Ten years ago, the EU aspired to become the world's economic leader. It planned to overtake the US and Japan in productivity and innovation. Knowledge was to drive its economic growth. The Lisbon Strategy (also known as the Lisbon Agenda) essentially failed to achieve its targets. There are a number of reasons for this; the most important being that true leadership seeks to change the ball-game and not just seek to out-perform the competition.
The EU Commission puts much of the blame on the lack of commitment by member states. Achieving the right mix between top-down and bottom-up inputs is a critical issue in any planning exercise. Obviously, the Commission got it wrong. If it wishes to avoid a repeat with Europe 2020, the Commission should seriously consider how to "connect" better so as to secure the commitment of all the stakeholders. The four-month public consultation exercise leading to Europe 2020 resulted in the Commission receiving 1,500 comments. This works out at three comments per one million citizens (and ignoring the multitude of institutions in Europe).
The Commission believes that, this time, things will work out differently. It feels emboldened by the Lisbon Treaty. The performance of member states will be closely monitored and it is not excluded that laggard countries are castigated through financial penalties, such as forfeiting EU budget payments. A final decision on Europe 2020 will be taken this June, by which time member states are expected to have set their individual targets.
European Commission president José Manuel Barroso, in the preface to the proposed strategy document, states that this is Europe's moment of truth. Failure of Europe 2020 would "consign us to a gradual decline, to the second rank of the new global order". The most immediate challenge is to get the EU out of the recession. Then, Europe is expected to take charge of its own destiny: meeting the needs of its aging population, addressing global climate and resource management issues and adapting to the challenges created by emerging global economic powerhouses, such as China and India.
The vision is to have an economy that is smart (founded on knowledge and innovation), sustainable (through efficient, greener use of resources) and inclusive (promoting social and territorial cohesion through higher employment). The measureable targets that have been set for 2020 are:
• Seventy-five per cent of Europeans aged between 20-64 years will be in employment.
• Three per cent of GDP will be invested in research and innovation.
• Meeting the 20/20/20 climate/energy targets.
• Early school-leavers be less than 10 per cent, with at least 40 per cent of European youth having a tertiary degree.
• The number of Europeans at risk of poverty to be reduced by 20 million.
These targets are to be supported by seven "flagship initiatives" that include "Innovation Union", "Youth on the Move" and "A Digital Agenda for the EU".
The Commission is saying that full use is to be made of EU policies and financial instruments to ensure that the strategy's targets are met. The Commission realises that this was another important shortcoming of the Lisbon Agenda. There was little coordination, convergence and synergy with Cohesion Funds, EU budgets and the Stability and Growth Pact. The present Greek trauma betrays the shallowness of the Commission's governance; its turning a blind-eye so as to accommodate the exigencies of the ruling national political regimes.
Let us hope the EU is now more serious in its intent. Serious doubts remain especially as Europe 2020 does not even mention the fact that 42 per cent of the EU budget still goes to subsidise agriculture.
Formulating an economic policy for a bloc of 27 countries is no small task. And, yet, it is clear that the Commission has not learnt much from the failures of the Lisbon Agenda. As with puddings, the proof of economic planning is in the eating.
Planning is essentially an on-going learning exercise. Plans are just road-maps that need to be consistently re-visited and adjusted to reflect the experience gained in a fast-changing environment.
The recent global economic crisis, which cost the EU most of the gains it had made under the Lisbon Agenda, provided a unique opportunity to go back to basics, to re-think existing growth patterns and re-define post-modern lifestyles. Europe 2020 presents little creative, "outside the box" thinking. This is not the best start for an economic giant that wants to lead the world through knowledge and innovation.
Malta is expected to toe the path outlined by Europe 2020. We too are expected to present our targets and to define the economic trajectory for the next five years so as to enable Europe to meet its objectives. Regretfully, there is no public discussion on what Europe 2020 means for us citizens. Setting up a Strategic Policy Unit within the Office of the Prime Minister is not enough. How does the government intend to mobilise local stakeholders so as to get their commitment for Europe 2020? To confuse matters, the government has now rekindled its own Vision 2015. How does this dovetail with Europe 2020?
fms18@onvol.net