Flash Eurobarometer 455, 
https://publications.europa.eu/s/flS1 

84 

 
 
 
 
European Commission (2018), Study on the impact of internet and social media on youth 
participation and youth work, Consortium led by Open Evidence 

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Mid-term evaluation of 
the Erasmus+ programme (2014-2020), COM/2018/050 final of 31.1.2018, http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM:2018:50:FIN  

European Commission (2018), Joint Research Center policy report, Civic attitudes and 
behavioural intentions among 14-year-olds. How can education make a difference towards a 
more democratic and cohesive Europe? 
http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC109180/jrc109180_iccs_science_
for_policy_report_final_pubsy.pdf  

OECD/European Commission 

OECD (2018), Resilience of students with an immigrant background - Factors that shape 
well-being, http://www.oecd.org/education/the-resilience-of-students-with-an-immigrant-
background-9789264292093-en.htm  

Cedefop 

Cedefop (2016), Validation in the care and youth work sectors. Thematic report for the 2016 
update of the European inventory on validation, https://publications.europa.eu/s/esfd  

Cedefop (2017), European inventory on validation of non-formal and informal learning. 2016 
update: synthesis report, https://publications.europa.eu/s/esff (past inventory updates 2014, 
2010, 2008, 2005, 2004 at http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/events-and-
projects/projects/validation-non-formal-and-informal-learning/european-inventory)  

Eurofound 

Eurofound (2011), Foundation Findings – Youth and work, 
https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/foundation-findings/2011/labour-market-
social-policies/foundation-findings-youth-and-work  

Eurofound (2011), Helping young workers during the crisis: Contributions by social partners 
and public authorities, https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/eurwork/comparative-
information/helping-young-workers-during-the-crisis-contributions-by-social-partners-and-
public-authorities  

85 

 
 
 
 
 
Eurofound (2012), Effectiveness of policy measures to increase the employment participation 
of young people, https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2012/labour-
market/effectiveness-of-policy-measures-to-increase-the-employment-participation-of-young-
people  

Eurofound (2012), Foundation Focus – Youth in Europe: Best days of their lives?, 
https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/foundation-focus/2012/labour-
market/foundation-focus-youth-in-europe-best-days-of-their-lives  

Eurofound (2012), NEETs – Young people not in employment, education or training: 
Characteristics, costs and policy responses in Europe, https://publications.europa.eu/s/fihp  

Eurofound (2012), Recent policy developments related to those not in employment, education 
and training (NEETs), https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/emcc/comparative-
information/recent-policy-developments-related-to-those-not-in-employment-education-and-
training-neets  

Eurofound (2012), Youth Guarantee: Experiences from Finland and Sweden, 
https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2012/labour-market/youth-guarantee-
experiences-from-finland-and-sweden  

Eurofound (2013), Active inclusion of young people with disabilities or health problems, 
https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2013/labour-market-social-
policies/active-inclusion-of-young-people-with-disabilities-or-health-problems  

Eurofound (2013), Working conditions of young entrants to the labour market, 
https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/eurwork/comparative-information/working-
conditions-of-young-entrants-to-the-labour-market  

Eurofound (2013), Young people and temporary employment in Europe, 
https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/emcc/comparative-information/young-
people-and-temporary-employment-in-europe  

Eurofound (2014), Mapping youth transitions in Europe, https://publications.europa.eu/s/fihq  

Eurofound (2014), Social situation of young people in Europe, 
https://publications.europa.eu/s/fihr  

Eurofound (2014, Social innovation in service delivery: New partners and approaches, 
https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2013/industrial-relations-social-
policies/social-innovation-in-service-delivery-new-partners-and-approaches  

Eurofound (2015), Social inclusion of young people, https://publications.europa.eu/s/fihs  

Eurofound (2015), Youth entrepreneurship in Europe. Values, attitudes and policies, 
https://publications.europa.eu/s/esfn  

86 

 
 
Eurofound (2016), Engaging the ‘missing middle’: Status quo, trends and good practice, 
https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/2016/labour-market-social-policies/engaging-
the-missing-middle-status-quo-trends-and-good-practice  

