- Email: [email protected]
European Union Policies on Lifelong Learning: In-between Competitiveness Enhancement and Social Stability Reinforcement
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 548 – 553
WCES 2012
European Union policies on lifelong learning: in-between competitiveness enhancement and social stability reinforcement Eugenia Panitsidou a *, Eleni Griva b, Dora Chostelidou c a University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki,54006, Greece University of Western Macedonia, Florina,53100, Greece c Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki,54124, Greece b
Abstract The present paper draws on European Union (EU) policies for Lifelong Learning, through thorough review of policy papers. Adopting an interpretative approach, it seeks to define trends and detect interrelations between EU education policy and developments in the context of European enlargement, as well as global socioeconomic mandates. Ambitious objectives set at the Lisbon Council, in 2000, legitimised enforcement of a coherent European education policy. Hence, in alignment with the Lisbon Strategy mandates (since 2010, renewed as education throughout lifespan emerged as a major component of sustainable economic growth and social cohesion reinforcement, so as to allow Europe to retain its strong global role.
1. Introduction Technology evolution after the Second World War, along with capitalism prevalence, increased competitiveness mandates in the second half of 20 century, when foundations of unification of the weakened by two world wars through Lifelong Learning European states were laid. The first references to promot (LLL) were made in the 1970's, (Janne, 1973). Moreover, rising unemployment and the oil crisis of 1973 led to reactivation and enlargement of the unification process (Ertl, 2006), with education becoming an issue of interest, so as to legitimize and promote a unified growth policy. Towards the end of last century, prevalence of a global market coupled with growing economic competition with the United States of America and Japan, the opening of the Chinese market and the parallel decline of the communist alternative, made it imperative for European countries to surpass national restraints and proceed with signing of the Treaty on European Union (EU) (Official Journal of the European Union, 1992). Over the new millennium, awareness of the costs of "non-Europe" intensified cooperation among member states and enabled extension of action beyond purely economic policies. A prerequisite for harmonious living in a prosperous economy, as highlighted through EU policy rhetoric, is education. As early enshrined in the Treaty of Rome (1957) (Official Journal of the European Union, 2002a) and confirmed by the Treaty of Amsterdam (Official Journal of the European Union, 1997), education is the key variable
* Eugenia Panitsidou. Tel.: +6937367476 E-mail address: [email protected] & [email protected]
1877-0428 © 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Uzunboylu doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.158
Eugenia Panitsidou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 548 – 553
549
for economic and social progress of peoples in Europe. However, wider consensus on the economic value of education was reached at the Lisbon European Council (Commission of the European Communities, 2000b), where investment in education was identified as conditio sine qua non of the strategy initiated so as to turn EU into the most competitive economy worldwide, based on knowledge. Fruitful progress towards unification, social stability and economic prosperity of member states, has therefore been deposited in education. Education, however, in a modified form compared to that of the 20th century, flexible, efficient, accessible and lifelong (Commission of the European Communities, 1995). In particular, the "lifelong" dimension has been deemed to actively contribute to achieving EU objectives on growth and market efficiency, ensuring a high level of education and training when entering the labor market and active participation of citizens in the knowledge economy. Furthermore, it has been considered able to enhance social cohesion and alleviate additional problems that arise in the context of European enlargement, such as issues of national identity, social justice, tolerance, multiculturalism, human rights and equality. 2. Purpose of the study The purpose of the present study is to investigate policies with regard to LLL and its role to economic growth and social stability enhancement in the EU. To this end, initially, a policy analysis is attempted through thorough review of the institutional framework, drawing on EU policies on LLL. Adopting an interpretative approach, it seeks to define trends and detect interrelations between EU education policy and developments in the context of European enlargement and integration, as well as global socio-economic mandates. 3. European policies for LLL 3.1 The institutional framework The socioeconomic context at the turn of the century, with EU enlargement in process and increasing competitiveness in the global market, imposed activation of the Lisbon Strategy (Council of the European Union, 2000). At a time when economic prospects seemed favorable within EU, while, additionally, there was rising urgent for the European Council in Lisbon awareness of the cost of 'nonto enhance Community policies, setting ambitious goals regarding EU position in the global economic arena and placing LLL at the heart of policies launched to build the most dynamic knowledge economy in the world. The Council recognized the important role of education as an integral part of economic and social policies, as means to strengthen Europe's competitiveness globally and as guarantee to ensure the social cohesion and enable integration of all citizens (Council of the European Union, 2000). The objectives set by the Lisbon Agenda focus on two closely interrelated parameters to meet the demands of overall development and economic growth: a) restoring full employment and b) enhancing social cohesion. Nevertheless both of them are strongly mediated by a third variable, accessibility to knowledge throughout lifespan and openness of educational systems. Under this emphatic approach to LLL, three areas of focus were endorsed, related to ensuring the transparency of qualifications, promotion of new basic skills - especially in information technology - and development of local learning centers. Additionally, the agenda launched in Lisbon introduced a schema of enhanced collaboration in education and training among member states, committing them to a consistent strategy and concrete objectives. d greater convergence towards EU goals, serving as a means to spread best practice and set guidelines and timetables for implementing policies (Hingel, 2001; Papastamatis & Panitsidou, 2009). Even though, it was was initiated, leading to a
Hingel 2001) and practically overriding the principle of
In light of the increased cooperation among member states, during the period 2000-2002, a large number of policy papers were issued, aiming at setting objectives and priorities, as well as a coherent framework of action under a common European education policy (Commission of the European Communities, 2000a, 2000b, 2001a, 2001b, 2002). In detail, the Commission Communication "Making a European Area of
550
Eugenia Panitsidou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 548 – 553
