Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee – The importance of institutionalising civil and social dialogue in EU candidate and partner countries (own-initiative opinion)
Date: 2025-07-17
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU candidate countries, civil society, participatory democracy, public consultation, social dialogue, social participation, social policy, third country








C_202505152EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5152


28.10.2025






Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee
The importance of institutionalising civil and social dialogue in EU candidate and partner countries
(own-initiative opinion)
(C/2025/5152)


Rapporteurs: 
                  Decebal-Ștefăniță PADURE


Dumitru FORNEA


Ionuţ SIBIAN







Advisors


Mircea MITRUȚIU (Rapporteur’s advisor Group I)
Igor ZUBCU (Rapporteur’s advisor Group II)
Simona CONSTANTINESCU (Rapporteur’s advisor Group III)




Plenary Assembly decision


23.1.2025




Legal basis


Rule 52(2) of the Rules of Procedure




Section responsible


External Relations




Adopted in section


12.6.2025




Adopted at plenary session


17.7.2025




Plenary session No


598




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


187/0/2




1.   Conclusions and recommendations









1.1.


An independent and vibrant civil society is vital for democracy, protecting fundamental rights and freedoms, and countering rising extremist movements that question EU values. Organised civil society, grounded in democratic values, acts in the public interest by mediating between authorities and citizens, amplifying diverse voices, including those of vulnerable groups. It provides a platform for peaceful activism, advocacy and the defence of rights, strengthening democratic engagement and accountability.












1.2.


Building on the scope of the EESC’s previous proposals on civil dialogue (1) and social dialogue (2), the EESC reiterates the importance of institutionalising civil and social dialogue also in EU candidate and partner countries (3), with the following refined objectives:






—


The existence of a comprehensive and conducive legislative framework that ensures the effective participation of civil society organisations (CSOs), social partners and other relevant stakeholders in the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of legislative and policy work. This framework should align with EU standards of inclusiveness, transparency and accountability, as well as those established by the United Nations (UN), particularly within the framework of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 16.










—


Aligning the institutional set-up of civil and social dialogue in the candidate countries with the principles, standards and good practices in the European Union and encouraging it in partner countries with reference to the European Economic and Social Committee. Both civil and social dialogue should benefit from adequate resources and national regulatory frameworks that would guarantee their effective functioning and convergence in ensuring a permanent dialogue between the state and society.










—


Promoting authentic and structured tripartite dialogue between governments, trade unions and employers’ organisations to foster cooperation in key areas such as employment, labour rights, collective bargaining, regional development, education and just transition strategies.










—


Strengthening the capacity of CSOs and social partners to participate effectively, and at the same level, in civil and social dialogue, through dedicated financial support, training, institutional partnerships and operational assistance, and without prejudice to their independence from the government.










—


Encouraging the exchange of good practices and know-how from EU Member States, via structured cooperation, peer learning programmes, technical assistance and strategic partnerships.










—


Expanding the involvement of organised civil society in EU-funded cooperation frameworks, in order to support participatory governance.
















1.3.


In order to reach these goals, the EESC recommends the following concrete preliminary actions:






—


The relevant institutions of the European Union can promote, in their relations with candidate and partner states, the importance of the involvement and effective participation of organised civil society in the negotiation processes, in a transparent and inclusive manner, thus also contributing to strengthening the role of the Joint Consultative Committees, Civil Society Platforms or Domestic Advisory Groups, consultative structures of civil society that exist and operate based on the association agreements or trade treaties of the EU with various neighbouring states or other regions of the world.










—


Envisaging a monitoring process that would allow the EESC and other relevant civil society stakeholders to oversee the performance of institutional civil and social dialogue during the full cycle of regulatory and public policy shaping, and issue recommendations where necessary.










—


Integrating civil and social dialogue conditionality into EU accession negotiations and cooperation programmes, especially in terms of compliance with Articles 151 to 155 of the TFEU on social policy and stakeholder consultation.










—


Creating inclusive and permanent national platforms for dialogue between governments, CSOs and social partners, functioning as institutionalised fora for policy debate and legislative co-creation, using the EESC as a model.










—


Implementing targeted EU funding programmes to support the development and long-term sustainability of independent CSOs and social partner structures, enabling their active and equitable participation in public policy and EU integration processes.