Eurofound (2016), Exploring the diversity of NEETs, https://publications.europa.eu/s/esfg 

Eurofound (2016), Start-up support for young people in the EU. From implementation to 
evaluation, https://publications.europa.eu/s/esfj  

Resources: Eurofound reports and other information on youth issues, 
https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/news/spotlight-on/resources-eurofound-reports-and-other-
information-on-youth-issues) 

87 

 
 
 
 
D. Mutual learning: list of expert groups and results 2010-2018 

Developing the creative and innovative potential of young people through non-formal 
learning in ways that are relevant to employability 

  Set up following the Council conclusions on fostering the creative and innovative 

potential of young people, May 2012 

  Member States (23) who have nominated an expert: BE (fr and nl), BG, CZ, DK, DE, 

EE, IE, EL, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, AT, PL, PT, SI, SK, FI, SE and UK 
  Outcomes: The report was submitted to the Council Working Party on Youth in 

January 2014, http://ec.europa.eu/youth/library/reports/creative-potential_en.pdf  
  Follow-up: Brochure (2015) Unleashing young people’s creativity and innovation – 

European good practice project (including briefings to different groups of 
stakeholders), https://publications.europa.eu/s/ejm0 

Youth work quality systems in EU Member States and the role of common indicators or 
frameworks 

  Set up following the Council conclusions on the contribution of quality youth work to 
the development, well-being and social inclusion of young people, May 2013, and 
under the European Union Work Plan for Youth (2014-2015) 

  Member States (20) who have nominated an expert: BE (fr and nl), CZ, DK, DE, EE, 

IE, FR, LV, LT, LU, HU, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, SI, SK, FI and SE 

  Outcomes: The report was submitted to the Council Working Party on Youth in April 

2015, http://ec.europa.eu/youth/library/reports/quality-youth-work_en.pdf  
  Follow-up: Handbook (2017) Improving youth work: your guide to quality 

development, https://publications.europa.eu/s/ejmZ  

Specific contribution of youth work to address the challenges young people are facing, in 
particular the transition from education to employment 

  Set up under the European Union Work Plan for Youth (2014-2015) 
  Member States (23) who have nominated an expert: BE (fr and nl), BG, CZ, DK, DE, 
EE, IE, FR, HR, IT, CY, LV, LT, LU, HU, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, SI, SK and FI 
  Outcomes: The report was submitted to the Council Working Party on Youth in 
December 2015, http://ec.europa.eu/youth/library/reports/contribution-youth-
work_en.pdf  

88 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Defining the specific contribution of youth work as well as non-formal and informal 
learning to fostering active citizenship and participation of young people in diverse and 
tolerant societies as well as preventing marginalisation, and radicalisation potentially 
resulting in violent behaviour 

  Set up under the European Union Work Plan for Youth (2016-2018) 
  Member States (19) who have nominated an expert: BE (fr and nl), CZ, DK, DE, EE, 

IE, ES, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, SI and SE 

  Outcomes: The report was submitted to the Council Working Party on Youth in 

February 2017, https://publications.europa.eu/s/ejmY  

Addressing the risks, opportunities, and implications of digitalisation for youth, youth 
work and youth policy 

  Set up under the European Union Work Plan for Youth (2016-2018) 
  Member States (20) who have nominated an expert: BE (fr and nl), CZ, DK, DE, EE, 

IE, ES, FR, HR, LV, LU, MT, AT, PL, PT, SI, SE, SK, FI and UK 

  Outcomes: The report was submitted to the Council Working Party on Youth in 

December 2017, https://publications.europa.eu/s/fous  

Defining the specific contribution of youth work as well as non-formal and informal 
learning to responding to the opportunities and challenges raised by the increasing 
numbers of young migrants and refugees in the European Union 

  Set up under the European Union Work Plan for Youth (2016-2018) 
  Member States (19) who have nominated an expert: BE (fr and nl), CZ, DK, DE, EE, 

