Opetusministeriö E-JATKOKIRJE OPM KAS Korhonen Ville Eduskunta Suuri valiokunta

Transkriptio

1 Opetusministeriö E-JATKOKIRJE OPM KAS Korhonen Ville Eduskunta Suuri valiokunta Viite Asia EU; nuoriso; Ehdotus neuvoston päätöslauselmaksi nuorisoalan eurooppalaisen yhteistyön uudistetuista puitteista U/E-tunnus: E 50/2009 vp EUTORI-numero: EU/2009/0326 Ohessa lähetetään perustuslain 97 :n mukaisesti selvitys ehdotuksesta neuvoston päätöslauselmaksi nuorisoalan eurooppalaisen yhteistyön uudistetuista puitteista. LIITTEET OPM ; 14231/09, JEUN 44, EDUC 151, SOC 580; 9008/09 JEUN 25 EDUC 72 SOC ADD 1 + ADD 2 + ADD 3 + ADD 4

2 2(2) Asiasanat Hoitaa Tiedoksi jaosto nuoriso- ja liikunta-asiat (EU 32), koulutus-, nuoriso- ja kulttuurineuvosto OPM TEM, VM, ALR, STM, EUE, VNEUS, UM Lomakepohja: Eduskuntakirjelmä

3 Opetusministeriö PERUSMUISTIO OPM KUPO/ny Astala Seija Asia EU; nuoriso; Ehdotus neuvoston päätöslauselmaksi nuorisoalan eurooppalaisen yhteistyön uudistetuista puitteista Kokous Liitteet Viite EUTORI/Eurodoc nro: - U-tunnus / E-tunnus: E 50/2009 vp Käsittelyn tarkoitus ja käsittelyvaihe: Asiakirjat: Ehdotusta käsitellään Ruotsin puheenjohtajakaudella neuvoston nuorisotyöryhmässä. Neuvosto hyväksynee päätelmät koulutus-, nuoriso- ja kulttuurineuvostossa Euroopan Parlamentin on tarkoitus antaa lausuntonsa uudesta yhteistyökehyksestä helmikuussa /09, JEUN 44, EDUC 151, SOC /09 JEUN 25 EDUC 72 SOC ADD 1 + ADD 2 + ADD 3 + ADD 4 EU:n oikeuden mukainen oikeusperusta/päätöksentekomenettely: Käsittelijä(t): Suomen kanta/ohje: Perustamissopimuksen artikla 149/poliittinen yhteisymmärrys OPM/kulttuuriasiainneuvos Seija Astala, puh OPM/kansainvälisen vaihdon sihteeri Sanna Puura, puh Suomi tukee puheenjohtajan eurooppalaiselle nuorisoalan yhteistyölle esittämiä yleisiä päätavoitteita, joilla pyritään luomaan kaikille nuorille paremmat mahdollisuudet osallistua koulutukseen ja työelämään sekä edistämään kaikkien nuorten aktiivista kansalaisuutta, sosiaalista osallisuutta ja solidaarisuutta.

4 Esitetyt päätoiminta-alat kattavat laajasti nuorten elämän kannalta keskeiset alueet. Ehdotuksessa korostuu monialaisen ja moniammatillisen yhteistyön merkitys, mikä vastaa myös kansallisia tavoitteitamme. 2(8) Suomi pitää puheenjohtajan esittämää yhteistyön rakennetta hyvänä. Pitkän aikavälin ( ) strategia luo jatkuvuutta työskentelyyn ja sen jaksottaminen kolmivuotiskausiin mahdollistaa tavoitteiden ja toimenpiteiden tarkistamisen lyhyellä aikavälillä. On hyvä, että kullakin kolmivuotisjaksolla keskitytään tiettyihin toimintaaloihin ja että nuorten työllisyys on valittu ensimmäisen kauden ( ) painopistealaksi. Pyrkimys avoimen koordinaatiomenetelmän vahvistamiseen sekä konkreettisiin, näkyviin tuloksiin perustuu nyt käytössä olevan avoimen koordinaatiomenetelmän arvioinnin tuloksiin. Uuden avoimen koordinaatiomenetelmän täytäntöönpanovälineet vaativat jäsenmailta huomattavasti suurempaa panostusta ja sitoutumista EUyhteistyöhön, mikä tulisi ottaa kansallisen tason resurssoinnissa huomioon. Olisi myös pohdittava, miten alue- ja paikallistason toimijat voidaan paremmin integroida mukaan eurooppalaiseen yhteistyöhön. Esitetyt välineet nostavat nuorisotutkimuksen keskeiselle sijalle yhteistyöpuitteiden toimeenpanossa. Erityisesti tämä koskee raportointia ja prosessin seurantaa. Nuorisotutkimuksen merkitystä monialaisena ja monimetodisena (ml. osallistuva ja havainnoiva laadullinen tutkimus) käytäntönä tulisi vastaavasti vahvistaa uuden yhteistyökehyksen toimeenpanossa. Nuorisoalan tietopohjaa vahvistamalla voidaan edistää paitsi monialaista lähestymistapaa niin myös nuorten hyvinvointia ja nuorisotyön ammatillistumista ja kehittymistä eurooppalaisessa kontekstissa. On hyvä, että raportointia pyritään yksinkertaistamaan. Ehdotuksen mukaan ensimmäinen neuvoston ja komission yhteisraportti laadittaisiin vuonna Se perustuisi jäsenvaltioiden kansallisiin raportteihin nuorisoalalta sekä muilta relevanteilta sektoreilta. Raportoinnin aikataulutus on haasteellinen ottaen huomioon nuorisosektorin poikkisektoraalisen luonteen. Koska nuorisoraporttia on tarkoitus käyttää myös seuraavan työskentelyjakson painopisteiden valinnan perustana, olisi sen valmistelulle ja tulosten analysoinnille varattava riittävästi aikaa. Suhtaudumme periaatteessa myönteisesti indikaattorien käyttämiseen ja uusien kehittämiseen siltä osin kuin jo olemassaolevat indikaattorit eivät pysty tuottamaan tarvittavaa tietoa. Indikaattorityö tulisi linkittää muihin prosesseihin, kuten post- Lissabonin seurantaan sekä Euroopan neuvoston kanssa tehtävään tutkimusyhteistyöhön. Pidämme hyvänä, että nuorisotyön merkitys painottuu uudessa eurooppalaisessa yhteistyössä. Tämän tulisi näkyä myös eri ohjelmien ja rahastojen painopisteissä. Jäsennellyn vuoropuhelun sitominen puheenjohtajakausien teemoihin on huomattava parannus nykyiseen käytäntöön. Ehdotus Euroopan tason ohjausryhmän perustamisesta vuoropuhelun tehostamiseksi hyödyttää niitä jäsenmaita, joissa toistaiseksi ei juurikaan ole harjoitettu vuoropuhelua eri toimijoiden välillä. Kansallisten ohjausryhmien kokoonpanon tulee ensisijaisesti vastata kunkin jäsenmaan tarpeita. Ehdotuksessa ei varsinaisesti painoteta toimenpiteitä eri syistä muita heikommassa asemassa olevien nuorten aseman parantamiseksi, vaikka heidät mainitaankin yhteistyöpuitteiden johtavissa periaatteissa. Puitteiden toimeenpanossa tulisikin kiinnittää huomiota esim. maahanmuuttajanuorten ja vammaisten nuorten tilanteen kohentamiseen.

5 3(8) Pääasiallinen sisältö: Taustaa Komissio antoi tiedonannon (KOM(2009)lopullinen) EU:n nuorisostrategia -Satsataan nuorten vaikutusmahdollisuuksiin; Uudistetulla avoimella koordinointimenetelmällä kiinni nuorison haasteisiin ja mahdollisuuksiin. Tiedonannossa komissio ehdotti uutta, nykyistä vahvempaa avointa koordinaatiomenetelmää, joka olisi joustava ja raportointimekanismeiltaan toimiva. Tavoitteena oli vahvistaa yhteyksiä Lissabonin kasvu- ja työllisyysstrategiaan ja erityisesti eurooppalaisen nuorisosopimuksen keskeisiin toimialoihin. Päätöslauselmaehdotus perustuu komission tiedonantoon. Päätöslauselmaehdotus Nuorisoalan eurooppalaiselle yhteistyölle esitetään kahta päätavoitetta: (i) luodaan kaikille nuorille enemmän ja yhtäläisiä mahdollisuuksia koulutuksessa ja työmarkkinoilla; (ii) edistetään kaikkien nuorten aktiivista kansalaisuutta, sosiaalista osallisuutta ja solidaarisuutta. Näiden kahden toisiinsa linkittyvän tavoitteen saavuttaminen - kansallista toimivaltaa kunnioittaen - edellyttää kaksitahoista lähestymistapaa: (i) nuorisoalalla toteutettavia aloitteita (koulun ulkopuolinen oppiminen, osallistuminen, vapaaehtoistoiminta, nuorisotyö, liikkuvuus ja nuorisotiedotus); sekä (ii) nuorisonäkökulman huomioonottamista muilla politiikka-aloilla (mainstreaming initiatives), joilla on merkitystä nuorten elämän kannalta. Nuorisoulottuvuus olisi sisällytettävä post-lissabon prosessiin, uudistettuun sosiaalipoliittiseen ohjelmaan, EU:n strategioihin, koulutusyhteistyön strategisiin puitteisiin, työllisyyden suuntaviivoihin, terveysstrategiaan ja kulttuuria koskevaan toimintasuunnitelmaan. Päätoiminta-aloiksi ehdotetaan seuraavia: - koulutus ja ammatillinen koulutus - työllisyys ja yrittäjyys - terveys ja hyvinvointi [liikunta/urheilu] - osallistuminen - vapaaehtoistoiminta - sosiaalinen osallisuus - nuoriso ja maailma - luovuus ja kulttuuri Kaikissa nuoria koskevissa politiikoissa tulee noudattaa seuraavia johtavia periaatteita:

6 4(8) (a) edistää sukupuolten tasa-arvoa ja torjua syrjintää sen kaikissa muodoissa sekä kunnioittaa niitä oikeuksia ja periaatteita, jotka on tunnustettu muun muassa Euroopan unionin perusoikeuskirjan 21 ja 23 artiklassa; (b) ottaa huomioon nuorten elinolosuhteissa, tarpeissa, toiveissa, kiinnostuksen kohteissa ja asenteissa ilmenevät erot ja kiinnittää erityistä huomiota eri syistä heikommassa asemassa oleviin nuoriin; (c) tunnustaa nuoret yhteiskunnan voimavaraksi ja antaa nuorille mahdollisuus osallistua heitä koskevien politiikkojen muotoiluun jäsennellyn vuoropuhelun avulla. Edelleen ehdotetaan, että 1. vuoteen 2018 asti eurooppalaista nuorisoalan yhteistyötä toimeenpannaan uudistetun avoimen koordinaatiomenetelmän pohjalta, joka perustuu edellä esitettyihin yleisiin tavoitteisiin, kaksitahoiseen lähestymistapaan ja yllä mainittuihin toiminta-aloihin; 2. yhteistyön tulee olla konkreettista ja tuottaa näkyviä tuloksia, joita olisi esitettävä, tarkasteltava ja levitettävä säännöllisesti ja järjestelmällisesti ja siten luotava pohjaa jatkuvalle arvioinnille ja kehittämiselle. 3. Avoimen koordinaatiomenetelmän toimeenpano perustuu seuraaviin työmenetelmiin: (i) Työskentelyjaksot: vuoteen 2018 ulottuva kausi jaetaan kolmen vuoden jaksoihin, joista ensimmäinen kattaa vuodet ; (ii) Painopisteet: jokaista työskentelyjaksoa varten neuvosto hyväksyy yhteistyössä puheenjohtajatrion kanssa joukon prioriteettialoja ehdotettujen päätoiminta-alojen joukosta. Painopisteet suunnitellaan niin, että ne mahdollistavat yhteistyön kaikkien jäsenmaiden kesken tai tiiviimmän yhteistyön rajoitetun jäsenvaltioiden ryhmän välillä.; (iii) Täytäntöönpanovälineet: Jotta yhteistyön puitteet voitaisiin panna täytäntöön tehokkaasti, tarvitaan sekä nimenomaan nuorisoalaa koskevia välineitä että muita asiaan liittyviä politiikan aloja koskevia välineitä. Nuorisoalan omia välineitä käytetään tukemaan sekä nuorisoalan omia aloitteita että hallinnonalat ylittävää yhteistyötä. Nuorisoalan välineet: (a) Tiedon keruu ja tutkimustietoon perustuva nuorisopolitiikka: tutkimukset, selvitykset, tutkijaverkostot, EU:n nuorisoraportti. (b) Vastavuoroinen oppiminen: vertaisoppimishankkeet, konferenssit, seminaarit, korkean tason foorumit, asiantuntijaryhmät, verkostot. Hankkeiden olisi liityttävä läheisesti kulloisenkin kolmivuotisen työskentelyjakson painopisteisiin. Lisäksi olisi jatkettava yhteistyötä kansainvälisten järjestöjen, kuten Euroopan neuvoston, OECD:n ja Yhdistyneiden kansakuntien kanssa.; (c) Edistymisraportit: Komission tulisi laatia EU:n nuorisoraportti kunkin työskentelyjakson lopussa siten, että ensimmäinen raportti laadittaisiin vuonna Raportissa olisi kaksi osaa: neuvoston ja komission yhteinen raportti (poliittinen osa) ja liiteasiakirjat (tilastollinen ja analyyttinen osa). EU:n nuorisoraportissa arvioitaisiin

7 5(8) edistymistä puitteiden mukaisissa yleisissä tavoitteissa sekä viimeisimmän työskentelyjakson osalta määriteltyjen painopisteiden osalta ja nimettäisiin hyvät käytännöt. EU:n nuorisoraportin olisi perustuttava jäsenvaltioiden laatimiin kansallisiin raportteihin nuorisoalalta ja muilta asiaan liittyviltä politiikan aloilta sekä muihin olemassa oleviin tietoihin ja tilastoihin. Päällekkäistä raportointia olisi vältettävä. EU:n nuorisoraportteja tulisi myös käyttää seuraavan työskentelyjakson painopisteiden nimeämisen perustana. (d) Tulosten levittäminen: yhteistyön näkyvyyden ja vaikuttavuuden lisäämiseksi kansallisella, paikallisella, alueellisella ja Euroopan tasolla yhteistyön tuloksia olisi levitettävä laajasti kaikkien asiaankuuluvien sidosryhmien kesken. (e) Prosessin seuranta: pohjana eri aloilla käytetyt indikaattorit (koulutus, työllisyys, terveys, sosiaalinen osallisuus) sekä tarvittaessa uusia indikaattoreita koskevat ehdotukset. (f) Kuuleminen ja jäsennelty vuoropuhelu nuorten ja nuorisojärjestöjen kanssa: vuoropuhelun aiheet olisi sovitettava yhteen nuorisoalan eurooppalaisen yhteistyön yleisten tavoitteiden ja kunkin työskentelyjakson painopisteiden kanssa. Vuoropuhelun olisi oltava mahdollisimman osallistavaa ja nuorisotutkijoiden ja nuorisotyön toimijoiden tulisi osallistua siihen. (g) EU-ohjelmien ja rahastojen hyödyntäminen: olisi hyödynnettävä tehokkaasti Youth in Action -ohjelmaa, elinikäisen oppimisen ohjelmaa, Kulttuuri-, Progress-, Media- ja Erasmus nuorille yrittäjille -ohjelmaa sekä kilpailukyvyn ja innovoinnin ohjelmia. 4. Välineitä olisi käytettävä kullakin kolmivuotisjaksolla mahdollisimman tehokkaasti. 5. Yhteistyön puitteissa olisi tutkittava, miten nuorisotyöllä voidaan edistää edellä esitettyjen yleisten tavoitteiden saavuttamista sekä sitä, miten nuorisotyötä voidaan tukea sen taloudellisesta ja yhteiskunnallisesta panoksesta. Pohdittavia aiheita ovat mm. nuorisotyöntekijöiden koulutus, taitojen tunnustaminen eurooppalaisten välineiden avulla, nuorisotyöntekijöiden liikkuvuuden tukeminen ja nuorisotyöhön liittyvien innovatiivisten palvelujen ja lähestymistapojen edistäminen. 6. Neuvosto voi tarkistaa uutta yhteistyökehystä ja tehdä siihen tarvittavia muutoksia, mikäli eurooppalainen kehitys sitä edellyttää, erit. Lissabonin strategian uudistuksen yhteydessä. Jäsenmaita kehotetaan 1. tekemään yhdessä työtä nuorisoalan EU-yhteistyön vahvistamiseksi yllä mainittujen yleisten tavoitteiden, toiminta-alojen, periaatteiden ja täytäntöönpanovälineiden pohjalta sekä kutakin jaksoa varten sovittujen painopistealojen pohjalta; 2. ottamaan käyttöön kansallisella tasolla sellaisia toimenpiteitä, jotka voivat edistää yhteistyökehyksen yleisten tavoitteiden saavuttamista sekä harkitsemaan EU-tason vastavuoroisesta oppimisesta saatujen virikkeiden huomioonottamista kansallisissa politiikoissaan. Komissiota kehotetaan

