The Lisbon Strategy

Document Sample
The Lisbon Strategy Powered By Docstoc
					 The Lisbon Strategy

Background, development and
     future perspective
Objectives of European Integration
• Lisbon can be seen as an extension of
  integration‟s initial objectives
  – Peace and stability (political)
  – Economic growth and socio-economic
    modernization (economic)
    •   Coal and Steel Community
    •   Common Commercial Policy
    •   Agricultural Policy
    •   Regional Policy
 Re-launch of integration (mid-80s
• Internal Market Programme and the Single European Act
• Development of internal policies (environment , social
  regional, consumer etc.) through new instruments:
  structural funds, mutual recognition
• EMU and the single currency (1992) with the Stability
  Pact and the European Central Bank
       resulting in deeper economic interdependence, re-regulation on
  European level, Europeanization of national administrations, loss of
  national independence in monetary policy and restricted room for
  manoeuvre in national economic policy.
  The Lisbon Summit, March 2000
• “turning Europe into the world‟s most competitive and
  dynamic knowledge-based economy, capable of
  sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs
  and greater social cohesion” within 10 years
• A three-pronged strategy aimed at
   – A transition to a knowledge-based economy by improving policies for the
     information society and R&D, pursuing structural reform for competitiveness and
     completing the internal market
   – A modernization of the European social model by investing in people and
     combating social exclusion
   – Sustaining the economic outlook and favourable growth perspective by applying
     an appropriate macro-economic policy mix
   • Quantifiable targets in a variety of areas (R&D, education, employment etc)
   • Making use of existing processes and reporting instruments: the BEPG (Stability
     Pact), the Employment Guidelines (the Luxemburg process) and structural
     reform (the Cardiff process)
   • Governance based on the Community method, the Open Method of Co-
     ordination and political commitment
 The Lisbon objectives widened
• The summits of Nice (December 2000),
  Stockholm (March 2001) and Gothenburg (June
  2001) added new objectives to Lisbon
  – The European Social Agenda: structural reform of labour
    markets, job creation and measures against social exclusion,
    poverty and discrimination
  – Sustainable social protection systems (pension and health care
    systems), promotion of frontier technologies (f.i. biotechnology)
  – Sustainable development – making the environment Lisbon‟s
    third pillar
         Running out of steam?
• The summit of Barcelona (Match 2002): agreement on
  liberalizing electricity and gas markets for non-household
  consumers; a go-ahead for Galileo; political commitment
  on an increase in public R&D spending (3% of GDP),
  spreading broadband technology, implementation of the
  „Single Sky‟ by 2004 and a host of measures to boost job
• Brussels I summit (March 2003) overshadowed by the
  war in Iraq and the beginning of the unraveling of the
  Stability Pact. First warnings about member states‟
  dismal implementation record and lack of national reform
     Faltering implementation
• Brussels II summit (March 2004) overshadowed
  by terrorist attack and the break-up of the
  Stability Pact
• European Action for Growth (package for
  investment in infrastructure – physical and
• Commission warning on faltering implementation
  of Lisbon objectives, both on European and
  national levels, indication that EU members
  would not fulfill the Lisbon objectives in 2010
         A re-launch of Lisbon?
• Brussels III (March 2005) agreed on re-focusing priorities
  on economic growth and employment by investing in
  innovation and knowledge and making Europe an
  attractive place to invest and work
• Improving governance by making the setting of priorities
  clearer, enhancing member states‟ commitment (national
  action programmes, a national Lisbon coordinator and
  strengthen the involvement of national parliaments) and
  improving monitoring by the Commission
• A reinforced policy process based on an integrated 3-
  yearly policy cycle based on strategic priorities and
  integrated policy guidelines followed-up by an annual
  Community Lisbon programme and national
            What is Lisbon?
• A political commitment to socio-economic renewal based
  on a series of on-going policy processes in the area of
  employment, social affairs, market integration,
  sustainable development, sustainability of public
  finances, good governance etc.
• A mixed policy process based on the traditional
  Community method in areas linked to the Internal
  Market, the environment etc. and voluntary alignment of
  national policies such as social security, employment,
  pension and public health, education, innovation and
  R&D against jointly defined objectives
• A diffuse institutional structure and multiple
  administrative processes governed by hard and ‟soft‟
  policy instruments in an uneasy relationship.
               Institutional set-up
• The European Council provides leadership, political commitment
  and arbitration
• Different council formations fight for supremacy: EcoFin, the
  Competitiveness Council, the GAERC, and sector councils
  (employment, social affairs, environment etc)
• Council committees : the Economic and Financial committee, the
  Economic Policy Committee
• Commission produces annual reports and monitors progress
• European Parliament: few institutional points of access
• EESC and the Committee of the Regions
• European social partners meet in the Tripartite Social Summit for
  Growth and Employment
• National administrations (influential) and national parliaments (thus
  far little involvement)
 Decision-making and instruments
• The traditional community method
• A variety of processes (about 10) governed by the OMC
  with various reporting instruments
• OMC = coordination of national policies towards the
  fulfillment of jointly agreed targets, no European
   – Peer pressure, naming and shaming
   – Joint learning and dissimilation of best practices
   – Good governance and improved national administrative
   – The Commission in the centre of national administrative
   – National implementation
   – No formal Community procedures to deal with non-compliance
Weaknesses of the Lisbon process
• Lack of coherence – too many objectives, some working
  at cross-purpose
• Lack of coherence with other policy processes and
  instruments (Stability Pact, sustainable development, EU
  budget/structural funds)
• Lack of political will and leadership on behalf of national
• Policy-framework too loose (can OMC deliver the
  intended result?)
• Lack of national involvement (parliaments and social
• Democratic deficit
 Reforms and future challenges
• Reform of the Stability Pact
• EU budget negotiations
• Member States‟ unwillingness to implement,
  weak enforcement
• Future policy reform and transfer of
• Institutional and procedural reform
• Democratic deficit?
• National ownership?
• Leadership? A collective European executive?