EL, ES, HR, IT, CY, LV, LT, MT, NL, AT, PT, SI, SK, SE 

  Outcomes: The report will be submitted to the Council Working Party on Youth at the 

end of 2018 

89 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
E. Mutual learning: list of peer-learning activities and results 2014-2018 

Peer-learning activities organised by Member States under the European Union Work Plans 
on Youth  

Peer-learning activity 

Strengthen cross-sectoral youth policy-making at national 
level 

Report: Peer-learning exercise on cross-sectoral youth policy. 
Two seminars in the frame of the European Union Work Plan for 
Youth (2014-2015), http://pjp-
eu.coe.int/documents/1017981/1668203/CSYP+peer+learning+
Luxembourg+Riga+2015+final+report.pdf/fdcf9ce2-f148-4389-
bcdf-cf6b5e19ea50    

The first seminar took place in Luxembourg in June 2015. The 
second one took place in Riga, Latvia, in November 2015. 

Support to young people’s health and well-being, including 
mental health 

Cross-sectoral peer learning amongst Member States 
‘Participation of young people with mental health issues’ 

The first seminar took place in Amsterdam in November 2016; 
the second one took place in Helsinki in June 2017; the third 
seminar took place in Rotterdam in November/December 2017. 

http://www.mielenterveysseura.fi/en/development-projects/peer-
learning-participation-young-people-mental-health-issues  

Organising countries 

Latvia, Luxembourg 

Youth Ministries from 
Latvia and Luxembourg 

Netherlands, Finland 

The Netherlands Youth 
Institute 

The Finnish Association 
for Mental Health 

Youth work as a recognised and value added tool for cross-
sectoral cooperation in supporting young people’s transition 
to adulthood and the world of work 

Peer-learning seminar on innovative youth work approaches as a 
recognised and value added tool for cross-sectoral cooperation in 
supporting young people’s transition to adulthood. 

Malta 

European Union 
Programmes Agency 
(EUPA) 

The seminar took place in Malta in May/June 2017 

http://trainings.salto-youth.net/6484  

New practices in youth work and making the youth work 
more appealing 

Peer-learning seminar - From Innovation to Strengthening Life 
Skills 

Focus on how youth workers are using innovative approaches to 
engage with young people, ensure smoother transition of young 

Slovakia, Malta 

IUVENTA – Slovak 
Youth Institute (YIA-SK) 

European Union 
Programmes Agency 

90 

 
 
 
people to adulthood and better connection with the labour 
market needs. 

(EUPA), Malta 

The seminar took place in Slovakia in November/December 
2017. 

http://trainings.salto-youth.net/6863  

91 

 
 
 
 
F. Structured Dialogue: list of topics per cycle 2010-2018 

Structured Dialogue Cycle 

From – To 

Trio Presidency 

I – Youth Employment 

Early 2010 – Mid 2011 

Spain, Belgium, Hungary 

II – Youth Participation in 
Democratic Life in Europe 

Mid 2011 – End 2012 

Poland, Denmark, Cyprus 

III – Social Inclusion of 
Young People Across Europe 

Early 2013 – Mid 2014 

Ireland, Lithuania, Greece 

IV – Youth empowerment for 
political participation 

Mid 2014 – End 2015 

Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg 

V – Enabling all young 
people to engage in a diverse, 
connected and inclusive 
Europe. Ready for life, ready 
for society 

VI – Youth in Europe: 
What’s Next? 

Early 2016 – Mid 2017 

Netherlands, Slovakia, Malta 

Mid 2017 – End 2018 

Estonia, Bulgaria, Austria 

92 

 
 
 
 
 
 
G. Structured Dialogue Cycle V - January 2016 to June 2017 (consultation numbers) 

Reports  by  National  Working  Groups 66  and 
organisations to European Youth Forum 

international  non-governmental  youth 

National Working Groups 

Number of young persons 
consulted 

Belgium 

Bulgaria 

Czech Republic 

Denmark 

Germany 

Estonia 

Ireland 

Spain 

France 

Croatia 

Italy 

Cyprus 

Latvia 

Lithuania 

Luxembourg 

Hungary 

Malta 

Netherlands 

Austria* 

2 600 

360 

671 

1 092 

387 

1 968 

265 

808 

622 

870 

530 

700 

356 

3 000 

700 

2 000 

6 000 

3 777 

2 000 

66  Roman alphabetical order of the countries’ geographical names in the original language(s). Information not 

available for Greece, Poland. 

