Suchergebnisse

Presentation given at the 12th Zermat Symposium "Lissabon" - Der europaische Glaube an die Planbarkeit des Wachstums, August 21st to 24th 2005. Abstract en español e inglés. ; Las esperanzas puestas en la Cumbre de Lisboa el año 2000 no se han cumplido, ya que el proceso no se ha realizado. Se ha vuelto a replantear si aquel giro drástico de la orientacion europea se ha considerado una Utopia o sencillamente era errónea o si bien no ha habido fuerza política y economica para este cambio. La nueva orientacion a las personas en busqueda del conocimiento como respuesta a la competitividad europea se vuelve a plantear dado que es la nueva orientación que está realizando el mundo empresarial. Los sistemas de dirección y de organización de las empresas han asumido esta "visión" y la están realizando más allá de la propia realidad del marco politico.

ÖZETBu tezin temel amacı, Avrupa'daki sosyal ve ekonomik gerilimlere dayanan yabancı karşıtlığını göz önünde tutarak, ne ölçüde bir göçün Avrupa Birliği ekonomisine fayda getireceğini saptamaktır. Birleşik Devletler deneyiminden hareketle, göçmenlerin Amerikan ekonomisine büyük katkı sağladıkları ve bugün Birleşik Devletler'in dünya'nın önde gelen ekonomisi olmasında önemli rol oynadıkları söylenebilir. Bu tez, bu bakış çerçevesinde, devletlerce uygulanmakta olan göç politikaları ile ulusların rekabet güçlerini ilişkilendirmekte ve Avrupa Birliği'nin Lizbon hedeflerine iktisadi göçmenler yoluyla ulaşıp ulaşamayacağı sorusuna cevap aramaktadır.Bu çalışma, Birlik düzeyinde ortak göç politikasının yerleştirilmesi yönünde Avrupa'da güçlü ekonomik gerekçelerin bulunduğunu göstermekte ve ayrıca iktisadi esaslara dayanan bir göç politikasının nitelikli beyinleri Avrupa Birliği'ne çekme konusunda becerisini arttıracağını ortaya koymaktadır. Böyle bir politika sadece nitelikli göçmen işçileri gelmeleri konusunda teşvik etmekle kalmayıp aynı zamanda, Avrupa emek piyasalarındaki vasıfsız yabancıların da piyasada yer alma isteklerini olumsuz yönde etkileyecektir. Daha da önemlisi, bu tezde Avrupa Birliği'nin Lizbon Stratejisi'nin gerçekleştirilmesinin Avrupa'da bilgiye dayalı ekonomilerin oluşumu ile yakından bağlı olduğu gösterilmektedir. Bu argümana dayalı olarak, Avrupa Birliği'nin iktisadi rekabet edebilirliğinin güçlendirilmesinde ve bilgi birikimi transferinde "iktisadi göçün" kilit araç olarak kullanılabileceği kuvvetle vurgulanmaktadır. ABSTRACTBy taking the social and economic tensions of European people towards foreigners into account, the main objective of this thesis is to determine what extent "immigration" brings benefits to the European Union economy. As in the United States experience, it can be said that immigrants have been making great contributions to the US economy and today, the US has a leading economy in the world by immigrants' significant role. From the point of this view, this thesis relates the immigration policies to competitiveness of nations and intends to answer the following question: Whether the European Union can achieve the Lisbon goals by stimulating economic migrants into the Union? This study shows that there are strong economic reasons in Europe to introduce a common immigration policy at the European Union level. This study also tries to explain that an economically motivated immigration policy would increase the Union's ability to attract well qualified brains into Europe. This means that this policy not only encourages the skilled immigrant workers but also discourages unskilled foreigners in European labour markets. More importantly, this thesis argues that the accomplishment of the Lisbon Strategy of the Union is closely linked to creation of knowledge based economies in the EU and as a consequence of this evidence, it is strongly emphasized that "economic migration" can be used as a key instrument to transfer the knowledge (brain gain) and strengthen the economic competitiveness of the EU.

In March 2010, the European Commission (2010, preface) introduced Europe 2020 as marking "a new beginning" and having "new tools and […] new ambition". The research questions guiding my paper are the following: Does Europe 2020 constitute a new beginning? Does Europe 2020 address the shortcomings of the Lisbon Strategy? Is Europe 2020 likely to succeed? The recent crisis illustrates that the EU needs to decide on how to address multiple and pressing challenges. As the member states are faced by similar challenges, adopting a common economic strategy appears to be sensible. However, in 2000 the Lisbon Strategy was also launched as an ambitious common strategy. Despite the substantial effort and resources which were invested, the Lisbon Strategy was a failure. The success of Europe 2020 will in large part depend on whether the lessons have been learned. I conducted a comparative analysis of two strategies. The analysis of key-documents and publications showed that policy content and implementation mechanism of Europe 2020 closely resemble those of the Lisbon Strategy. Further, I identified the main shortcomings of the Lisbon Strategy and analyzed whether Europe 2020 constitutes an adequate remedy. Here, I particularly focused on the open method of coordination (OMC) and found that many shortcomings of the Lisbon Strategy are likely to persist. Based on my findings, I argue that Europe 2020 is unlikely to succeed, unless significant amendments are made. The paper is of relevance for everyone who is interested in engaging in a critical and informed dialogue regarding European economic strategy.