(Commission of the European Communities, 2001a) and subsequent Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 for LLL (Official Journal of the European Union, 2002b), brought forward the need for new basic skills for all citizens, accentuating once more the essential role of LLL and stressing the need for coherent national strategies. In 2002, the Copenhagen Declaration (Council of the European Union, 2002) focused on comparability of knowledge and skills and transparency of qualifications in education and training., while in May 2003 (Official Journal of the European Union, 2003) the Ministers of Education reached consensus over establishment of five benchmarks to be achieved by 2010. The benchmark for adult education determined that average participation in LLL, by 2010, should amount to 12.5% of the critical age group 25 to 64 (Commission of European Communities, 2002). Promotion of employability and mobility within an open European labor market was put forward by the Joint Interim Report of the Council and the Commission, endorsed in 2004 (Council of the European Union, 2004), advocating for necessity to develop, as common reference point, a European framework for the recognition of qualifications and competences (European Qualification Framework). Additionally, the urgency to implement substantial partnerships between businesses, social partners and educational institutions at all levels, promoting recognition of prior knowledge and creating learning environments that are open, attractive and accessible to all, and especially to disadvantaged groups, was outlined. However, evaluation of the Lisbon Strategy, five years after its implementation, was not optimistic, assessing results as insufficient (Commission of the European Communities, 2005c). Among reasons for falling behind was the fact that the strategy had evolved into a complex structure with multiple objectives and actions, and unclear division of responsibilities and tasks, especially between the EU and national policies (Commission of European Communities, 2010). In this context, the European Council relaunched the Lisbon Strategy, focusing once again on growth and employment (Commission of European Communities, 2005a), while extending action by committing member states to prepare and submit national action plans for the period 2005-2008, so as to promote a coherent European education policy. Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Council, a year later (Council of European Union, 2006), were more encouraging, assuming that at the end of 2005 gradual economic recovery had started, anticipating creation of six million new jobs during the period 2005-2007 and reduction of unemployment to 8% in 2007. Optimistic projections, however, were undermined by the upcoming economic recession, as, between March 2008 and August 2009, the unemployed in the EU increased by 5.4 million people, reaching 21.8 million (Cedefop, 2009). Thus, considering that globalization intensifies the challenges faced by the EU, in 2006, a reference framework of key competences for LLL (Official Journal of the European Union, 2006a) was established, assuming that every citizen will need a wide range of basic skills, that is, a combination of broader knowledge, skills and attitudes in order to flexibly adapt to a rapidly changing and highly interconnected world. The Reference Framework sets out eight key competencies, expected to promote personal fulfillment and development, active citizenship, social inclusion and employment (Commission of European Communities, 2007b). The issue of funding and effectiveness of investment in LLL has been put forward by several Commission Communications (Commission of European Communities, 2006a, 2006b, 2007a, 2007c), noting that investment in education and training has a significant cost, but high private, economic and social, medium and long term, returns outweigh initial costs. Moreover, in light of neo-liberalism prevalence and reduction of the welfare state, for first time in a EU policy paper, there is made reference to allocating the costs of LLL to individuals themselves, calling on Member States to encourage citizens to invest in their own learning, for both personal fulfillment and employability (Commission of European Communities, 2007c). The end of the decade 2001-2010 found EU amid the worst economic crisis in decades, revealing strong interdependence among member states and highlighting close cooperation as getaway to recovering from crisis. Hence, in May 2009, the Council adopted a new strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training, under the name "Education and Training 2020". As main objective of the of the renewed cooperation framework, further promotion of education and training once more prevailed, so as to ensure: a) personal and professional development of all citizens and b) economic prosperity and employability, while promoting democratic values, social cohesion, active citizenship and intercultural dialogue (Official Journal of the European Union, 2009). To assess performance of member states in achieving strategic objectives, indicators, called "European benchmarks", were reduced to four, not varying significantly from earlier benchmarks, concerning promotion of
Eugenia Panitsidou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 548 – 553
551
LLL, improving quality and effectiveness of education, enhancing social cohesion and active citizenship, and fostering innovation, creativity and entrepreneurship. LLL has once more been among priority areas, aiming to raise participation of adults in LLL, especially the unskilled, at a rate higher than that set in Lisbon, amounting to 15% by 2020. The decisive, especially in the areas of economy and employment, role attributed to LLL in the new convergence strategy for 2020, is grounded in the assumption that new jobs, requiring new skills, are going to be created. Moreover, in light of economic recession, it is estimated that new trends of multiple entry and exit from the labor market, rather than the traditional sequence (education, employment and retirement), will prevail, requiring a framework for organizing and supporting these transitions (such as part-time employment along with education and training intervals) (Council of the European Union, 2010). Under this "more flexible" employment scheme, the urge for LLL to become more accessible has been stressed, in order to ensure smooth transitions between jobs and other activities, and avoid loss of human capital due to long-term unemployment (Commission of European Communities, 2009). At the turn of the decade, evaluation of achievements in context of the Lisbon Strategy (Commission of European Communities, 2010) was rather modest, attributing, though, lack of significant results to global recession. More specifically it was noted that its impact on growth and employment cannot be easily perceived, since extrinsic variables, such as global economic crisis had an important inhibitory role to play. Nevertheless, what was pointed out as major benefit was improvement in quality of reforms at national and European level, while additionally greater consensus and coordination among member states was achieved. 