8 1. tekemään yhteistyötä jäsenvaltioiden kanssa ja tukemaan jäsenmaita näiden yhteistyössä; 6(8) 2. tarkastelemaan erityisesti EU:n nuorisoraportissa, missä määrin yhteistyöpuitteiden yleiset tavoitteet on saavutettu. Tässä yhteydessä komissiota pyydetään asettamaan työryhmä keskustelemaan tarpeesta kehittää indikaattoreita alueilla, joilla niitä ei vielä ole. Mahdollisia indikaattoreita koskevat ehdotukset tulisi jättää neuvoston harkittaviksi viimeistään joulukuussa Käynnistämään yleisiin tavoitteisiin ja painopisteisiin liittyviä selvityksiä. 4. Laatimaan vuonna 2017 yhdessä jäsenvaltioiden kanssa lopullisen arviointiraportin, joka kattaa koko kauden Neuvoston olisi keskusteltava lopullisesta arviointiraportista vuonna Neuvosto panee merkille komission aikomuksen 1. perustaa vuonna 2010 jäsenvaltioiden sekä Euroopan nuorisofoorumin edustajista koostuvan työryhmän jäsennellyn vuoropuhelun täytäntöönpanon kehittämiseksi edelleen. Liitteet: Päätöslauselman liitteessä 1 esitetään aloitteita, joita jäsenvaltiot ja/tai komissio voivat tehdä toimivaltansa puitteissa ja ottaen huomioon toissijaisuusperiaatteen. Liitteessä 2 esitetään nuorisoalan EU- yhteistyön painopisteet ajanjaksolle : : nuorisotyöllisyys (Espanjan, Belgian ja Unkarin puheenjohtajakauden yhteinen painopiste);; : sosiaalinen osallisuus (Espanjan puheenjohtajakausi) nuorisotyö (Belgian puheenjohtajakausi) kansalaisuus ja osallistuminen (Unkarin puheenjohtajakausi) Liitteessä 3 esitetään jäsennellyn vuoropuhelun yleiset periaatteet. Jäsennellyn vuoropuhelun tulisi perustua 18 kuukauden työskentelyjaksoihin EUyhteistyön painopisteiden mukaisesti. Jäsennellyn vuoropuhelun tehostamiseksi komission tulisi perustaa eurooppalainen ohjausryhmä. Jäsenvaltioita kannustetaan perustamaan vastaavasti kansallinen ohjausryhmä. Kansallinen käsittely: Jaosto EU-32 (nuoriso ja liikunta) Jaosto EU-32 (nuoriso ja liikunta) kirjallinen menettely Jaosto EU-32 (nuoriso ja liikunta; laaja kokoonpano) Eduskuntakäsittely: Sivistysvaliokunta (Koulutus-, kulttuuri- ja nuorisoneuvoston asioiden esittelyn yhteydessä); Sivistysvaliokunta

9 - 7(8) Käsittely Euroopan parlamentissa: Euroopan parlamentin on tarkoitus antaa lausuntonsa yhteistyökehyksestä helmikuussa Kansallinen lainsäädäntö, ml. Ahvenanmaan asema: Taloudelliset vaikutukset: - Muut mahdolliset asiaan vaikuttavat tekijät: -

10 8(8) Asiasanat Hoitaa Tiedoksi Lomakepohja: Perusmuistio, EU-ohje

11 COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION Brussels, 9 October /09 LIMITE JEUN 44 EDUC 151 SOC 580 NOTE from : Presidency to : delegations No. Cion prop. : 9008/09 JEUN 25 EDUC 72 SOC ADD 1 + ADD 2 + ADD 3 + ADD 4 No. prev. doc. : 13666/09 JEUN 42 EDUC 143 SOC 541 Subject : Draft Council resolution on a renewed framework for European cooperation in the youth field ( ) Delegations will find attached a revised text on the above subject drafted by the Presidency in preparation for the next meeting of the Youth Working Party on 14 October Bold and [ ] indicate changes to the previous document /09 KT/ag 1 DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

12 DRAFT COUNCIL RESOLUTION on a renewed framework for European cooperation in the youth field ( ) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, RECALLING the Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, of 27 June 2002 establishing a framework for European cooperation in the youth field 1, which included the application of the open method of coordination and mainstreaming of youth issues into other policies, and the European Youth Pact adopted by the March 2005 European Council 2 as one of the instruments contributing to the achievement of the Lisbon objectives for growth and jobs; the Renewed Social Agenda which targets youth and children as a main priority; and ACKNOWLEDGING the conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, of 11 May 2009 on the evaluation of the current framework for European cooperation in the youth field and on future perspectives for the renewed framework 3 ; WELCOMES the communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled An EU strategy for youth Investing and empowering. A renewed open method of coordination to address youth challenges and opportunities; OJ C 168, , pp /1/ / /09 KT/ag 2 DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

13 RECOGNISES that 1. Young women and men have a crucial role to play in meeting the many socio-economic, demographic, cultural, environmental and technological challenges and opportunities facing the European Union and its citizens today and in the years ahead. Promoting the social and professional integration of young women and men [ ] is an essential component to reach the objectives of Europe's Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs, at the same time as promoting personal fulfilment, social cohesion and active citizenship. 2. The EU Youth Report shows that, although a majority of today's young Europeans enjoy good living conditions, there are still challenges to be met such as youth unemployment, young people not participating in education or training, poverty among youth, low levels of participation and representation of young people in [ ] the democratic process and various health problems. [ ] Economic downturns, such as the one which began in 2008, tend to have a significant negative impact on young people and the effects risk being long term. 3. The current framework for European cooperation in the youth field has proved to be a valuable platform for the Member States in addressing youth-related issues and that the open method of coordination (OMC), the mainstreaming of youth issues into other policy areas and initiatives such as the European Youth Pact 5 have facilitated a flexible approach in a manner suited to the youth field, with due regard for the competencies of the Member States and the principle of subsidiarity /09 ADD /05 : Annex I to the European Council conclusions, March /09 KT/ag 3 DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

14 4. A renewed framework setting out a strategy for European cooperation in the youth field over the next decade - while building on the progress made and experiences gained to date and while continuing to respect the Member States' responsibility for youth policy - would further enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of such cooperation and provide increased benefits to young people in the European Union, especially in the context of the post-2010 Lisbon Strategy. 5. It is of vital importance to enable all young women and men to make the best of their potential. This entails not only investing in youth, by putting in place greater resources to develop policy areas that affect young people in their daily lives and improve their well being, but also empowering youth by promoting their autonomy and the potential of young people to contribute to a sustainable development of society and to European values and goals. It also calls for greater cooperation between youth policies and relevant policy areas in particular education, employment, social inclusion, culture and health. ACCORDINGLY AGREES that 1. In the period up to and including 2018, the overall objectives of European cooperation in the youth field should be to: (i) (ii) create more and equal opportunities for all young people in education and in the labour market, and to promote the active citizenship, social inclusion and solidarity of all young people /09 KT/ag 4 DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

15 2. The main fields of action in which initiatives should be taken are outlined below and detailed in Annex I hereto: - Education and training - Employment and entrepreneurship - Health and well-being [physical activity / sport] - Participation - Voluntary activities - Social inclusion - Youth and the world - Creativity and culture 3. While fully respecting Member States' responsibility for youth policy and the voluntary nature of European cooperation in the youth field, achieving the two interrelated overall objectives implies a dual approach involving the development and promotion of both: (i) and (ii) specific initiatives in the youth field - i.e. policies and actions specifically targeted at young people in areas such as non-formal learning, participation, voluntary activities, youth work, mobility and information; mainstreaming initiatives - i.e. initiatives to enable a cross-sectoral approach where due account is be taken of youth issues when formulating, implementing and evaluating policies and actions in other policy fields which have a significant impact on the lives of young people. Building on the example of the European Youth Pact, a youth dimension should be continued to be integrated in the Post-Lisbon Process and the Renewed Social Agenda as well as in relevant EU strategies and programmes, such as the new Strategic Framework for European cooperation in Education and Training, the Employment Guidelines, the Health Strategy and the Agenda for Culture /09 KT/ag 5 DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

16 UNDERLINES that 1. A number of guiding principles should be observed in all policies and activities concerning young people, namely the importance of (a) promoting gender equality and combating all forms of discrimination, respecting the rights and observing the principles recognised inter alia, in Articles 21 and 23 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; (b) taking account of possible differences in the living conditions, needs, aspirations, interests and attitudes of young people due to factors such as age, sex, socio-economic situation, diverse cultural backgrounds and belief systems, sexual orientation [ ], physical or mental [ ] well-being, paying particular attention to those who, for various reasons, may have fewer opportunities; (c) recognising all young people as a resource to society, and upholding the right of young people to participate in the development of policies affecting them by means of a continuous structured dialogue with young people and [ ] youth organisations. FURTHER AGREES that 1. In the period up to 2018 European cooperation in the youth field should be implemented by means of a renewed open method of coordination, and should draw on the overall objectives, dual approach and main fields of action outlined above. 2. European cooperation in the youth field should be evidence based, pertinent and concrete. It should produce clear and visible results which should be presented, reviewed and disseminated on a regular basis and in a structured manner, thereby establishing a basis for continuous evaluation and development /09 KT/ag 6 DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