—


European Union institutions and civil society organisations, need to enhance their efforts to support information campaigns that highlight the importance of social and civil dialogue. This is particularly crucial for engaging young people. These activities should be conducted in partnership with civil society organisations or social partners in the candidate and partner countries.
















1.4.


The EESC recommends that both social partners and civil society organisations should be members of Economic and Social Councils (ESCs). In states where only the social partners participate in the work of the existing ESC, other channels/platforms for civil dialogue should be established.




2.   Background

Civil and social dialogue is a fundamental pillar of the European model of participatory governance. Over the past decades, this dialogue has significantly contributed to the consolidation of democracies in EU Member States and has played a crucial role in promoting sustainable, equitable and inclusive socio-economic development.








2.1.


Institutionalised social dialogue at European level was legally regulated by the signing of the Treaties of Rome by the founding states of the European Economic Community on 25 March 1957. In the same year, as a result of these treaties, the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) was established: the main European consultative body which was intended to be ‘a bridge between the Community institutions and organised civil society’.












2.2.


In Title X of the Treaty – Social Policy, there are references to social and civil dialogue and consultation of the European Economic and Social Committee: Articles 151, 152, 153, 154 and 155. For example, Article 152 states that: ‘The Union recognises and promotes the role of the social partners at its level, taking into account the diversity of national systems. It shall facilitate dialogue between the social partners, respecting their autonomy.’.












2.3.


As relations between the European Union and candidate countries, as well as partner countries in the eastern and southern regions, expand, there is a need to strengthen civil and social dialogue as part of the integration and cooperation processes. Previous EESC opinions have stressed that structured social and civil dialogue is a key factor for the success of development, social cohesion and democratisation policies in these countries (4).












2.4.



Social dialogue













2.5.


The International Labour Organization (ILO) defines social dialogue as all types of negotiation, consultation or exchange of information between, or among, representatives of governments, employers’ organisations and trade unions on issues of common interest relating to economic and social policy. It can exist as a tripartite process, with the government as one party, or it may consist of bipartite relations between workers and management. Social dialogue plays a pivotal role in influencing economic, labour and social policies and in promoting convergences in living and working conditions. The process of collective bargaining is a crucial tool of social dialogue that aims to guarantee decent working conditions and justice in the workplace.






Civil dialogue










2.6.


Though no universal definition of civil dialogue has been adopted, it is widely recognised as a key component of the work of civil society organisations (CSO) in ensuring that citizens’ voices are heard in decision-making processes. The sectoral, cross-cutting and horizontal components of civil dialogue promote collaboration and inclusivity in public governance, enhancing the legitimacy and accountability of policies. This is achieved through two complementary dimensions: 1) dialogue among CSOs to exchange views and expertise; and 2) structured dialogue between CSOs and government institutions to ensure that diverse voices are considered in policy-making.




3.   General comments









3.1.


In many candidate and partner countries, civil and social dialogue remains fragmented and lacks institutional regulation, which affects their capacity to develop coherent and inclusive public policies. In the absence of clear institutional structures, the involvement of civil society and social partners in decision-making is limited and uneven, leading to a lack of trust in democratic processes and citizen disengagement.












3.2.


The EESC underlines the clear distinction between social dialogue, as enshrined in Articles 151 – 155 TFEU and involving social partners (employers’ organisations and trade unions), and civil dialogue, as framed under Article 11 TEU, which includes broader organised civil society actors. These two forms of dialogue are complementary but distinct in purpose, actors and institutional frameworks.












3.3.


A structured and well-institutionalised civil and social dialogue is essential for ensuring stability, institutional memory, economic development and social cohesion in candidate/partner countries. By promoting and supporting such institutional constructions, the European Union and Member States can strengthen their role as a reliable partner and support democratic processes in these countries, contributing to smoother and more sustainable integration into the European family within the enlargement processes, but also in the relationship with other partner countries that could be inspired by the concept of institutionalised civil and social dialogue.












3.4.


In addition, the EESC President recently launched an initiative to more actively involve candidate countries in the EESC’s activities. This initiative aims to ensure that these countries can benefit from the expertise and experiences of EU Member States, in particular in promoting competitive economies through social dialogue and a broader involvement of civil society. By integrating candidate countries early in these processes, the EESC not only helps to prepare them for future EU membership, but also supports the creation of resilient economies that can compete on a global scale while maintaining high social standards.