3.2 LLL & Estimated benefits As evidenced by above policy review, rhetoric, in light of Lisbon and ET 2020 strategies, highlights the socioeconomic value of LLL and benefits of investment in knowledge, stressing its effect on economic growth and social stability (Commission of the European Communities, 2003, 2005b). The role of non-governmental organizations in shaping education policy in the EU and adding to emphasis on LLL, has been significant. However, although investment in LLL has long been an explicit or implicit policy goal, non-economic returns are often vaguely understood (McMahon, 1998). Extensive and repeated reference to private and social benefits of LLL is rather abstract, which could be attributed to lack of scientific research in the field (Schuller et al., 2004:6). According to slogans tend to bring attention to some general and ambiguously defined purposes or Popkewitz (1980), repeatedly accentuates multifarious benefits such as goals increased earnings and employability, social cohesion strengthening, health standards improvement, active citizenship, lower crime rates and greater prosperity and fulfillment (Commission of the European Communities, 2005b. Commission of the European Communities, 2003, 2006a). In detail, it is emphasized that there is "compelling evidence that education contributes to personal development, social cohesion and productivity, has a measured impact on economic growth and reduces societal costs by preventing social exclusion, health problems and crime" (Commission of European Communities, 2003). In 2005, under the objectives set by the renewed Lisbon Strategy, a study was conducted (Commission of the European Communities, 2005b), investigating the efficiency of investment in education and training. Findings highlighted that education produces a variety of benefits at multiple levels, benefits for individuals, businesses and society at large. In the same vein, Commission Communication "Adult Learning: It is never too late to learn" (Commission of European Communities, 2006a) acknowledges that adult learning increases social returns in terms of improved civic participation, better health, and increased individual well being and fulfillment. In detail, it is assumed that education not only "transforms people's lives", but also enables them to cope with the multifarious stresses of daily life, maintain mental and physical health, increase well being and self confidence, and combat feelings of social isolation or exclusion. Hence, rising participation in LLL is closely interrelated with: a) increasing overall skills levels and ensuring basic skills acquisition by all citizens, b) helping respond to demographic changes, such as population aging in Europe and problems arising from migration and c) enhancing social integration, as low levels of initial education, unemployment, rural isolation and reduced opportunities may lead to marginalization of large numbers of people, while new forms of illiteracy, in the form of access to and use of ICT, intensify the phenomena of social exclusion (Commission of European Communities, 2006a).
552
Eugenia Panitsidou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 548 – 553
4. Concluding Remarks: Challenges and Limitations At the Lisbon European Council, in March 2000, noting that Europe faces "a quantum shift resulting from globalization and the challenges of a new economy driven by knowledge", the strategic goal was set to turn EU "the most competitive and dynamic knowledge economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion". However, a major restrain in reaching the ambitious goal set in Lisbon, is the fact that EU remains a political formation which can not currently be considered a "Union", both on economic and sociocultural level (Nijhof, 2005). In addition, linguistic and cultural pluralism within EU prevents emergence of a "European identity" through which individuals could identify themselves as citizens of the EU. To this end, LLL could account for social stability and cultural convergence. A substantial development in EU education policy has been convergence to a coherent policy framework, implemented though technocratic tools, such as, comparable among member states, "indicators" and "benchmarks", while focusing on increasing investment in LLL. As a result, there has been gradual shift to a supranational education policy, which was legitimized under the threat of socio-economic costs in the event of failure of the Lisbon Strategy. As stated in a 2004 Commission Report (Commission of European Communities, 2004), "poor implementation of the Lisbon Strategy could have devastating costs for Europe, inhibiting progress and delaying ates were committed to submitting development". Thus, under the threat of the "cost of nonnational reform programmes to be implemented under wider national consensus. To reach necessary social consensus, it was requested by member states to better communicate to all citizens the need for raising participation in LLL, through launch of extensive communication campaigns, involving individuals, along with national, regional and local social partners (Commission of the European Communities, 2000a. Commission of the European Communities, 2009). a rhetoric highlighting the returns emanating from investment in knowledge. Political discourse continually outlines the socio-economic value of LLL, while the role being assigned to in the knowledge economy appears distributional, stabilizing and developmental: a) distributional, as assumed to ensure equal learning opportunities for all citizens, regardless of socioeconomic status and previous educational background, b) stabilizing, through acquiring necessary skills and knowledge, both for integration and remaining in the profession, as well as for ensuring continuous adaptation to socioeconomic transformations, and c) developmental, through chances for continuous upgrading of skills and knowledge to match the needs of the labor market, enhancing efficiency of human resources. Slogans suggest meanings intended to encompass the hopes of diverse groups, but provide little clarification of the underlying issues or guidance about what should be done, while they are usually mediated through competing interests (Werner, 1991). Whether this particular slogan concerns an attempt to legitimise economic imperialism and reduction of welfare services, or provides for a political tool to ensure a high standard of living for all EU citizens, having made clear that the status quo is no longer an option in the contemporary economy, remains to be found out in the near future, especially under compelling conditions of current economic recession. References Cedefop (2009). Learning amid Crisis. Fact Sheet. Thessaloniki: Cedefop. White Paper on Education and Training: Teaching and learning, towards the learning society. Brussels: COM 590. A Memorandum for Lifelong Learning. European Communities. Brussels: Directorate General Education and Culture. The Lisbon European Council: An Agenda for Economic and social Renewal in Europe. Brussels: Directorate General Education and Culture. f the European Communities (2001a). Making a European Area of Lifelong Learning a Reality. Brussels: COM 678. Concrete Future Objectives of Education and Training Systems. Brussels: COM 59. European Communities (2002). European benchmarks in education and training: follow-up to the Lisbon European Council. Communication from the Commission. Brussels: COM 629. Commission of the European Communities (2003). Joint Report on Social Inclusion summarizing the results of the examination of the National Action Plans for Social Inclusion (2003-2005). Brussels: COM 773. Commission of the European Communities (2004). Delivering Lisbon: Reforms for the Enlarged Union. Communication from the Commission. Brussels: COM 29.