17 3. The success of the open method of coordination in the youth field depends on the political commitment of Member States and on effective working methods at national and EU level. From this perspective, the working methods used in the context of European cooperation should be based on the following: (i) (ii) Work cycles: The period up to 2018 will be divided into a series of 3-year cycles, with the first cycle covering the years from 2010 to Priorities: For each of these cycles, a number of priorities for European cooperation will be chosen. These will be highlighted among the fields of action identified under the framework [or concern methodological aspects of how to better reach the objectives for European cooperation.] The priorities will be adopted by the Council on the basis of the relevant joint Council/Commission report - as referred to hereafter - and in cooperation with the representatives of the two Presidency trios covering the work cycle in question. These priorities for European cooperation will be designed to allow for cooperation between all the Member States or for closer cooperation between a more limited number of Member States, in accordance with national priorities. The priorities for the first part of the first work cycle under this new framework are set out in Annex II hereto. The priorities for the second part of this cycle will be presented and adopted by the Council [ ] at a later [ ]date. (iii) Implementation instruments: For the framework of cooperation to be effectively implemented, there is a need both for instruments in the specific youth field and for instruments in other related policy fields /09 KT/ag 7 DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

18 In the specific youth field, the instruments are outlined in sub-paragraphs (a)-(g). These should be used to support the dual approach, i.e. to implement initiatives in the specific youth field, as well as to promote a cross-sectoral approach to support mainstreaming of a youth perspective in other related policy fields. In the mainstreaming work, the instruments should be used as a basis for dialogue with, and support for, other policy fields in order for these to integrate a youth perspective where and when relevant. (a) Knowledge building and evidence-based youth policy: Youth policy should be evidence-based. Better knowledge and understanding of the living conditions, values and attitudes of young women and men needs to be gathered and shared with other relevant policy fields so as to enable appropriate and timely measures to be taken. Such knowledge can be promoted inter alia via support to the European Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy and its correspondents, EU-wide analytical capacity (Eurydice), youth research, studies, special European youth surveys and networks of researchers. The EU Youth Report will also be an essential contribution towards evidence-based policy making. Cooperation between relevant authorities, youth researchers, young people and their organisations and those active in youth work should be promoted. (b) Mutual learning: Mutual learning is a key element in this framework of cooperation. It provides the opportunity to identify and learn from good practices in different Member States. Mutual learning [ ] will be carried out by such means as peer learning activities, conferences and seminars, high level fora or expert groups as well as through, studies and analyses, and web-based networks, with the involvement of relevant stakeholders. The subjects of these activities should be closely linked to the priorities for the respective three year work cycles. All of these initiatives should be developed with clear objectives and on the basis of clear mandates, time schedules and planned outputs to be proposed by the Commission in cooperation with the Member States /09 KT/ag 8 DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

19 Policy dialogue with third countries and cooperation with international organisations such as the Council of Europe, OECD and the United Nations should be continued, thereby providing a source of reference and inspiration. (c) Progress reporting: The European Union Youth Report should be drawn up by the Commission at the end of each work cycle - and in the case of the first under the new framework, in The EU Youth Report shall consist of two parts: A joint Council-Commission report (political part), and supporting documents (statistical and analytical part). The EU Youth report will evaluate progress made towards the overall objectives of the framework, as well as progress regarding the priorities defined for the most recent work cycle and identify good practises. The EU Youth Report should be based on national reports drawn up by the Member States in the youth field and in other relevant policy areas, as well as on other existing information and statistical data. Duplication of reporting obligations should be avoided. The EU Youth Report should also serve as a basis for establishing a set of priorities for the following work cycle. (d) Dissemination of results: To enhance visibility and impact of cooperation under this framework at local, regional, national and European level, the outcomes of cooperation should be widely disseminated among all relevant stakeholders and, where appropriate, discussed at the level of Directors-General or Ministers. (e) Monitoring of the process: To promote the delivery of results through the open method of coordination, as well as ownership of the method at both national and EU level, the Member States and the Commission will work closely together in steering, taking forward and evaluating the process and its outcomes. In this context, work should be carried out on the basis of existing indicators which have a bearing on the situation of young people in fields such as education, employment, health, social inclusion and, where appropriate, proposals should be developed on potential new indicators for consideration by the Council /09 KT/ag 9 DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

20 (f) Consultations and structured dialogue with young people and youth organisations: The structured dialogue with young people and youth organisations, which serves as a forum for continuous joint reflection on the priorities, implementation and follow-up of European cooperation in the youth field, should be pursued and developed. The themes of the dialogue should be aligned with the overall objectives of European cooperation in the youth field and the priorities for each work cycle. Clear objectives and realistic procedures should be established for each cycle of dialogue in order to ensure continuity and follow-up. The dialogue should be as inclusive as possible and developed at local, regional, national and EU level and strive to include youth researchers and those active in youth work. Structured dialogue with young people and youth organisations in other policy fields should also be supported. The implementation of the structured dialogue is further outlined in Annex III. (g) Mobilisation of EU Programmes, [ ] Funds [and instruments]: Effective use should be made of available EU funds such as the Structural Funds, and of relevant programmes such as the Youth in Action, Lifelong Learning, Culture, Progress, Media, Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs and Competitiveness and Innovation programmes [as well as instruments such as the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument]. 4. For each 3 year cycle, instruments should, as far as possible, be used for work towards the priories /09 KT/ag 10 DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

21 5. Under this framework of cooperation, supporting and developing youth work should be regarded as cross-sectoral issues. Youth work is a broad term covering a large scope of activities of a social, cultural, educational or political nature both with and for young people. Increasingly, such activities also include sport and services for young people [ ]. Youth work belongs to the area of "out-of-school" education, as well as specific leisure time activities managed by professional or voluntary youth workers and youth leaders and is based on non-formal learning processes and on voluntary participation. The ways in which youth work can contribute to achieving the overall objectives identified above - as well as be supported and recognised as an added value for its economic and social contribution - should be further examined and discussed under this framework. Among the issues to be discussed are: appropriate training for youth workers and leaders, the [ ] recognition of [ ] their skills using the appropriate European instruments, support for the mobility of youth workers and leaders and the promotion of innovative services and approaches for youth work. 6. The renewed framework for European cooperation in the youth field may be reviewed and necessary adjustments made by the Council in the light of any major new developments in Europe, particularly decisions taken on a post Lisbon Strategy. ACCORDINGLY INVITES THE MEMBER STATES to 1. Work together, with the support of the Commission and using the open method of coordination as outlined in this Resolution, to enhance European cooperation in the youth field in the period up to 2018 on the basis of the overall objectives, the fields of action, the dual approach, principles and implementation instruments described above, and of the priorities agreed for each work cycle. 2. Adopt, on the basis of national priorities, measures at national level which can contribute to achieving the overall objectives outlined in the renewed framework, as well as consider whether inspiration can be drawn from mutual learning at EU level, when devising national policies in the youth field and other related policy areas /09 KT/ag 11 DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

22 INVITES THE COMMISSION to 1. Work with and support the Member States - during the period up to in cooperating within this framework on the basis of the overall objectives, the fields of action, the dual approach, principles and implementation instruments described above, and the priorities agreed for each work cycle. 2. Examine, in particular through the EU Youth Report, the degree to which the overall objectives of this framework have been met. In this context the Commission is invited to set up a working group to, in consultation with relevant policy areas, discuss existing data on the situation of young people and the possible need for development of indicators in fields where they do not exist or where no youth perspective is apparent. The results of this work and proposals on potential new indicators should be submitted for consideration by the Council no later than December Launch studies and to propose peer-learning activities relevant to the overall objectives and priorities, as well as to regularly report to the Council on these various activities. 4. Prepare in 2017, in association with Member States, a final evaluation report covering [ ] this framework of cooperation. The final evaluation report should be discussed by the Council in [ ] 14231/09 KT/ag 12 DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

23 ANNEX I YOUTH-RELATED AIMS AND POSSIBLE INITIATIVES FOR MEMBER STATES AND THE COMMISSION Many of the fields of action listed in paragraph 3 of the ACCORDINGLY AGREES section above and detailed further below clearly have their own overall objectives and priorities and are outlined in separate cooperation frameworks and strategies, and are addressed within their respective open methods of coordination. Efforts are however needed to ensure that a youth perspective is suitably maintained in each field. With this purpose in mind, this annex proposes in section (A) a number of initiatives for all fields, followed in section (B) by a series of specific youth-related aims intended to clarify the youth dimension in each of the fields of action listed, together with a non-exhaustive list of possible initiatives which can be taken by Member States and/or the Commission within their respective competences and with due regard for the principle of subsidiarity. A) GENERAL INITIATIVES The following general initiatives should be considered in all the fields of action identified: - Developing and strengthening cooperation between policy makers in the respective fields of action and youth policy makers, inter-alia through improved dialogue and the sharing of knowledge and expertise; - Encouraging and supporting the involvement and participation of young people and [ ] youth organisations in policy making, implementation and follow-up; - Providing and improving access to quality information, guidance and counselling services including through networks such as Eurodesk, ERYCA and EYCA and other European networks; - Strengthening cooperation with local and regional authorities; - Supporting the development of better knowledge about the situation of young people, for instance through support to youth research, research networks, specific studies, etc; 14231/09 KT/ag 13 ANNEX I DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

