1 / 30

RELEVANCE OF LISBON AGENDA AND EDUCATION FOR WESTERN BALKANS COUNTRIES

RELEVANCE OF LISBON AGENDA AND EDUCATION FOR WESTERN BALKANS COUNTRIES. Višnja Samardžija, PhD Institute for International Relations Zagreb, 2007. Content of presentation. The revised Lisbon Strategy Goals, p riorities , achievments Instruments and activities

tatyana-gaines
Download Presentation

RELEVANCE OF LISBON AGENDA AND EDUCATION FOR WESTERN BALKANS COUNTRIES

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. RELEVANCE OF LISBON AGENDA AND EDUCATION FOR WESTERN BALKANS COUNTRIES Višnja Samardžija, PhD Institute for International Relations Zagreb, 2007.

  2. Content of presentation • The revised Lisbon Strategy • Goals, priorities, achievments • Instruments and activities • Education goals of Lisbon • Howare the WB countries prepared to approach Lisbon strategy goals? • Strategic documents • Institutional aspects • Implementing mechanisms • Benchmarking

  3. The Lisbon Strategy – starting points • The Lisbon goals • Lisbon European Council, 2000 – “to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world by 2010, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion” • The redefined Lisbon strategy • “Working together for growth and jobs – A new start for the Lisbon Strategy” (March 2005)

  4. Priorities – revised Lisbon

  5. Lisbon: priority areas for action • European Spring Council, 2006 • Investing more in knowledge and innovation • Unlocking business potential, especially of SMEs • Getting people into work • Efficient, secure and sustainable energy

  6. 1.Investing more in knowledge and innovation • Promote polices and actions aiming to achiev 3% objective for R&D spending by 2010 • Adopt FP7 and CIPProgramme • Establish European Research Council aimed at raising excellence of the best research teams • Create single, competitive and open European labour market for researchers • Develop a broad-based information strategy for Europe that translates investment in knowledge into products and services • Develop a comprehensive Lifelong Learning strategies (MS) and EU Lifelong Learning Programme 2007-2013 • Facilitate universities’ access to complementary sources of funding • Develop managerial skill and competencies for the people involved to transfer the research results to business community

  7. 2. Unlocking business potential, especially of SMEs • Develop national strategies to foster competitiveness, innovation and productivity • Explore options for establishing measurable targets in specific sectors for reducing administrative burdens by 2006 • Establish by the end of 2007 a “one-stop-shop” or arrangements with equivalent effect • Reduce the average time for setting up a business, especially an SME, with objective of being able to do this within one week anywhere in the EU by the end of 2007 • recruitment of a first employee should not involve more than one public administration point.

  8. 3. Getting people into work Reduce unemployment, adopt a real lifecycle approach to employment by: • reducing early school leaving for 10% by 2010; • 85% of 22 years old should have completed upper secondary education; • offering job to every young person who has left school / universityor additional training within six months of becoming unemployed by the end of 2007, and within 4 months by 2010; • implementing policies to promote women’s employment; approved the European Pact for Gender Equality; • increasing availability of quality childcare in line with MS’ own national targets; • implementing active ageing strategies, incentives for prolonging working lives, gradual retirement, use of part-time work and improvements to the working environment; • pursuing reforms by MSs in labour market and social policies; • establishing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (1 January 2007)

  9. Obligations of the EU and member states EU • Community Lisbon Programme • New Integrated guidelines for growth and employment • Annual Progress report • Coordination of implementation Member states • National Reform Programmes (NRPs) • National Lisbon coordinators • Implementation!!!

  10. Stronger implementing mechanisms? • Integrated guidelines for growth and employment • Macroeconomic • Microeconomic • Employment guidelines • Open method of coordination (OMC) • Soft approach - evaluation, monitoring, reporting • Exchange of best practice instruments • Peer reviews • Quantitative and qualitative indicators • benchmarks, scoreboards • Process of mutual learning aiming to develop coherent policies • Competitiveness reports, or composite indicators on knowledge society in areas such as R&D and human capital

  11. The framework of indicators and benhmarks for monitoring • Improving quality of education and training • Promoting efficiency in education and training • Making lifelong learnig a reality • Key competences among young people • Modernising school education, vocational education and training • Modernising higher education (Bologna process) • Employability !!!

  12. Strategy Policy Action Plan Capacity Legal framework Human capital Physical capital Equipment/infrastr. expenditure Commitment to reforms Adopting Lisbon instruments Measures, deadlines, implementing bodies Social dialogue, partnership Implementation! Convergence towards common EU goals

  13. Lisbon strategy and candidates • Barcelona Summit (2002) • Lisbon Strategy – incentive for candidates to implement objectives as a two-way learning process • Western Balkans • Lisbon objectives do not constitute additional criteria • ...but, Lisbon objectives reflected in EU policies towards region in areas that can be considered priorities under European/Accession Partnerships • Lisbon strategy priorities should be differently interpreted by each country (considering level of development, individual stage of rapprochement to EU) • Implemenation of Lisbon goals complementary to fulfilment of Copenhagen criteria

  14. Implementation of revised Lisbon strategy ... and candidates European Commission +European Council Eur. Parliament EESC Comm.of Regions Soc. partners REVISED LISBON STRATEGY + Member States (25) But...EU policies towards WB region reflect Lisbon activities that can be considered as priorities under European/Accession Partnerships • Lisbon objectives are not additional EU criteria! Candidate countries ... WB countries Implemenating Lisbon goals - complementary to fulfilling Copenhagen criteria