3.5.


In this context, the institutionalisation of civil and social dialogue becomes a key driver not only of social and democratic progress, but also of economic performance, thus helping to align candidate and partner countries with EU and UN standards and competitiveness objectives.












3.6.


In some candidate countries where such bodies do not exist, the process of assessing the possibility of establishing an Economic and Social Council or similar body at national level has already started, and the expertise of the EESC and other similar organisations in the Member States would be very useful for developing the needs analysis and finalising the legislative and administrative processes related to this institutional construction.












3.7.


The establishment of Economic and Social Councils in candidate and some partner countries where they do not exist could facilitate increased cooperation and better synchronisation between EU actions and the interests of organised civil society in these countries.












3.8.


The institutionalisation of social and civil dialogue helps civil society organisations and social partners to be treated with respect and to benefit in an organised, efficient and transparent manner from public financial resources that are allocated to civil and social dialogue processes at local, regional, national or European level and beyond.












3.9.


Creating an Economic and Social Council where they do not exist would also allow for the existence of a body of professional civil servants in certain fields who would develop opinions and recommendations approved by consensus of civil society parties, ensuring the improvement of draft documents developed by public authorities and the exclusion of social disputes.












3.10.


Social partners (unions and employers’ associations) and representatives of other civil society organisations that will be part of the Economic and Social Council or a similar body would benefit from:






—


mandatory consultation of draft normative acts in the specialised fields provided for by the law, initiated by the government, as well as legislative initiatives of deputies;










—


development, at the request of the government, parliament or on its own initiative, of analyses/studies regarding economic, social and environmental realities for which governments should provide administrative and financial support;










—


reporting to the government or parliament about the emergence of economic and social phenomena that require the development of new normative acts and/or the modification of existing ones.








4.   Specific comments









4.1.


The institutionalisation of social and civil dialogue can be carried out in various organisational structures, respecting the particularities of each state, taking into account the interests and aspirations of civil society organisations and social partners, but at the same time taking into account the best practices at European and international level in this field.












4.2.


The EESC believes that institutionalising civil and social dialogue accelerates the integration of candidate countries into the European social model, based on the representativeness and diversity of the social partners and civil society organisations, and their involvement in public decision-making.












4.3.


The EESC notes that Economic and Social Councils and other forms of institutionalised civil and social dialogue contribute significantly to strengthening the model of governance and participatory democracy, and plays a crucial role in promoting sustainable, equitable and inclusive socio-economic development.












4.4.


The EESC stresses the need to strengthen civil and social dialogue as part of the integration and cooperation processes between candidate countries and Member States. Structured civil and social dialogue is a key factor for the success of sustainable development, social cohesion and democratisation policies in these countries.












4.5.


Social dialogue, particularly in its tripartite form, involves structured interaction between governments, employers’ organisations and trade unions, focusing primarily on the labour market, working conditions and economic policies. In contrast, civil dialogue encompasses a broader range of actors, with civil society organisations (CSOs) participating in a process of participatory governance alongside three other key stakeholders: public authorities, political institutions and, in some cases, economic and social actors. While distinct, these two forms of dialogue are complementary and represent essential pillars of democratic legitimacy and inclusive policy-making within the EU.












4.6.


Institutionalised and structured consultation ensures social peace and a favourable social and economic environment for development and modernisation in candidate/partner countries, both by dissipating accumulated social tensions through dialogue and negotiation, and by creating the conditions for establishing and maintaining a predictable institutional and legal framework for citizens and economic actors in the country and abroad.












4.7.


The EESC notes that by integrating institutionalised civil and social dialogue into all legislative and public policy decisions that have a significant social, economic and environmental impact, the representation of various interests in society is ensured: SMEs, foreign investors, public companies, employees, civil society and local communities.












4.8.


In the Economic and Social Councils, social partners and civil society organisations representing various interests develop their capacity for consensus and compromise through negotiation and dialogue and learn to negotiate and balance their opinions in order to reach a common point of view in their relationship with decision-makers.












4.9.


In states where they do not exist, the establishment of Economic and Social Councils will strengthen the role and place of social partners and civil society organisations in the consultation and partnership relationship with the governments of candidate and partner countries, by requiring them to consult and seek their opinion on all legislative and public policy projects with a significant social, economic and environmental impact.












4.10.