24 - Supporting the development of youth work and recognising its value; - [ ] - Making effective use of, and facilitating access of young people to, available EU funds and programmes; - Supporting development of experimental projects and programmes to try out new and innovative ideas and to exchange good practices. - [ ] Recognising the value of bilateral cooperation for European cooperation in the field of youth policy. - Developing a close cooperation between youth policy and children s policy taking into account that the living conditions of young people are significantly determined by the support and protection received during childhood /09 KT/ag 14 ANNEX I DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

25 B) YOUTH-RELATED AIMS AND POSSIBLE INITIATIVES FOR EACH FIELD OF ACTION Education and training Aim: Equal access for young people to high quality education and training at all levels and opportunities for lifelong learning should be supported. As a complement to formal education, nonformal learning for young people should be promoted and recognised, and better links between formal education and non-formal learning developed. Young people s transition between education and training and the labour market should be facilitated and supported, and early school leaving reduced. Initiatives by Member States and the Commission within their respective spheres of competence Support the development of youth work and other non-formal learning opportunities as one of a range of actions to address early school leaving. Fully use the range of tools established at EU level for the transparency and validation of skills and the recognition of qualifications 6. Promote learning mobility of all young people. Address gender and other stereotypes via formal education and non-formal learning. Use formal education and non-formal learning to promote cohesion and understanding across different groups, promote equal opportunities and narrow the gaps in achievement [ ] Develop participative structures in education as well as cooperation between schools, families and local communities. Encourage formal education and non-formal learning in support of young people's innovation, creativity and entrepreneurship. Make a broader public aware of the value of non-formal learning outcomes. The Commission will further develop Europass as a European instrument for the transparency of skills, including tools for the self-assessment of skills and the record of competences by third parties. 6 The former being ensured through tools such as Europass, EQF or ECVET, and the latter by Directive 2005/36/EC /09 KT/ag 15 ANNEX I DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

26 Employment and entrepreneurship Aim: Young people s integration into the labour market, either as employees or as entrepreneurs, should be supported. The transition from education and training or from unemployment or inactivity to the labour market should be facilitated and supported. Opportunities to reconcile working life with family life should be improved. In the Post-Lisbon Process a youth perspective needs to be ensured, and work carried out in line with the overall objectives of the European Youth Pact needs to be continued. Initiatives by Member States and the Commission within their respective spheres of competence Increase and improve investments in the provision of suitable skills for those jobs in demand on the labour market, with better matching in the short term and better anticipation in the longer term of the skills needed. Take the specific situation of young people into account when devising flexicurity strategies. Promote cross-border professional and vocational opportunities for young people. Develop short-term measures in their recovery plans to stimulate the integration of young people in the labour market as well as structural measures taking into account youth. [Develop career guidance and counselling services.] Lower barriers to the free movement of workers across the EU. Promote quality internships and apprenticeships to facilitate the entry to and progress within the labour market. Improve childcare and promote sharing of responsibilities between partners so as to help reconciliation between professional and private life for both young women and young men. Support young people s entrepreneurship inter-alia via [ ] entrepreneurship education, support to 'start up' funds, mentoring programmes, and encourage recognition of junior enterprise. Support development of European networks and structures to promote youth entrepreneurship. Promote entrepreneurship in the field of sustainable development /09 KT/ag 16 ANNEX I DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

27 Health and well-being Aim: The health and well-being of young people should be supported, with a focus on the promotion of, mental and sexual health, sport, physical activity and healthy [ ] life styles, as well as the prevention and treatment of injury, eating disorders, addictions and substance abuse Initiatives by Member States and the Commission within their respective spheres of competence Implement the Council Resolution on the health and well-being of young people and encourage youth fitness and [ ] physical activity by applying the EU Physical Activity Guidelines 7. Take into account that health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity in activities to promote the health and well-being of young people. Encourage healthy lifestyles for young people via physical education, education on nutrition, [ ] physical activity and collaboration between schools, youth workers, health professionals and sporting organisations. Emphasise the role of sport as an activity supporting teamwork, intercultural learning, fair play and responsibility. Increase knowledge and awareness of youth workers and youth leaders of health issues. Mobilise stakeholders at local level in order to detect and help young people at risk and to signpost them to other services, where needed. Encourage peer-to-peer health education. Promote the protection of children and young people, in particular regarding the competences concerning new media and their protection against certain dangers arising from the use of new media, e.g. via promoting media-literacy. 8 Facilitate access to existing health facilities by making them more youth friendly. 7 8 Recommended Policy Actions in Support of Health-Enhancing Physical Activity, 2008 The Presidency will verify the need for a reference to relevant EU documents in this field /09 KT/ag 17 ANNEX I DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

28 Participation Aim: Young people s participation in representative democracy and civil society at all levels and in society at large should be supported. Initiatives by Member States and the Commission within their respective spheres of competence Develop mechanisms for dialogue with youth and youth participation on national youth policies. [Encourage use of already existing, or development of, guidelines on youth participation, information and consultation in order to ensure the quality of these activities.] [ ] [Support] politically and financially youth organisations, as well as local and national youth councils and promote recognition of their important role in democracy. Promote the participation of more and a greater diversity of young people in representative democracy, in youth organisations and other civil-society organisations. [ ] Making effective use of information and communication technologies to broaden and deepen participation of young people. Support various forms of learning to participate from early age through formal education and non-formal learning. Further develop opportunities for debate between public institutions and young people. The Commission will [ ] revise the European Youth Portal and promote greater outreach to young people /09 KT/ag 18 ANNEX I DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

29 Voluntary activities Aim: Young people s voluntary activities should be supported and better recognised for their value as an important form of non-formal education. Obstacles to voluntary activities should be removed and the cross-border mobility of young people promoted. Initiatives by Member States and the Commission within their respective spheres of competence Promote the recognition of skills acquired through participation in civil society organisations and voluntary activities through instruments such as Europass and Youthpass and Member State funded instruments. Promote implementation of the Council Recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers in Europe. Raise awareness about the value of voluntary activities. [ ] Promote protection of young volunteers and [ ] quality in voluntary activities. Engage young people and youth organisations in the planning, delivery and evaluation of the European Year of Volunteering Promote intergenerational solidarity through voluntary activities /09 KT/ag 19 ANNEX I DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

30 Social inclusion Aim: Poverty and the social exclusion of young people and the transmission of such problems between generations should be prevented and mutual solidarity between society and young people strengthened. Equal opportunities for all should be promoted and all forms of discrimination combated Initiatives by Member States and the Commission within their respective spheres of competence Realise the full potential of youth work and youth centres as means of inclusion. Adopt a cross-sectoral approach when working to improve community cohesion and solidarity and reduce the social exclusion of young people, addressing the inter linkages between e.g. young people s education and employment and their social inclusion. Support the development of intercultural awareness and competences for all young people and combat prejudice. Support information and education activities for young people about their rights. Address the issues of homelessness, housing and financial exclusion. Promote access to quality services e.g. transport, e-inclusion, health, social services. Promote specific support for young families. Engage young people and youth organisations in the planning, delivery and evaluation of European Year of Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion /09 KT/ag 20 ANNEX I DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

31 Youth and the world Aim: Young people s participation in and contribution to global processes of policy-making, implementation and follow-up (concerning issues such as climate change, the UN Millennium Development Goals, human rights, etc.) and young people s cooperation with regions outside of Europe should be supported. Initiatives by Member States and the Commission within their respective spheres of competence Raise the awareness of young people about global issues such as sustainable development and human rights. Fostering mutual understanding among young people from all over the world through dialogue and by means of [ ] supporting actions such as training courses, exchanges, and meetings. Encourage young people to participate in green volunteering and "green" patterns of consumption and production with young people (e.g. recycling, energy conservation, hybrid vehicles, etc.). Promote entrepreneurship, employment, education and volunteering opportunities with regions outside of Europe. Promote cooperation with, and exchanges between, youth workers on different continents. Encourage young people to participate in cooperation activities either in their residing country or abroad /09 KT/ag 21 ANNEX I DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

32 Creativity and culture Aim: Young people s creativity and capacity for innovation should be supported through wider quality access to culture and cultural expressions from an early age, thereby promoting personal development, enhanced learning capabilities, intercultural skills, understanding and respect for cultural diversity and the development of new and flexible skills for future job opportunities. Initiatives by Member States and the Commission within their respective spheres of competence Support the development of creativity among youth people by implementing the Council conclusions on promoting a Creative Generation: developing the creativity and innovative capacity of children and young people through cultural expression and wider access to culture Widen quality access to culture and creative tools, particularly those involving new technologies, and develop opportunities for youth people to experience culture and express and develop their creativity within or outside school. Make new technologies readily available to empower young people's creativity and capacity for innovation, and attract interest in culture, the arts and science. Provide access to environments where young people can develop their creativity and interests and spend a meaningful leisure time. Facilitate long-term synergies between policies and programmes in the fields of culture, education, media, employment and youth with the view to promoting young people's creativity and capacity for innovation. Promote specialised training in culture, new media and intercultural competences for youth workers. Promote partnerships between culture and creative sectors and youth organisations and youth workers. Facilitate and support development young people's talent and entrepreneurial skills with a view to enhancing their employability and future job opportunities. Promote young people's knowledge about culture and cultural heritage in the different EU Member States, including through the use of new technologies /09 KT/ag 22 ANNEX I DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