93 

 
 
 
                                                 
National Working Groups 

Number of young persons 
consulted 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovenia 

Slovakia 

Finland 

Sweden 

United Kingdom 

International non-governmental 
youth organisations** 

Total 

1 500 

2 063 

10 240 

11 896 

1 900 

1 500 

1 350 

3 000 

62 155 

* Outreach through the national website (local consultations are not included) 

** Surveys and consultations on a local level are not included. 

94 

 
 
 
 
 
H. EU initiatives and action in the eight fields of action 

Education and training 

  Education  and 
training_en 

training:  https://ec.europa.eu/youth/policy/youth-strategy/education-

  Strategic 

& 
http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/strategic-framework_en  

framework 

Education 

– 

Training 

2020: 

  Education  (educational  and  training  opportunities  available  throughout  Europe  for 
students  of  all  ages,  including  information  on  studying  abroad,  vocational  training, 
recognition of qualifications and skills): https://ec.europa.eu/info/education_en 

  Youth work: https://ec.europa.eu/youth/policy/implementation/work_en 
  Partnership between the European Union and the Council of Europe in the youth field. 

  Chapter 

Youth work: http://pjp-eu.coe.int/en/web/youth-partnership/youth-work2  
and 

Youth  Wiki, 
https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/en/content/youthwiki/6-education-and-
training-overview 

‘Education 

the 

of 

6 

training’: 

Employment and entrepreneurship 

  Employment 

entrepreneurship: 
strategy/employment-entrepreneurship_en 

and 

https://ec.europa.eu/youth/policy/youth-

  Youth employment: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=1036 
  Supporting 

entrepreneurs 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=952&langId=en  

and 

the 

self-employed: 

  Promoting 

entrepreneurship: 

http://ec.europa.eu/growth/smes/promoting-

entrepreneurship_en  

  Chapter 

3 

of 

the  Youth  Wiki, 

‘Employment 

and 

entrepreneurship’: 

https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/en/content/youthwiki/3-employment-
entrepreneurship-overview 

95 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Health and well-being 

  Health 

and  well-being: 

https://ec.europa.eu/youth/policy/youth-strategy/health-

wellbeing_en 

  Public health: https://ec.europa.eu/health/home_en 
  Health 

funding: 
eu/health/health-projects-and-funding_en  

projects 

and 

https://ec.europa.eu/info/live-work-travel-

  Health and safety at work: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=148  
  Chapter 
Youth  Wiki, 
https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/en/content/youthwiki/7-health-and-well-
being-overview  

‘Health 

and 

the 

of 

7 

well-being’: 

Participation 

  Participation  in  civil  society:  https://ec.europa.eu/youth/policy/youth-strategy/civil-

society_en 

  Structured Dialogue: https://ec.europa.eu/youth/policy/implementation/dialogue_en 
  New 
Europe 

Narrative 

Discover 

the 

for 

- 

project: 

https://europa.eu/youth/eu/article/50/36003_en  

  Citizens’ Dialogues: https://ec.europa.eu/info/events/citizens-dialogues_en 
  Europe  for  Citizens  programme:  http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/europe-for-citizens-

programme/  

  Chapter  5  of  the  Youth  Wiki,  ‘Participation’:  https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-

policies/en/content/youthwiki/5-participation-overview 

Voluntary activities 

  Voluntary 

activities: 

https://ec.europa.eu/youth/policy/youth-strategy/voluntary-

activities_en 

  European Solidarity Corps: https://ec.europa.eu/info/eu-solidarity_en  
  EU 

https://ec.europa.eu/echo/what/humanitarian-aid/eu-aid-

Volunteers: 