Under the Lisbon strategy, education and training form an essential element of the social pillar which aims to modernise the European social model through investment in human resources and combating social exclusion. Up to 2004, elearning was promoted as a key element in achieving the strategy especially through the Elearning Action Plan (2004-2006). This paper will analyse the process through which elearning emerged as a policy measure in implementing the Lisbon strategy. Using Kingdon's policy streams metaphor (Kingdon, 1995), this paper will outline the policy and problem streams which coalesced in the late 1980s, opening a 'policy window', and which pushed distance learning onto the EU political agenda in the early 1990s. These included the accretion of 'soft law' around the area of vocational education and training since the Treaty of Rome in 1957; the challenges offered by the emerging new information technologies, declining industries and changing demands for skills; the adoption of distance learning systems at national level to redress disadvantage, and to provide flexible, high-quality and cost-effective access to higher education to adults who were unable to attend on-campus; and the role of the Commission, policy entrepreneurs and networks in promoting distance education as a solution to the major social and economic problems facing Europe. The Treaty of Maastricht committed the EU to supporting education and training in the community, and in particular, to 'encouraging the development of distance education' (Art 126 changed to Art 149 in Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon Treaties). A series of implementation programmes in the 1990s, including Socrates, Tempus and Phare, funded distance learning initiatives in the EU and accession countries. With the development of the Internet and web technologies, elearning came to replace distance education in the EU discourse. The paper will conclude with some observations on the current role of elearning policy within the Lisbon strategy.

This report provides an analysis of the Nordic innovation policies of relevance for regional innovation systems. The central question addressed is how national policy makers can best apply the broad Lisbon strategy goals to the specific creation of regional innovation policies adapted to the Nordic context. Meeting the ideals and goals of the Lisbon Agenda may imply significant changes in the Nordic countries. Specifically, if innovation is to be stimulated in the public sector this demands an increased role for the market in the production of goods and services produced by the public sector. The data available tends to highlight the fact that the metropolitan areas dominate in terms of innovation performance and potential across the Nordic countries. Regional differences must thus be considered in the context of the development of innovation policy instruments, while more sophisticated enabling instruments will undoubtedly also be needed. In the EU context the regions are viewed as being the actors best able to appreciate local and regional needs and thus best placed to develop innovation policies. Historically, the state has controlled innovation policy in the Nordic countries. The regional level may therefore need to be granted formal competence for the development of regional innovation policies. The EU commission has asked for the application of a broad view of innovation. Innovation policy in the Nordic countries has traditionally however been concerned, predominantly, with research and development policies, though all of the Nordic countries are currently in the course of adopting a broader approach to innovation. By its very nature this broader approach ensures that a wider and ever expanding range of policy fields address the notion of innovation. Better coordination between the various policy fields addressing innovation may thus be needed in order to avoid competing or overlapping measures at the national and regional levels.

This paper examines the economic and social thought that has evolved around the Lisbon strategy, which aimed to turn the European Union into the world's most competitive knowledge economy by 2010. It argues that a new regime of rationality has emerged in which economic and social objectives, which were previously thought to be at odds with one another, have become increasingly aligned. The supposed antinomy between economic efficiency and social security has been gradually replaced by a Rawlsian-inspired understanding of social justice in which the individual right to self-development and employment is seen to go hand-in-hand with economic innovation and competitiveness. This alignment, which is expressed through the worshipping of the Nordic welfare model in general and the notion of flexicurity in particular, seems to have a strong depoliticizing effect.

This article examines the politics of the Lisbon strategy before and after its major watershed reform in 2005, with particular attention to the role of the European Commission. Operating in an ambiguous partial delegation of power, the Commission changed from performing a strong administrative role in the 2000-04 period to performing a political role after 2005. The institutional analysis of this article combines contextual factors and internal factors for explaining this variation. The findings reveal that although internal factors play an important part in explaining change, they are highly related to contextual factors. More precisely, the ability of the Commission to unfold actively its ideological and normative leverage and unfold specific forms of procedural leverage after 2005 is highly related to the member states' decision to clarify the formal division of tasks between them and the Commission. In other words, situations of procedural ambiguity are not necessarily to the advantage of the Commission, since it does not invariably have the ability to use this ambiguity in its favour. Adapted from the source document.