33 ANNEX II PRIORITIES FOR EUROPEAN COOPERATION IN THE YOUTH FIELD DURING THE PERIOD 1 JANUARY JUNE 2011 [ ] Overall priority Youth Employment The overall thematic priority for the European cooperation in the youth field for the period January June 2011 will be youth employment. During these 18 months, this topic will be discussed in the framework of the structured dialogue. 1 January June 2010 Social Inclusion During the first half of 2010 the following issues will be highlighted: - Strengthening the European Youth Pact within the context of the Post-Lisbon Process. - Social inclusion of young people with fewer opportunities. - The role of local and regional authorities in youth policy. - Cooperation with the Latin American countries /09 KT/ag 23 ANNEX II DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

34 1 July December 2010 Youth Work During the second half of 2010 the following issues will be highlighted: - Youth work and the accessibility of youth work and activities to the poorest children and young people. - Young people s access to culture. 1 January June 2011 Participation During the first half of 2011 the following issues will be highlighted. - Citizenship and participation of young people, with an emphasis on social, cultural and political participation and human rights. - Voluntary activities of young people their contribution to the development of local communities /09 KT/ag 24 ANNEX II DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

35 ANNEX III IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRUCTURED DIALOGUE The overall guiding principles for the structured dialogue with young people and their organisations are outlines in paragraph 3 (iii) (f) of the FURTHER AGREES section above. In this annex the implementation of the structured dialogue at national and EU level is further developed. The structured dialogue should be based on work-cycles of 18 months with an overall theme corresponding to the overall priorities for European cooperation]. [ ] Each Presidency may also choose a [ ] specific priority theme, linked to the overall theme, for its term of office. The structured dialogue should whenever possible involve consultations with youth and youth organisation in the Member States, and at EU Youth Conferences organised by Presidency countries and at the European Youth Week. With a view to improving the implementation of the structured dialogue, within their respective competences and with due regard to the principle of subsidiarity: - the Commission is invited to convene a European Steering Committee for each 18-month period consisting of inter alia representatives of the Trio Presidency countries Ministries for Youth Affairs, National Youth Councils and National Agencies for the Youth in Action Programme, as well as representatives of the European Commission and the European Youth Forum. Where appropriate, youth researchers and youth workers will be consulted. The European Steering Committee is responsible for the overall coordination of the structured dialogue. The Steering Committee will set up a support structure with trainers and facilitators that can give methodological support and provide continuity in the organisation of the structured dialogue at the EU level /09 KT/ag 25 ANNEX III DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

36 - Member States are invited to support the establishment of a small National Working Group. These groups can, where applicable, be based on existing structures and be composed of inter alia representatives the Ministries for Youth Affairs, National Youth Councils, local and regional youth councils, youth organisations, those active in youth work, diverse young people and youth researchers. Member States are encouraged to, whenever possible, give National Youth Councils a leading role in these groups. The National Working Groups would have the task of securing the participatory process in the Member States. - [ ] - The Commission and Member States are invited, in cooperation with all actors involved, to continuously follow-up the structured dialogue and to gather and disseminate good practices /09 KT/ag 26 ANNEX III DG I - 2B LIMITE EN

37 EUROOPAN UNIONIN NEUVOSTO Bryssel, 28. huhtikuuta 2009 (04.05) (OR. en) 9008/09 JEUN 25 EDUC 72 SOC 274 SAATE Lähettäjä: Euroopan komission pääsihteerin puolesta Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, johtaja Saapunut: 28. huhtikuuta 2009 Vastaanottaja: Javier SOLANA, pääsihteeri, korkea edustaja Asia: KOMISSION TIEDONANTO NEUVOSTOLLE, EUROOPAN PARLAMENTILLE, EUROOPAN TALOUS- JA SOSIAALIKOMITEALLE JA ALUEIDEN KOMITEALLE EU:n nuorisostrategia Satsataan nuorten vaikutusmahdollisuuksiin Uudistetulla avoimella koordinointimenetelmällä kiinni nuorison haasteisiin ja mahdollisuuksiin Valtuuskunnille toimitetaan oheisena komission asiakirja KOM(2009) 200 lopullinen. Liite: KOM(2009) 200 lopullinen 9008/09 sp DG I - 2B FI

38 EUROOPAN YHTEISÖJEN KOMISSIO Bryssel KOM(2009) 200 lopullinen KOMISSION TIEDONANTO NEUVOSTOLLE, EUROOPAN PARLAMENTILLE, EUROOPAN TALOUS- JA SOSIAALIKOMITEALLE JA ALUEIDEN KOMITEALLE EU:n nuorisostrategia Satsataan nuorten vaikutusmahdollisuuksiin Uudistetulla avoimella koordinointimenetelmällä kiinni nuorison haasteisiin ja mahdollisuuksiin {SEC(2009) 545} {SEC(2009) 546} {SEC(2009) 548} {SEC(2009) 549} FI 1 FI

39 1. JOHDANTO Nuoret 1 ovat Euroopan tulevaisuus. Monien nuorten elämän mahdollisuudet ovat kuitenkin piloilla. Näin todetaan komission tiedonannossa Uudistettu sosiaalinen toimintaohjelma, 2 jonka tarkoituksena on antaa kaikille EU:n kansalaisille lisää mahdollisuuksia ja keinoja niiden hyödyntämiseen sekä osoittaa solidaarisuutta. Nuoriso on yksi Euroopan unionin sosiaalisen vision prioriteeteista, ja nykyisessä kriisissä on erityisen tärkeää pitää huolta nuorison henkisestä pääomasta. Sen vuoksi tässä tiedonannossa esitetään strategia linjaamaan Euroopan tulevaa nuorisopolitiikkaa. Tiedonannossa ehdotetaan uutta, entistä vahvempaa avointa koordinointimenetelmää, joka on joustava ja raportoinniltaan yksinkertaisempi ja lujittaa yhteyksiä niihin politiikanaloihin, joita tarkastellaan Lissabonin kasvu- ja työllisyysstrategiaan kuuluvassa Euroopan nuorisosopimuksessa. Lähestymistapa on monialainen, ja tarkoituksena on yhdistää lyhyen aikavälin toimenpiteitä pitemmälle tähtäävään tavoitteeseen eli nuorten vaikuttamismahdollisuuksien parantamiseen. Strategialla halutaan luoda nuorille edellytykset taitojensa kehittämiseen, itsensä toteuttamiseen, työntekoon sekä aktiiviseen osallistumiseen yhteiskunnan toimintaan ja EU:n rakentamiseen. Yhteiskunnan ei tule pitää nuoria joukkona, jota kohtaan sillä on työläitä velvollisuuksia, vaan arvokkaana resurssina, joka auttaa toteuttamaan pitemmälle tähtääviä sosiaalisia tavoitteita. 2. NUORTEN HAASTEET JA MAHDOLLISUUDET TÄNÄÄN Eurooppalaiset elävät entistä pitempään ja hankkivat lapsia entistä myöhemmin. Nuoria on entistä vähemmän vuotiaitten osuuden Euroopan väestöstä ennustetaan putoavan nykyisestä 19,3 prosentista 15,3 prosenttiin vuonna Nämä väestönrakenteen muutokset vaikuttavat perheisiin, sukupolvienväliseen solidaarisuuteen ja talouskasvuun. Globalisaatio voi luoda kasvua ja työpaikkoja mutta myös ongelmia nuorten kaltaisille muita heikommassa asemassa oleville työntekijöille, kuten nykyinen kriisi on osoittanut. 4 Tulevat sukupolvet joutuvat ilmastonmuutokseen ja energiavarmuuteen liittyvien kysymysten vuoksi muuttamaan käyttäytymistään ja elintapojaan. Jokainen tarvitsee välttämättä joustavat avaintaidot, joiden avulla pystyy kehittämään tarvittavia valmiuksia koko elämänsä ajan. Koulunkäynnin lopettaminen varhaisessa vaiheessa on edelleen keskeinen ongelma. Nuoret arvostavat ystävyyttä, toisten kunnioittamista, suvaitsevaisuutta ja solidaarisuutta. Nykyinen sukupolvi lienee parhaiten koulutettu, teknisesti edistynein ja liikkuvin koskaan. Muun yhteiskunnan tavoin nuoret kuitenkin kohtaavat voimakkaampaa yksilön korostamista ja lisääntyneitä kilpailupaineita ilman että heillä välttämättä olisi samat mahdollisuudet kuin muilla. Laajan ympäri Eurooppaa järjestetyn kuulemiskierroksen 5 pohjalta voidaan todeta, että eniten huolta nuorille aiheuttavat koulutus, työllisyys, sosiaalinen osallisuus ja terveys. Euroopan nuorilla täytyy olla valmiudet hyödyntää niitä mahdollisuuksia, joita esim. kansalais- ja Nuorilla tarkoitetaan tässä yleisesti ottaen teinejä ja nuoria aikuisia eli vuotiaita. Tekstissä käytetään kuitenkin tilastosyistä muitakin ikähaarukoita. KOM(2008) 412. Lähde: Eurostat. KOM(2009) 34. Ks. tähän tiedonantoon liittyvä vaikutustenarviointi ja kuulemisesta tehdyt raportit. FI 2 FI