Aid 

volunteers_en  
2 

  Chapter 

of 

the 

Youth 

Wiki, 

‘Voluntary 

activities’: 

https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/en/content/youthwiki/2-voluntary-
activities-overview  

Social inclusion 

  Social inclusion: https://ec.europa.eu/youth/policy/youth-strategy/social-inclusion_en 
  Social 

protection 

social 

inclusion: 

and 

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=750  

96 

 
 
 
 
 
  Rights 

the 
child/index_en.htm 

of 

child: 

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/rights-

  Fundamental rights: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/index_en.htm 
  Social 

integration 

market 

labour 

and 

of 

refugees: 

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1274&langId=en  

  Radicalisation Awareness Network (RAN): https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-

do/networks/radicalisation_awareness_network_en  

changing  world 

  Horizon 2020, the EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation. Europe in 
societies: 

a 
http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/europe-changing-
world-inclusive-innovative-and-reflective-societies  

innovative 

Inclusive, 

reflective 

and 

- 

  Chapter  4  of  the  Youth  Wiki,  ‘Social  inclusion’:  https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-

policies/en/content/youthwiki/4-social-inclusion-overview 

Youth and the world 

  Youth and the World: https://ec.europa.eu/youth/policy/youth-strategy/world_en 
  SALTO  Eastern  Europe  &  Caucasus  Resource  Centre:  https://www.salto-

youth.net/rc/eeca/  

  SALTO EuroMed Resource Centre: https://www.salto-youth.net/rc/euromed/  
  SALTO South East Europe Resource Centre: https://www.salto-youth.net/rc/see/  
  EU contribution to international goals (combat climate change and promote sustainable 
https://ec.europa.eu/info/energy-climate-change-environment/overall-

development): 
targets/eu-contribution-international-goals_en  

  EU 

Aid 

Volunteers: 

https://ec.europa.eu/echo/what/humanitarian-aid/eu-aid-

 

volunteers_en  
International  Cooperation  and  Development  –  Building  partnerships  for  change  in 
Development: 
countries. 
developing 
https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/sectors/human-development_en  

Human 

  Chapter 

9 

of 

the 

Youth  Wiki, 

‘Youth 

and 

the 

world’: 

https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/en/content/youthwiki/9-youth-and-world-
overview 

Creativity and culture 

  Creativity  and  culture:  https://ec.europa.eu/youth/policy/youth-strategy/creativity-

culture_en 

  Culture,  Heritage,  Sport 

in 
eu/culture-heritage-sport-eu_en  

the  EU:  https://ec.europa.eu/info/live-work-travel-

  Culture. Supporting Europe’s cultural and creative sectors: https://ec.europa.eu/culture/  

97 

 
 
 
 
  Creative Europe, the European Commission’s framework programme for support to the 
https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/creative-

audiovisual 

sectors: 

culture 
europe/index_en  

and 

  Chapter 

8 

of 

Youth  Wiki, 
https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/en/content/youthwiki/8-creativity-and-
culture-overview 

‘Creativity 

and 

the 

culture’: 

98 

 
 
 
 
 
I. Possible policy indicators for the priority areas proposed for the future cooperation 
over the period 2019-2027 

These are outcome indicators based on existing processes. 

ENGAGE: Fostering youth participation in democratic life  

  Number  of  young  people  involved  in  participatory  processes  at  national/subnational 

level 

  Number of young people reached by EU Youth Dialogue and other participatory EU-

level initiatives 

  Number of users on the European Youth Portal 

CONNECT: Connecting young people across the EU and beyond to foster voluntary 
engagement, learning mobility, solidarity and intercultural understanding  

  Number of young people participating in the European Solidarity Corps 
  Number  of  young  people  participating  in  youth  exchanges  under  the  Erasmus+ 

programme 

EMPOWER: Supporting youth empowerment through quality, innovation and 
recognition of youth work  

  Number of youth workers directly involved in the Erasmus+ programme 
  Number of young people and youth workers having received a Youthpass certificate 

99 

 
 
 
 
 
J. Possible actions for a future EU Work Plan for Youth for 2019-2021 

Working method/Instrument 

Indicative target date and output 

General outputs 

Expert group on indicators 

Mid 2019  

Policy indicators to help monitor progress 
in the implementation of the Youth 
Strategy  

National Action Plans 

Mid 2019 

EU Youth Strategy Platform 

Member States to submit National Action 
Plans 

At least once a year (with stakeholder 
meetings in between).  