Eugenia Panitsidou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 548 – 553
553
- A new start for the Lisbon Strategy. Communication to the Spring European Council. Brussels: COM 0024. Economics of Education: Study on the returns to various types of investment in education and training. Brussels: Directorate General Education and Culture. and Training. Staff Working Paper. Brussels: Directorate General Education and Culture. Commission of the European Communities (2006a). Adult Education: It is never too late to learn. Communication from the Commission. Brussels: COM 614. Commission of the European Communities (2006b). Efficiency and equity in European education and training systems. Communication from the European Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament. Brussels: COM 481. he European Communities (2007a). Modernising education and training: a vital contribution to prosperity and social cohesion in Europe. & Training 2010 Brussels: COM 549. Key Competences for Lifelong Learning: European reference framework. Brussels: Directorate General Education and Culture. nities (2007c). Action Plan on Adult learning - It is always a good time to learn. Communication from the Commission. Brussels: COM 558. Commission Working Document. Brussels: Directorate General Education and Culture. Commission Staff Working Document. Brussels: SEC 114. Council of the European Union (2000). The Lisbon European Council: Presidency Conclusions, 23rd-24th March 2000. Available at http://www.consilium. europa.eu/cms_data Council of the European Union (2002). The Copenhagen Declaration: Declaration of the European Ministers of vocational education and training, and the European Commission, convened in Copenhagen on enhanced European cooperation in vocational education and training. Brussels. Council of the European Union (2003).Council conclusions of 5/6 May 2003 on Reference Levels of European Average Performance in Education and Training (Benchmarks). Brussels: C 134/02. Council of the European Union (2004). "Education & Training 2010". The Success of the Lisbon Strategy Hinges on Urgent Reform s. Joint Interim Report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the detailed work programme on the follow-up of the objectives of education and training systems in Europe. Brussels: 6905/04, EDUC 43. Council of the European Union (2006). Brussels European Council 23-24 March, 2006. Presidency Conclusions. Brussels: 7775/06 CONCL1. Council of the European Union (2010). Council conclusions: A New European Strategy for Jobs and Growth. Brussels: 17.6.2010. Hingel, A. (2001). Education policies and European governance. Brussels: European Commission. Janne, H. (1973). For a Community Policy on Education. Bulletin of the European Communities. Brussels: Supplement 10, 73. McMahon, W. (1998). Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of the Social Benefits of Lifelong Learning. Education Economics, 6 (3), 309 346. Nijhof, W. (2005). Lifelong Learning as a European Skill Formation Policy. Human Resources Development Review, 4 (4), 401-417. Official Journal of the European Union (1992). Treaty on European Union. Brussels: C 191. Official Journal of the European Union (1997). Treaty of Amsterdam amending the Treaty on European Union, the Treaties establishing the European Communities and certain related acts. Brussels: C 340. Official Journal of the European Union (2002a). Consolidated Version of the Treaty Establishing the European Community: The Treaty of Rome 1957. Brussels: C 325/35. Official Journal of the European Union (2002b). Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 on lifelong learning. Brussels: C 163 / 1. Official Journal of the European Union (2006a). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning. Brussels: L 394. Official Journal of the European Union (2006b). Modernising Education and Training: A Vital Contribution to Prosperity and Social Cohesion in Programme. Brussels: C 79/01. Official Journal of the European Union (2009). Council conclusions of 12 May 2009 on a strategic framework for European cooperation in . Brussels: C 119/02. Papastamatis, A., & Panitsidou, E. (2009). The Aspect of 'accessibility' in the Light of European Lifelong Learning Strategies. Adult Education Centres: A case study. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 28 (4), 335-351. Popkewitz, T. (1980). Global education as a slogan system. Curriculum Inquiry, 10 (3), 303-316. Schuller, T., Preston, J., Hammond, C., Brassett-Grundy, A., & Bynner, J. (2004). The Benefits of Learning: The impact of education on health, family life and social capital. London: Routledge Falmer. Werner, W. (1991). Defining curriculum policy through slogans. Journal of Education Policy, 6 (2), 225-238.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 548 – 553
WCES 2012
European Union policies on lifelong learning: in-between competitiveness enhancement and social stability reinforcement Eugenia Panitsidou a *, Eleni Griva b, Dora Chostelidou c a University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki,54006, Greece University of Western Macedonia, Florina,53100, Greece c Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki,54124, Greece b
Abstract The present paper draws on European Union (EU) policies for Lifelong Learning, through thorough review of policy papers. Adopting an interpretative approach, it seeks to define trends and detect interrelations between EU education policy and developments in the context of European enlargement, as well as global socioeconomic mandates. Ambitious objectives set at the Lisbon Council, in 2000, legitimised enforcement of a coherent European education policy. Hence, in alignment with the Lisbon Strategy mandates (since 2010, renewed as education throughout lifespan emerged as a major component of sustainable economic growth and social cohesion reinforcement, so as to allow Europe to retain its strong global role.