40 poliittinen aktiivisuus, vapaaehtoistyö, luovuus, yrittäjyys, urheilu ja kansainvälinen vaikuttaminen tarjoavat. Koulutukseen, työllisyyteen, osallisuuteen ja terveyteen liittyvät ongelmat, joihin yhdistyy vielä taloudellisia ja asumiseen ja liikkumiseen liittyviä hankaluuksia, vaikeuttavat nuorten itsenäistymistä eli pääsyä tilanteeseen, jossa heillä on resurssit ja mahdollisuudet huolehtia itse omasta elämästään, osallistua täysipainoisesti yhteiskunnan toimintaan ja tehdä itsenäisiä päätöksiä. 3. TARVITAAN UUSI TOIMINTAKEHYS 3.1. EU:n tason yhteistyö Nuorisoalan yhteistyö on EU:ssa hyvin jäsenneltyä ja kehittynyttä. Nuorisoalan EU-ohjelmia on toteutettu jo vuodesta Poliittista päätöksentekoprosessia kehiteltiin vuoden 2001 valkoisessa kirjassa, 6 ja sen pohjana on tätä nykyä kolme peruspilaria: nuorten aktiivinen kansalaisuus avoimen koordinointimenetelmän välityksellä neljä prioriteettia (osallistuminen, tiedotus, vapaaehtoistyö ja nuorten parempi tuntemus), yhteiset tavoitteet, jäsenvaltioiden raportit sekä jäsennelty vuoropuhelu nuorten kanssa integroituminen yhteiskuntaan ja työelämään Lissabonin strategiaan kuuluvan Euroopan nuorisosopimuksen 7 välityksellä kolme prioriteettia (työllisyys ja sosiaalinen osallisuus, koulutus, työ- ja yksityiselämän yhteensovittaminen); komission tiedonannossa Nuorten saaminen täysipainoisemmin mukaan koulutukseen, työelämään ja yhteiskunnan toimintaan 8 ehdotetaan lisää toimia nuorisoasioiden ottaminen huomioon myös muussa politiikassa (mm. syrjinnän torjuminen, terveys) Arvio nuorisopolitiikasta Jäsenvaltioita on kuultu sekä nykyisistä toimintapuitteista että mahdollisista tulevista toimista. Euroopan parlamentti järjesti nuorisoaiheisen kuulemisen helmikuussa Osana jäsenneltyä vuoropuhelua järjestettiin keskusteluja, joihin osallistui tuhansia nuoria eri puolilta Eurooppaa. Myös Euroopan nuorisofoorumin ja kansallisten nuorisoneuvostojen kanssa kokoonnuttiin. Internetissä toteutettuun kuulemiseen saatiin yli vastausta. Näkemyksiään esittivät myös tutkijat ja nuorisotoimintaohjelman vastuuhenkilöt. Avointa koordinointimenetelmää pidettiin yleisesti ottaen asianmukaisena yhteistyövälineenä ja sen prioriteetteja edelleen pätevinä. Toimintapuitteet ovat saaneet maat laatimaan nuorisoon liittyvää lainsäädäntöä ja strategioita, ja yhä useammassa maassa nuorisojärjestöt otetaan mukaan politiikan muotoiluun. Euroopan nuorisosopimus nosti nuorison profiilia Lissabonin strategiassa etenkin koulutuksen ja työllisyyden yhteydessä. Myös syrjinnän torjunnassa ja terveysasioissa edistyttiin KOM(2001) 681. Eurooppa-neuvoston puheenjohtajan päätelmät, maaliskuu 2005 (asiak. 7619/05). KOM(2007) 498. FI 3 FI

41 Nykyiset, vuonna 2009 päättyvät toimintapuitteet eivät kuitenkaan ole aina osoittautuneet tehokkaiksi ja tuloksekkaiksi. Koordinoinnin riittämättömyyden vuoksi kaikkia haasteita ei ole voitu ratkaista. Nyt on päästy yhteisymmärrykseen entistä voimakkaammasta monialaisesta lähestymistavasta, jota Euroopan parlamentti peräänkuulutti vuonna 2008 antamassaan julistuksessa nuorten vaikutusmahdollisuuksista. Jäsennellyn vuoropuhelun organisointia olisi parannettava, ja sen piiriin olisi saatava laajemmin myös järjestäytymättömiä nuoria ja etenkin niitä, joilla on heikommat mahdollisuudet kuin muilla. 4. SATSATAAN NUORTEN VAIKUTUSMAHDOLLISUUKSIIN 4.1. EU:n nuorisovisio Nuorten pitäisi hyödyntää koko potentiaalinsa. EU:n visio koskee kaikkia nuoria, mutta toimenpiteissä olisi keskityttävä niihin, joilla mahdollisuuksia on vähemmän. Visiossa on kaksi lähtökohtaa: Satsataan nuoriin: kohdistetaan enemmän resursseja sellaisten osa-alueiden kehittämiseen, jotka vaikuttavat nuorten arkeen ja parantavat heidän hyvinvointiaan. Parannetaan nuorten vaikutusmahdollisuuksia: hyödynnetään nuorten potentiaalia uudistaa yhteiskuntaa ja edistää EU:n arvoja ja tavoitteita. Tarkoituksena on lisätä yhteyksiä nuorisopolitiikan ja muiden politiikanalojen kuten koulutuksen, työllisyyden, osallisuuden ja terveyden välillä niin, että nuorisoon liittyvä toiminta ja nuorisotyö tukevat niitä. Uudistetulla nuorisoalan avoimella koordinointimenetelmällä halutaan edistää kokonaisvaltaista politiikanmuotoilua sillä tavoin, että menetelmä antaa muuhun politiikan koordinointiin erityisosaamiseen pohjautuvan panoksensa ja tarjoaa nuorille mahdollisuuden vaikuttaa ja saada äänensä kuulluksi. EU:n roolina on auttaa jäsenvaltioita, joiden vastuulle nuorisopolitiikka kuuluu, tekemään keskenään yhteistyötä Pitemmän tähtäimen strategia höystettynä lyhyemmän tähtäimen prioriteeteilla Nuorten nykytilanteen kartoituksen 9 perusteella ehdotetaan uutta strategiaa, jolla on seuraavat kolme laaja-alaista ja toisiinsa kytkeytyvää, uudistetun sosiaalisen toimintaohjelman tavoitteisiin läheisesti liittyvää tavoitetta: Lisätään nuorten mahdollisuuksia koulutukseen ja työntekoon. Parannetaan kaikkien nuorten mahdollisuuksia osallistua täysipainoisesti yhteiskunnan toimintaan. Edistetään nuorten ja muun yhteiskunnan välistä solidaarisuutta. Kunkin tavoitteen yhteydessä ehdotetaan kahta kolmea toiminta-alaa, joille asetetaan tavoitteet strategian kolmeksi ensimmäiseksi vuodeksi ( ). Toiminta-aloilla esitetään joukko mahdollisia toimia, joihin jäsenvaltiot ja/tai komissio voisivat ryhtyä. Tämän päivän nuorten haasteita ja mahdollisuuksia arvioidaan säännöllisesti, ja ne priorisoidaan 9 EU:n nuorisoraportti FI 4 FI

