MOBILISING RESEARCHERS: THEIR ROLE IN RELATION TO LISBON

1. MOBILISING RESEARCHERS: THEIR ROLE IN RELATION TO LISBON Graham Room, University of Bath

2. Introduction • Mobilising researchers in the Lisbon process • Compare with earlier mobilisation in EU initiatives on poverty and social exclusion. • Social inclusion OMC in particular • Three dimensions of the Lisbon process • Convergence towards common objectives • Cross-national policy benchmarking and diffusing best practice • Public participation and accountability • Creative tensions and ambiguities

3. EU Initiatives on Poverty and Social Exclusion • Speaking Truth to Power • Rediscovery of Poverty: Seamus O Cinneide • National Reports (1980) • Observatory on National Policies to Combat Social Exclusion (1990-94) • O’Higgins and Jenkins (1987) • Eurostat …. ECHP and EU-SILC • Foreshadows OMC social inclusion indicators • OMC convergence towards common objectives

4. Action-Research, Evaluation, Policy Innovation • WoP and CDP • Rhetoric of experimentation, participation ….and cross-national policy learning • Evaluation from above • ….and from below • devising local innovations and constructing arguments for reform • empowering local actors in European games • Europe-wide pool of resources and models for local action • Policy transfer from centre versus innovation through decentralised networks • Foreshadows OMC cross-national policy learning • central goal of fourth Community poverty programme in relation to OMC • researchers involved through evaluation and studies

5. Public Accountability of EU Initiatives • Public hearings by European Parliament preparatory to third Poverty Programme • House of Lords Select Committee 1994 • Foreshadows OMC interest in governance and public accountability of EU

6. The Political Context of Research Mobilisation • EU initiatives on Poverty and Social Exclusion: • Public sweetener versus drive for economic dynamism • Paris 1972 versus Brussels 1988 • Lisbon process mid-term review: • streamlined objectives: indicators for upward accountability • undervalues other dimensions of OMC • social as dividend of economic not its precondition • Blair challenge: dynamic KBE + public re-engagement

7. Mobilisation of Researchers in the Lisbon process Speaking Truth to Power • Reaffirm social dimension of the KBE: an agenda for research and debate • Social dividend of economic growth • Security and flexibility • Social precondition of dynamic economy: • Human investment and skills in demographically challenged societies • Local and regional agreements to create high skill labour pools • Kristensen and Zeitlin (2005): innovation capacity embedded in social politics of local/regional/national communities • Skills + management + work organisation + technology: for innovation dynamics (Room et al, 2005) • Social policy and ‘national innovation systems’

8. Support Cross-National Learning and Policy Innovation • Elaborate benchmarking indicators for • Convergence • but also for dynamic innovation and cross-national learning • by government, business, civil society • Rear view mirrors versus smart indicators looking forward • Applying benchmarking but also benchlearning

9. Illuminate governance processes for public accountability • Debate national policies by reference to cross-European experience: • Comparison with policies elsewhere • Expose alternative futures and trade-offs • Stronger scrutiny of national (and regional and local) authorities • Powerful vindication of EU commitment to good governance • Re-builds public engagement with EU institutions

10. Conclusion • Research mobilisation: • Expose alternative dynamics for the Lisbon process and their social, economic and political implications • Engage critically with the Blair challenge • Social dimension of the KBE • Modes of policy development by means of which the EU can address these challenges effectively: Lisbon or what? • Central priority for FP7: to build this research capacity

11. References you may have missed … • Atkinson, A B, et al. (2005), Taking Forward the EU Social Inclusion Process, Luxembourg: Luxembourg Presidency of the European Union. • De la Porte, C, Pochet, P and Room, G (2001), 'Social Benchmarking, Policy-Making and New Governance in the EU', Journal of European Social Policy, 11(4): 291-307. • European Commission (2003), Communication: Innovation Policy: Updating the Union's approach in the context of the Lisbon Strategy, COM(2003)112 final, Brussels: European Commission • European Commission (2005), Communication to the Spring European Council: Working Together for Growth and Jobs: A New Start for the Lisbon Strategy, COM(2005)24, 2 February 2005, Brussels: European Commission • Kristensen, P H and Zeitlin, J (2005), Local Players in Global Games: The Strategic Constitution of a Multinational Corporation, Oxford: Oxford University Press. • Lundvall, B-A and Tomlinson, M (2002), 'International Benchmarking as a Policy Learning Tool', in M J Rodrigues (ed), The New Knowledge Economy in Europe, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. • Room, G (2005), The European Challenge: Innovation, Policy Learning and Social Cohesion in the New Knowledge Economy, Bristol: The Policy Press.