Report from platform to be disseminated to 
a broad audience.  

EU Youth Report 2021 

Spring 2021 

Report on progress made over the 2019-
2021 in the implementation of the Youth 
Strategy, including the triannual work plan  

ENGAGE: Fostering youth participation in civic and democratic life 

European Youth Week  

2019 

Dedicated events across the EU to mobilise 
young people  

First cycle of Youth Dialogue 

June 2020 

Results from the Youth Dialogue   

Second cycle of Youth Dialogue 

December 2021 

Results from the Youth Dialogue  

100 

 
 
 
 
 
CONNECT: Connecting young people across the EU to foster voluntary 
engagement, solidarity and intercultural understanding 

Expert group on cross-border solidarity 

2019  

Policy recommendations to feed into the 
review of the Council Recommendation on 
cross-border mobility of volunteers 

Council Recommendation on promoting 
cross-border solidarity actions 

2020  

Adoption by Council 

Peer-learning activities on national 
solidarity activities 

2020-21 

Peer learning activities to exchange good 
practices and support the implementation 
of the Recommendation on the cross-
border solidarity activities  

EMPOWER: Supporting youth empowerment with a focus on quality and 
innovative youth work 

Peer-learning activity and exchange of 
good practices examples 

Development of an online course on 
youth work  

Collect, as part of the Youth Wiki, 
qualitative information on youth work 

2019 

Compendia of good practice examples; 

Further dissemination of Expert Groups 
results and other practices under Erasmus+ 

2020 

Online course on youth work; 

Further dissemination of the Handbook on 
Improving youth work – your guide to 
quality development (2017) 

Further dissemination of the expert group 
report on Developing digital youth work 
(2018) 

2019-2020 

Separate Youth Wiki chapter on youth 
work 

Peer-learning activity on innovative ways 
of financing youth work 

2021 

Compendium of good practice examples 

101 

 
 
Governance and cross-sectoral aspects 

Seminars and peer-learnings to be 
determined 

Cross-sectoral exchange of good practices 

Peer-learning activity on cross-sectoral 
approaches in youth work 

2020 

Compendium of good practice examples 

Study to propose a toolkit on youth 
policies reaching grassroots level 

2020 

Development of a practical toolkit targeted 
at policy makers at regional and local level 
on addressing the needs of young people, 
with special attention on cross-sectorial 
partnerships 

102 

 
 
 
 
 
K. Glossary 

CoR – Committee of the Regions 

Council Working Party on Youth – the Youth Working Party prepares items for discussion by 
EU ministers for youth 

EESC – European Economic and Social Committee 

EQF –European Qualifications Framework 

ESF – European Social Fund 

ESIF – European Structural and Investment Funds 

ET 2020 – strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training 

EU – European Union 

Eurodesk – as a support organisation to Erasmus+, Eurodesk makes information on learning 
mobility comprehensive and accessible to young people and those who work with them 

EVS – European Voluntary Service 

MEP – Member of the European Parliament 

MFF – Multiannual Financial Framework 

NA – National Agency (Erasmus+ programme) 

NFIL – non-formal and informal learning 

NGO – non-governmental organisation 

NQF – National Qualifications Framework 

NWG – National Working Groups (Structured Dialogue) 

OMC – open method of coordination 

RAY – research-based analysis and monitoring of Erasmus+ Youth in Action programme 

SALTO-YOUTH – support, advanced learning and training opportunities for youth (within 
the Erasmus+ Youth in Action programme) 

TCA – transnational cooperation activities (Erasmus+ programme) 

VET – vocational education and training 

103