In the same way, representative social partners and civil society organisations will need to develop their own skills in analysing public policies and formulating opinions, amendments and alternative public policies in order to live up to their new institutionalised rights.












4.11.


The EESC recommends that candidate and partner countries establish clear and transparent criteria for the selection of representatives in civil and social dialogue including rotation mechanisms, public accountability measures and regular assessments of representativeness, in order to ensure legitimacy, credibility and diversity.












4.12.


In this regard, European pre-accession funds should be allocated to support the institutionalisation and operationalisation of structured civil and social dialogue mechanisms. Funding should focus on developing the administrative and regulatory frameworks needed for participatory governance and inclusive policy-making, including the transfer of know-how and experience regarding democratic dialogue structures and public policy processes from the EESC, national ESCs and similar bodies in the Member States to their counterparts in candidate and partner countries, without financing the core operations of social partners or civil society organisations, in order to preserve their autonomy and independence.












4.13.


Programmes to build mutual trust between public and private partners involved in civil and social dialogue must also be developed. The body of experts employed in the administration of the ESCs and the structuring of the activity into specialised sections will contribute to the efficiency of the activity of these consultative institutions.












4.14.


The EESC was the first European body to officially start involving candidate countries in its work, thus setting a positive example for other EU institutions. ‘Enlargement Candidate Member’ is an honorary title, showing support and consideration for civil society representatives from EU candidate countries, without conferring on them the status of EESC member.












4.15.


The early establishment of Economic and Social Councils or similar bodies in states where they do not already exist and the involvement of civil society representatives in the accession process/negotiating working groups will contribute to the pace of the negotiation process on the accession of candidate countries to the EU, particularly with regard to two clusters of negotiating chapters: Fundamentals (chapters ‘Judiciary and fundamental rights’ and ‘Justice, freedom and security’) and Competitiveness and inclusive growth (chapters on ‘Enterprises and industrial policy’ and ‘Social policy and employment’).












4.16.


Funding opportunities for candidate countries are designed with the objective of supporting the implementation of large systemic reforms, mainly focused in Cluster 1 Fundamentals. The functioning of democratic institutions is also associated with transparency in governance and consultations/involvement of civil society organisations in the EU integration process, both of which are part of the objectives of institutionalising civil and social dialogue.












4.17.


In line with the EU partnership principle and the social and economic objectives of the growth plans for candidate countries, the EESC insists that the social partners and civil society must be involved in the design phase as well as in the implementation, monitoring and evaluation phases of reform agendas in a timely and meaningful manner (5).












4.18.


The EESC recommends that the reform agendas must include a summary of the consultation process, showing how stakeholder input was reflected, in line with its 2024 opinion on the New Growth Plan and the Reform and Growth Facility for the Western Balkans.












4.19.


The EESC stresses that the institutionalisation of civil and social dialogue in the form of Economic and Social Councils in candidate and partner countries does not replace the tripartite social dialogue between governments, employers and trade unions on the labour market (pay and working conditions) in the form of tripartite social dialogue committees or councils at territorial and national level.






Brussels, 17 July 2025.


The President


of the European Economic and Social Committee

Oliver RÖPKE
               





(1)  Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Strengthening civil dialogue and participatory democracy in the EU: a path forward (exploratory opinion requested by the Belgian Presidency) (OJ C, C/2024/2481, 23.4.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2481/oj).

(2)  Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the proposal for a Council Recommendation on strengthening social dialogue in the European Union (COM(2023) 38 final – 2023/0012 (NLE)) and on the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on strengthening social dialogue in the European Union: harnessing its full potential for managing fair transitions (COM(2023) 40 final) (
OJ C 228, 29.6.2023, p. 87).

(3)  Partner country means any State that enters into a Partnership Agreement with EU. The list of countries is available at: Countries - European Commission: https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/countries_en.

(4)  Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Strengthening civil dialogue and participatory democracy in the EU: a path forward (exploratory opinion requested by the Belgian Presidency) (OJ C, C/2024/2481, 23.4.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2481/oj).
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee – Youth involvement in social and civil dialogue in the Mediterranean region (own-initiative opinion) (OJ C, C/2025/1189, 21.3.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1189/oj).

(5)  Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee – Paving the way to EU accession for the Western Balkans (exploratory opinion) (OJ C, C/2024/6872, 28.11.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6872/oj).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5152/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)