1. Introduction Technology evolution after the Second World War, along with capitalism prevalence, increased competitiveness mandates in the second half of 20 century, when foundations of unification of the weakened by two world wars through Lifelong Learning European states were laid. The first references to promot (LLL) were made in the 1970's, (Janne, 1973). Moreover, rising unemployment and the oil crisis of 1973 led to reactivation and enlargement of the unification process (Ertl, 2006), with education becoming an issue of interest, so as to legitimize and promote a unified growth policy. Towards the end of last century, prevalence of a global market coupled with growing economic competition with the United States of America and Japan, the opening of the Chinese market and the parallel decline of the communist alternative, made it imperative for European countries to surpass national restraints and proceed with signing of the Treaty on European Union (EU) (Official Journal of the European Union, 1992). Over the new millennium, awareness of the costs of "non-Europe" intensified cooperation among member states and enabled extension of action beyond purely economic policies. A prerequisite for harmonious living in a prosperous economy, as highlighted through EU policy rhetoric, is education. As early enshrined in the Treaty of Rome (1957) (Official Journal of the European Union, 2002a) and confirmed by the Treaty of Amsterdam (Official Journal of the European Union, 1997), education is the key variable
* Eugenia Panitsidou. Tel.: +6937367476 E-mail address: [email protected] & [email protected]
1877-0428 © 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Uzunboylu doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.158
Eugenia Panitsidou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 548 – 553
549
for economic and social progress of peoples in Europe. However, wider consensus on the economic value of education was reached at the Lisbon European Council (Commission of the European Communities, 2000b), where investment in education was identified as conditio sine qua non of the strategy initiated so as to turn EU into the most competitive economy worldwide, based on knowledge. Fruitful progress towards unification, social stability and economic prosperity of member states, has therefore been deposited in education. Education, however, in a modified form compared to that of the 20th century, flexible, efficient, accessible and lifelong (Commission of the European Communities, 1995). In particular, the "lifelong" dimension has been deemed to actively contribute to achieving EU objectives on growth and market efficiency, ensuring a high level of education and training when entering the labor market and active participation of citizens in the knowledge economy. Furthermore, it has been considered able to enhance social cohesion and alleviate additional problems that arise in the context of European enlargement, such as issues of national identity, social justice, tolerance, multiculturalism, human rights and equality. 2. Purpose of the study The purpose of the present study is to investigate policies with regard to LLL and its role to economic growth and social stability enhancement in the EU. To this end, initially, a policy analysis is attempted through thorough review of the institutional framework, drawing on EU policies on LLL. Adopting an interpretative approach, it seeks to define trends and detect interrelations between EU education policy and developments in the context of European enlargement and integration, as well as global socio-economic mandates. 3. European policies for LLL 3.1 The institutional framework The socioeconomic context at the turn of the century, with EU enlargement in process and increasing competitiveness in the global market, imposed activation of the Lisbon Strategy (Council of the European Union, 2000). At a time when economic prospects seemed favorable within EU, while, additionally, there was rising urgent for the European Council in Lisbon awareness of the cost of 'nonto enhance Community policies, setting ambitious goals regarding EU position in the global economic arena and placing LLL at the heart of policies launched to build the most dynamic knowledge economy in the world. The Council recognized the important role of education as an integral part of economic and social policies, as means to strengthen Europe's competitiveness globally and as guarantee to ensure the social cohesion and enable integration of all citizens (Council of the European Union, 2000). The objectives set by the Lisbon Agenda focus on two closely interrelated parameters to meet the demands of overall development and economic growth: a) restoring full employment and b) enhancing social cohesion. Nevertheless both of them are strongly mediated by a third variable, accessibility to knowledge throughout lifespan and openness of educational systems. Under this emphatic approach to LLL, three areas of focus were endorsed, related to ensuring the transparency of qualifications, promotion of new basic skills - especially in information technology - and development of local learning centers. Additionally, the agenda launched in Lisbon introduced a schema of enhanced collaboration in education and training among member states, committing them to a consistent strategy and concrete objectives. d greater convergence towards EU goals, serving as a means to spread best practice and set guidelines and timetables for implementing policies (Hingel, 2001; Papastamatis & Panitsidou, 2009). Even though, it was was initiated, leading to a
Hingel 2001) and practically overriding the principle of
In light of the increased cooperation among member states, during the period 2000-2002, a large number of policy papers were issued, aiming at setting objectives and priorities, as well as a coherent framework of action under a common European education policy (Commission of the European Communities, 2000a, 2000b, 2001a, 2001b, 2002). In detail, the Commission Communication "Making a European Area of
550
Eugenia Panitsidou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 548 – 553