  15. Croatia – (towards) implementing Lisbon goals • Croatia does not have a coherent Lisbon Action Plan • Some of the aims and activities leading to it’s implementation introduced in different strategic documents • Strategic Development Framework (2006-13) adopted • National Programme for Integration into EU (anually) • Science and Technology Policy 2006-10 • 55 Recommendations for Raising Croatia’s Competitiveness • Programme of Incentives for SME (2004-08) + Operative plan (2006) • Croatian Programme for Innovative Technological Development • National Strategy for Development of Intellectual Property (2005-10) • ... other • Existing documents cover only partly Lisbon agenda • Need for development operational action plan/plans for implementing Lisbon goals • targets, instruments, dealines, responsibilities

  16. Benchmarks • Indicators only partly registered by national statistics bureaus • Need to further develop system of collecting and monitoring qualitative and quantitative indicators • Example: • Innovation benchmark - rather weak and underdeveloped area, lack of resources (financial support, man-power, premises) • Activities in progress: preparations for participation in EU benchmark programmes and system of monitoring indicators (EU benchmark programmes for innovation) • Support from the PHARE programme

  17. Ranking and Scores of Potential EU Member Countires Source: World Economic Forum. The Lisbon Review 2006. Measuring Europe’s Progress in Reform.

  18. R&D: investing more in knowledge and innovation Need to increase the overall R&D investment(EU goal 3% of GDP by 2010, of which 2/3 from private sector) • Developing Action Plan for increasing R&D expenditure • identify R&D targeted level of expenditure for R&D (eg. Croatia 2% in 2010, share 1:1) • develop overall strategy to achieve targets, coordinated measures, actions, monitoring mechanisms • Expenditure on R&D low: • Croatia: 1,28% of GDP (EU average 1.9%) • targeted share public/private sector 1:2 • Need to participate in the OMC in favor of the 3% objective (CREST) • Innovation - positive (but limited) results achieved • HITRA,Croatian Programme for Innovative Technological Development • should be coordinated with measures involving all the components of the National Innovation System (NIS)

  19. Completion of upper secondary education % of population (20-24) that have completed educationEuropean Benchmark 85% Source: Eurostat (Labour Force Survey) “Progress towards the Lisbon Objectives in Education and Training” Report 2006, 16.05.2006.

  20. Number of tertiary graduates in MST (mathematics and technical studies) per 1000 inhabitants, aged 20-29European Benchmark ↑ 15%(Ireland, France, UK) Croatia 5,4 Source: Eurostat “Progress towards the Lisbon Objectives in Education and Training” Report 2006, 16.05.2006.

  21. Total public expenditure on education (% GDP, 2000 - 2002) Izvor: Eurostat “Progress towards the Lisbon Objectives in Education and Training” Report 2006, 16.05.2006 Croatia: Present expenditure 4.4% Target 4.9%

  22. Expenditure for education from private sources(%GDP, 2000 - 2002) Source: Eurostat “Progress towards the Lisbon Objectives in Education and Training” Report 2006, 16.05.2006.

  23. Expenditure in education sector - WB countries • Education sector in WB countries reflects handicap of small economies in achieving economies of scale • Smallest economies have the highest levels of expenditure in education (Kosovo 5.7% of GDP, Montenegro 5%, others 3%) • the trend is revised when considering results attainded! • Enrolment ratios – all WB countries present similar level in primary and secondary enrolment ration, the largest countries show the highest level in tertiary education (50% Serbia, 13.6 Montenegro, Croatia)

  24. All enrolments in higher education, independent of age, as a percentage of 20-24 year old in population(Poland, Baltics, Slovenia – strongest growth) Izvor: Eurostat “Progress towards the Lisbon Objectives in Education and Training” Report 2006, 16.05.2006

  25. Participation in vocational stream of upper secondary education,(% of pupils in upper secondary education enrolled in vocational stream) Source: Eurostat “Progress towards the Lisbon Objectives in Education and Training” Report 2006, 16.05.2006.

  26. Strengthening competitiveness: unlocking business potential (SMEs) Example of CROATIA • Introducing “one-stop-shop” concept” • HITRO.HR service • shortening the duration procedure of establishing a company (six days) • HITRORez • Web page: Business Navigator (June 2006) • Competitiveness barometer (NCC, 2006)

  27. Business Navigator, Croatia

  28. Global competitiveness index • Global Competitiveness Report (GCR) • Croatia included in 2002 • International Economic Forum • Davos + NVK • benchmarking • Comparison with 104 world countries • Position of Croatia, GCR 2006/07 • ↑ competitiveness growth index 51/104 (64 in 2005, behind new MS, but better than Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey) • ↑ business competitiveness index: 56 instead of 65 • Imperative: to increase competitiveness!

  29. Lessons for WB countries • Lisbon strategy is not obligatory for candidate • voluntary adoption of good practice • Identification of own priorities: • respecting national and regional differences, defining specific, individual goals • Negotiations on EU membership • prioritisation of the Lisbon strategy goals in defferent area (R&D) • participation in implementig mechanism (OMC) • Adopting best practice of new MS (National Reform Programmes) • Croatia best positioned as compared with EU candidates • transfer the knowledge to WBc

  30. Conclusions • Lisbon strategy goals remain the main reform framework for EU, relevant for WBc • Raising awareness and understanding on Lisbon goals and implementation mechanisms during accession process necessary • Prioritisation and seequencing goals according individual situation and needs • Development of the system of collecting and monitoring qualitative and quantitative indicators necessary, corresponding to structural indicators (EUROSTAT) • Adopting best practice • Lisbon Action Plans not dseveloped in the region, • mix of policies exist that work in the same direction. But, they are neither fully coherent nor coordinated • Imited progress made, stronger efforts needed

More Related