(Commission of the European Communities, 2001a) and subsequent Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 for LLL (Official Journal of the European Union, 2002b), brought forward the need for new basic skills for all citizens, accentuating once more the essential role of LLL and stressing the need for coherent national strategies. In 2002, the Copenhagen Declaration (Council of the European Union, 2002) focused on comparability of knowledge and skills and transparency of qualifications in education and training., while in May 2003 (Official Journal of the European Union, 2003) the Ministers of Education reached consensus over establishment of five benchmarks to be achieved by 2010. The benchmark for adult education determined that average participation in LLL, by 2010, should amount to 12.5% of the critical age group 25 to 64 (Commission of European Communities, 2002). Promotion of employability and mobility within an open European labor market was put forward by the Joint Interim Report of the Council and the Commission, endorsed in 2004 (Council of the European Union, 2004), advocating for necessity to develop, as common reference point, a European framework for the recognition of qualifications and competences (European Qualification Framework). Additionally, the urgency to implement substantial partnerships between businesses, social partners and educational institutions at all levels, promoting recognition of prior knowledge and creating learning environments that are open, attractive and accessible to all, and especially to disadvantaged groups, was outlined. However, evaluation of the Lisbon Strategy, five years after its implementation, was not optimistic, assessing results as insufficient (Commission of the European Communities, 2005c). Among reasons for falling behind was the fact that the strategy had evolved into a complex structure with multiple objectives and actions, and unclear division of responsibilities and tasks, especially between the EU and national policies (Commission of European Communities, 2010). In this context, the European Council relaunched the Lisbon Strategy, focusing once again on growth and employment (Commission of European Communities, 2005a), while extending action by committing member states to prepare and submit national action plans for the period 2005-2008, so as to promote a coherent European education policy. Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Council, a year later (Council of European Union, 2006), were more encouraging, assuming that at the end of 2005 gradual economic recovery had started, anticipating creation of six million new jobs during the period 2005-2007 and reduction of unemployment to 8% in 2007. Optimistic projections, however, were undermined by the upcoming economic recession, as, between March 2008 and August 2009, the unemployed in the EU increased by 5.4 million people, reaching 21.8 million (Cedefop, 2009). Thus, considering that globalization intensifies the challenges faced by the EU, in 2006, a reference framework of key competences for LLL (Official Journal of the European Union, 2006a) was established, assuming that every citizen will need a wide range of basic skills, that is, a combination of broader knowledge, skills and attitudes in order to flexibly adapt to a rapidly changing and highly interconnected world. The Reference Framework sets out eight key competencies, expected to promote personal fulfillment and development, active citizenship, social inclusion and employment (Commission of European Communities, 2007b). The issue of funding and effectiveness of investment in LLL has been put forward by several Commission Communications (Commission of European Communities, 2006a, 2006b, 2007a, 2007c), noting that investment in education and training has a significant cost, but high private, economic and social, medium and long term, returns outweigh initial costs. Moreover, in light of neo-liberalism prevalence and reduction of the welfare state, for first time in a EU policy paper, there is made reference to allocating the costs of LLL to individuals themselves, calling on Member States to encourage citizens to invest in their own learning, for both personal fulfillment and employability (Commission of European Communities, 2007c). The end of the decade 2001-2010 found EU amid the worst economic crisis in decades, revealing strong interdependence among member states and highlighting close cooperation as getaway to recovering from crisis. Hence, in May 2009, the Council adopted a new strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training, under the name "Education and Training 2020". As main objective of the of the renewed cooperation framework, further promotion of education and training once more prevailed, so as to ensure: a) personal and professional development of all citizens and b) economic prosperity and employability, while promoting democratic values, social cohesion, active citizenship and intercultural dialogue (Official Journal of the European Union, 2009). To assess performance of member states in achieving strategic objectives, indicators, called "European benchmarks", were reduced to four, not varying significantly from earlier benchmarks, concerning promotion of
Eugenia Panitsidou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 548 – 553
551
LLL, improving quality and effectiveness of education, enhancing social cohesion and active citizenship, and fostering innovation, creativity and entrepreneurship. LLL has once more been among priority areas, aiming to raise participation of adults in LLL, especially the unskilled, at a rate higher than that set in Lisbon, amounting to 15% by 2020. The decisive, especially in the areas of economy and employment, role attributed to LLL in the new convergence strategy for 2020, is grounded in the assumption that new jobs, requiring new skills, are going to be created. Moreover, in light of economic recession, it is estimated that new trends of multiple entry and exit from the labor market, rather than the traditional sequence (education, employment and retirement), will prevail, requiring a framework for organizing and supporting these transitions (such as part-time employment along with education and training intervals) (Council of the European Union, 2010). Under this "more flexible" employment scheme, the urge for LLL to become more accessible has been stressed, in order to ensure smooth transitions between jobs and other activities, and avoid loss of human capital due to long-term unemployment (Commission of European Communities, 2009). At the turn of the decade, evaluation of achievements in context of the Lisbon Strategy (Commission of European Communities, 2010) was rather modest, attributing, though, lack of significant results to global recession. More specifically it was noted that its impact on growth and employment cannot be easily perceived, since extrinsic variables, such as global economic crisis had an important inhibitory role to play. Nevertheless, what was pointed out as major benefit was improvement in quality of reforms at national and European level, while additionally greater consensus and coordination among member states was achieved. 3.2 LLL & Estimated benefits As evidenced by above policy review, rhetoric, in light of Lisbon and ET 2020 strategies, highlights the socioeconomic value of LLL and benefits of investment in knowledge, stressing its effect on economic growth and social stability (Commission of the European Communities, 2003, 2005b). The role of non-governmental organizations in shaping education policy in the EU and adding to emphasis on LLL, has been significant. However, although investment in LLL has long been an explicit or implicit policy goal, non-economic returns are often vaguely understood (McMahon, 1998). Extensive and repeated reference to private and social benefits of LLL is rather abstract, which could be attributed to lack of scientific research in the field (Schuller et al., 2004:6). According to slogans tend to bring attention to some general and ambiguously defined purposes or Popkewitz (1980), repeatedly accentuates multifarious benefits such as goals increased earnings and employability, social cohesion strengthening, health standards improvement, active citizenship, lower crime rates and greater prosperity and fulfillment (Commission of the European Communities, 2005b. Commission of the European Communities, 2003, 2006a). In detail, it is emphasized that there is "compelling evidence that education contributes to personal development, social cohesion and productivity, has a measured impact on economic growth and reduces societal costs by preventing social exclusion, health problems and crime" (Commission of European Communities, 2003). In 2005, under the objectives set by the renewed Lisbon Strategy, a study was conducted (Commission of the European Communities, 2005b), investigating the efficiency of investment in education and training. Findings highlighted that education produces a variety of benefits at multiple levels, benefits for individuals, businesses and society at large. In the same vein, Commission Communication "Adult Learning: It is never too late to learn" (Commission of European Communities, 2006a) acknowledges that adult learning increases social returns in terms of improved civic participation, better health, and increased individual well being and fulfillment. In detail, it is assumed that education not only "transforms people's lives", but also enables them to cope with the multifarious stresses of daily life, maintain mental and physical health, increase well being and self confidence, and combat feelings of social isolation or exclusion. Hence, rising participation in LLL is closely interrelated with: a) increasing overall skills levels and ensuring basic skills acquisition by all citizens, b) helping respond to demographic changes, such as population aging in Europe and problems arising from migration and c) enhancing social integration, as low levels of initial education, unemployment, rural isolation and reduced opportunities may lead to marginalization of large numbers of people, while new forms of illiteracy, in the form of access to and use of ICT, intensify the phenomena of social exclusion (Commission of European Communities, 2006a).
552
Eugenia Panitsidou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 548 – 553
4. Concluding Remarks: Challenges and Limitations At the Lisbon European Council, in March 2000, noting that Europe faces "a quantum shift resulting from globalization and the challenges of a new economy driven by knowledge", the strategic goal was set to turn EU "the most competitive and dynamic knowledge economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion". However, a major restrain in reaching the ambitious goal set in Lisbon, is the fact that EU remains a political formation which can not currently be considered a "Union", both on economic and sociocultural level (Nijhof, 2005). In addition, linguistic and cultural pluralism within EU prevents emergence of a "European identity" through which individuals could identify themselves as citizens of the EU. To this end, LLL could account for social stability and cultural convergence. A substantial development in EU education policy has been convergence to a coherent policy framework, implemented though technocratic tools, such as, comparable among member states, "indicators" and "benchmarks", while focusing on increasing investment in LLL. As a result, there has been gradual shift to a supranational education policy, which was legitimized under the threat of socio-economic costs in the event of failure of the Lisbon Strategy. As stated in a 2004 Commission Report (Commission of European Communities, 2004), "poor implementation of the Lisbon Strategy could have devastating costs for Europe, inhibiting progress and delaying ates were committed to submitting development". Thus, under the threat of the "cost of nonnational reform programmes to be implemented under wider national consensus. To reach necessary social consensus, it was requested by member states to better communicate to all citizens the need for raising participation in LLL, through launch of extensive communication campaigns, involving individuals, along with national, regional and local social partners (Commission of the European Communities, 2000a. Commission of the European Communities, 2009). a rhetoric highlighting the returns emanating from investment in knowledge. Political discourse continually outlines the socio-economic value of LLL, while the role being assigned to in the knowledge economy appears distributional, stabilizing and developmental: a) distributional, as assumed to ensure equal learning opportunities for all citizens, regardless of socioeconomic status and previous educational background, b) stabilizing, through acquiring necessary skills and knowledge, both for integration and remaining in the profession, as well as for ensuring continuous adaptation to socioeconomic transformations, and c) developmental, through chances for continuous upgrading of skills and knowledge to match the needs of the labor market, enhancing efficiency of human resources. Slogans suggest meanings intended to encompass the hopes of diverse groups, but provide little clarification of the underlying issues or guidance about what should be done, while they are usually mediated through competing interests (Werner, 1991). Whether this particular slogan concerns an attempt to legitimise economic imperialism and reduction of welfare services, or provides for a political tool to ensure a high standard of living for all EU citizens, having made clear that the status quo is no longer an option in the contemporary economy, remains to be found out in the near future, especially under compelling conditions of current economic recession. References Cedefop (2009). Learning amid Crisis. Fact Sheet. Thessaloniki: Cedefop. White Paper on Education and Training: Teaching and learning, towards the learning society. Brussels: COM 590. A Memorandum for Lifelong Learning. European Communities. Brussels: Directorate General Education and Culture. The Lisbon European Council: An Agenda for Economic and social Renewal in Europe. Brussels: Directorate General Education and Culture. f the European Communities (2001a). Making a European Area of Lifelong Learning a Reality. Brussels: COM 678. Concrete Future Objectives of Education and Training Systems. Brussels: COM 59. European Communities (2002). European benchmarks in education and training: follow-up to the Lisbon European Council. Communication from the Commission. Brussels: COM 629. Commission of the European Communities (2003). Joint Report on Social Inclusion summarizing the results of the examination of the National Action Plans for Social Inclusion (2003-2005). Brussels: COM 773. Commission of the European Communities (2004). Delivering Lisbon: Reforms for the Enlarged Union. Communication from the Commission. Brussels: COM 29.
Eugenia Panitsidou et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 548 – 553
553
- A new start for the Lisbon Strategy. Communication to the Spring European Council. Brussels: COM 0024. Economics of Education: Study on the returns to various types of investment in education and training. Brussels: Directorate General Education and Culture. and Training. Staff Working Paper. Brussels: Directorate General Education and Culture. Commission of the European Communities (2006a). Adult Education: It is never too late to learn. Communication from the Commission. Brussels: COM 614. Commission of the European Communities (2006b). Efficiency and equity in European education and training systems. Communication from the European Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament. Brussels: COM 481. he European Communities (2007a). Modernising education and training: a vital contribution to prosperity and social cohesion in Europe. & Training 2010 Brussels: COM 549. Key Competences for Lifelong Learning: European reference framework. Brussels: Directorate General Education and Culture. nities (2007c). Action Plan on Adult learning - It is always a good time to learn. Communication from the Commission. Brussels: COM 558. Commission Working Document. Brussels: Directorate General Education and Culture. Commission Staff Working Document. Brussels: SEC 114. Council of the European Union (2000). The Lisbon European Council: Presidency Conclusions, 23rd-24th March 2000. Available at http://www.consilium. europa.eu/cms_data Council of the European Union (2002). The Copenhagen Declaration: Declaration of the European Ministers of vocational education and training, and the European Commission, convened in Copenhagen on enhanced European cooperation in vocational education and training. Brussels. Council of the European Union (2003).Council conclusions of 5/6 May 2003 on Reference Levels of European Average Performance in Education and Training (Benchmarks). Brussels: C 134/02. Council of the European Union (2004). "Education & Training 2010". The Success of the Lisbon Strategy Hinges on Urgent Reform s. Joint Interim Report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the detailed work programme on the follow-up of the objectives of education and training systems in Europe. Brussels: 6905/04, EDUC 43. Council of the European Union (2006). Brussels European Council 23-24 March, 2006. Presidency Conclusions. Brussels: 7775/06 CONCL1. Council of the European Union (2010). Council conclusions: A New European Strategy for Jobs and Growth. Brussels: 17.6.2010. Hingel, A. (2001). Education policies and European governance. Brussels: European Commission. Janne, H. (1973). For a Community Policy on Education. Bulletin of the European Communities. Brussels: Supplement 10, 73. McMahon, W. (1998). Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of the Social Benefits of Lifelong Learning. Education Economics, 6 (3), 309 346. Nijhof, W. (2005). Lifelong Learning as a European Skill Formation Policy. Human Resources Development Review, 4 (4), 401-417. Official Journal of the European Union (1992). Treaty on European Union. Brussels: C 191. Official Journal of the European Union (1997). Treaty of Amsterdam amending the Treaty on European Union, the Treaties establishing the European Communities and certain related acts. Brussels: C 340. Official Journal of the European Union (2002a). Consolidated Version of the Treaty Establishing the European Community: The Treaty of Rome 1957. Brussels: C 325/35. Official Journal of the European Union (2002b). Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 on lifelong learning. Brussels: C 163 / 1. Official Journal of the European Union (2006a). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning. Brussels: L 394. Official Journal of the European Union (2006b). Modernising Education and Training: A Vital Contribution to Prosperity and Social Cohesion in Programme. Brussels: C 79/01. Official Journal of the European Union (2009). Council conclusions of 12 May 2009 on a strategic framework for European cooperation in . Brussels: C 119/02. Papastamatis, A., & Panitsidou, E. (2009). The Aspect of 'accessibility' in the Light of European Lifelong Learning Strategies. Adult Education Centres: A case study. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 28 (4), 335-351. Popkewitz, T. (1980). Global education as a slogan system. Curriculum Inquiry, 10 (3), 303-316. Schuller, T., Preston, J., Hammond, C., Brassett-Grundy, A., & Bynner, J. (2004). The Benefits of Learning: The impact of education on health, family life and social capital. London: Routledge Falmer. Werner, W. (1991). Defining curriculum policy through slogans. Journal of Education Policy, 6 (2), 225-238.