42 kolmen vuoden välein joustavuuden ja sen varmistamiseksi, että toiminta-alat vastaavat uusien ikäluokkien uusia tarpeita. Muutoksia voidaan tehdä tarvittaessa myös sitten, kun EU:n vuoden 2010 tuolle puolen ulottuvasta kasvu- ja työllisyysstrategiasta on päätetty Lisätään nuorten mahdollisuuksia Toiminta-ala 1 Koulutus Lähes 80 prosenttia vuotiaista eurooppalaisista on hankkinut keskiasteen koulutuksen. Siitä huolimatta 15-vuotiaista joka neljännen lukutaito on heikko 10 ja kuusi miljoonaa nuorta jättää koulun ilman päättötodistusta. Liikkuvuuden lisääntyminen on tehnyt EU:sta avoimen alueen, 11 jolla nuoriso voi kehittää kykyjään ja potentiaaliaan, mutta sen hyödyntämisessä on vielä parantamisen varaa. Euroopan komissio on ehdottanut uutta koulutusalan avointa koordinointimenetelmää, 12 jolla puututaan seuraaviin pitkän aikavälin strategisiin haasteisiin: elinikäinen oppiminen ja liikkuvuus, laatu ja teho, tasapuolisuus ja kansalaisuus sekä innovointi ja luovuus. Komissio on ehdottanut myös uutta mallia, jolla työmarkkinoiden tarpeet ja ihmisten taidot saataisiin kohtaamaan toisensa. 13 Muodollisen koulutuksen tehostaminen on eittämättä ensiarvoista, mutta taitoja voidaan hankkia koulun ulkopuolellakin nuorisotyön ja uuden tekniikan avulla. Tavoite Muodollisen koulutuksen ohella olisi tuettava nuorten epävirallista oppimista elinikäisen oppimisen edistämiseksi Euroopassa. Sen laatua olisi parannettava, sen tulokset olisi tunnustettava, ja se olisi integroitava paremmin muodolliseen koulutukseen. Jäsenvaltioiden ja komission toimet niiden toimivallan mukaisesti Kehitetään mahdollisuuksia epäviralliseen oppimiseen yhtenä keinona vähentää koulupudokkaiden määrää. Hyödynnetään täysimääräisesti EU:n tasolla kehitettyjä välineitä taitojen validoimiseen ja tutkintojen ja pätevyyksien tunnustamiseen. 14 Edistetään kaikkien nuorten oppimiseen liittyvää liikkuvuutta. Rohkaistaan koulutus- ja nuorisopolitiikan parissa toimivia yhteistyöhön. Puututaan sukupuolistereotypioihin sekä virallisessa että epävirallisesti järjestetyssä koulutuksessa. Tarjotaan nuorille laadukkaita ohjaus- ja neuvontapalveluja KOM(2008) 425. Tässä viitataan esim. Erasmus- ja Youth in Action -ohjelmaan. KOM(2008) 865. KOM(2008) 868. Taitojen validoimisen välineitä ovat mm. Europass, Euroopan tutkintojen viitekehys ja ammatillisen koulutuksen ECVET-järjestelmä. Tutkintojen ja pätevyyksien tunnustamiseen tarjoaa puolestaan välineen direktiivi 2005/36/EY. FI 5 FI

43 Luodaan koulutusjärjestelmään osallistavia järjestelyjä ja kehitetään koulujen, perheiden ja paikallisyhteisöjen yhteistyötä. Komissio kehittää Europass-järjestelmään kuuluvaa itsearviointia pitemmälle etenkin epävirallisissa yhteyksissä hankittujen taitojen osalta mm. Youthpass-todistusten avulla. Toiminta-ala 2 Työllisyys Nuorten siirtymisestä koulutuksesta työelämään on tullut selvästi pitempi ja mutkikkaampi prosessi. Nuorten työttömyys on keskimäärin kaksi kertaa niin yleistä kuin työvoiman yleensä, ja meneillään oleva talouskriisi vain vaikeuttaa nuorten mahdollisuuksia työmarkkinoilla. Nuoret työskentelevät usein heikkolaatuisissa ja tilapäisissä työsuhteissa, joissa palkkakin on pieni. Nuorisotyöttömyyden taustalla on usein se, ettei nuorilla ole tarvittavia tai sopivia taitoja. Siksi onkin tarjottava opastusta ja neuvontaa tarvittavien pätevyyksien hankinnasta ja tulevista työmahdollisuuksista. Työmarkkinoille pääsemisen ja laadukkaitten työpaikkojen edistäminen on ollut Lissabonin kasvu- ja työllisyysstrategiassa ja Euroopan nuorisosopimuksessa keskeisenä painopisteenä. Niitä on painotettava edelleen. Rahoitus- ja talouskriisin vaikutukset työmarkkinoihin ovat niin mittavat, että nuorisotyöttömyyteen on entistäkin tärkeämpää puuttua sekä välittömästi että pitemmällä tähtäimellä. Työvoiman vapaa liikkuvuus on yhtenäismarkkinoitten kulmakivi, ja erityisen tärkeää se on työelämäänsä aloittelevien nuorten kohdalla. Tavoitteet Jäsenvaltioiden ja EU:n tason työllisyyspolitiikkaa olisi koordinoitava joustoturvan kaikilla neljällä osa-alueella, jotta siirtyminen koulusta tai työttömyydestä työhön helpottuisi. Työhön päästyään nuorten pitäisi pystyä myös etenemään urallaan. Tarvitaan lisää ja paremmin kohdennettuja investointeja siihen, että ihmiset voivat hankkia sellaiset taidot, joita työmarkkinoilla tarjolla oleviin tehtäviin tarvitaan. Taidot ja työpaikat on saatava kohtaamaan toisensa paremmin lyhyellä aikavälillä, ja taitotarpeita on pystyttävä ennakoimaan paremmin pitemmällä aikavälillä. Jäsenvaltioiden ja komission toimet niiden toimivallan mukaisesti Pidetään nuorison työllisyys prioriteettina. Edistetään nuorten mahdollisuuksia rajatylittävään työskentelyyn. Tutustutetaan nuoret työelämään jo varhaisessa vaiheessa. Kehitetään nuorisotyötä nuorten työllistettävyyden tueksi. Edistetään työllisyys- ja nuorisopoliittisten päättäjien yhteistyötä ja nuorten ottamista mukaan työllisyyspolitiikkaan. Varmistetaan, että nuorten työllisyyden edistämiseen varattuja EU-varoja (etenkin Euroopan sosiaalirahastosta tulevia) käytetään tehokkaasti. Sisällytetään elvytyssuunnitelmiin nuorten työllisyyttä edistäviä lyhyen aikavälin toimenpiteitä ja nuorten hyväksi toteutettavia rakenteellisia toimenpiteitä. FI 6 FI

44 Kehitetään uraohjaus- ja neuvontapalveluja. Madalletaan esteitä, jotka haittaavat työvoiman vapaata liikkuvuutta EU:ssa. Edistetään laadukkaitten harjoittelujaksojen käyttöä koulutus- ja/tai työllisyysohjelmissa. Parannetaan lastenhoitopalveluja, jotta nuoret aikuiset voisivat paremmin sovittaa yhteen työ- ja yksityiselämänsä. Toiminta-ala 3 Luovuus ja yrittäjyys Teknologia tarjoaa tämän päivän nettisukupolvelle uusia mahdollisuuksia oppia, luoda ja osallistua. Toisaalta eteen tulee myös yksityisyyden suojaan, internetin turvallisuuteen ja medialukutaitoon liittyviä kysymyksiä. Nuorten yrittäjyyden ja innovoinnin edistäminen on osa kilpailukyvyn ja innovoinnin puiteohjelmaa ja elinikäisen oppimisen avaintaitoja koskevaa eurooppalaista viitekehystä, johon kuuluvat myös kulttuuritaidot. Vuosi 2009 on luovuuden ja innovoinnin teemavuosi, ja nämä teemat on uudessa koulutusalan avoimessa koordinointimenetelmässä nimetty strategisiksi haasteiksi. Nuoria olisi rohkaistava ajattelemaan ja toimimaan innovatiivisesti, ja nuoret kyvyt olisi tunnustettava. Kulttuurista kumpuaa luovuutta. Yrittäjyyskoulutusta taas olisi pidettävä keinona edistää talouskasvua ja uusien työpaikkojen luomista samoin kuin taitojen, kansalaisosallistumisen, itsenäisyyden ja omanarvontunnon lähteenä. Tavoite Kaikkia nuoria olisi rohkaistava kehittämään kykyjään, hankkimaan luovia taitoja, omaksumaan yrittäjähenki ja ilmaisemaan itseään kulttuurin saralla. Jäsenvaltioiden ja komission toimet niiden toimivallan mukaisesti Kehitetään edelleen starttirahoitusta ja edistetään nuorten yritysten tunnustamista. Tarjotaan helposti saataville uutta teknologiaa, jonka avulla nuoret kyvyt pääsevät vaikuttamaan. Lisätään kiinnostusta taiteita ja luonnontieteitä kohtaan. Tuetaan nuorisotyön panosta nuorten luovuuden ja yrittäjyyden hyväksi. Parannetaan luovien välineiden saatavuutta etenkin sellaisten, joissa hyödynnetään uutta teknologiaa. FI 7 FI

45 Parannetaan nuorten mahdollisuuksia osallistua täysipainoisesti yhteiskunnan toimintaan Toiminta-ala 4 Terveys ja urheilu Lasten ja nuorten terveys luetaan EU:n terveysstrategiassa ensisijaisiin toimintaaloihin, ja asiaa painottaa myös neuvosto päätöslauselmassaan. 15 Monien nuorten terveys on vaarassa stressin, huonon ruokavalion, liikunnan puutteen, suojaamattoman seksin, tupakoinnin taikka alkoholin tai huumeiden käytön vuoksi. Myös laajemmat ympäristö- tai sosioekonomiset tekijät saattavat heikentää terveyttä, mikä taas voi estää aktiivista osallistumista. Nuoret ovat terveyskysymyksissä erityinen ryhmä, ja sen vuoksi asiaa on käsiteltävä laaja-alaisesti. Urheilu parantaa nuorten fyysistä ja psyykkistä hyvinvointia, ja lisäksi sillä on merkittävä koulutuksellinen ja sosiaalinen rooli. 16 Tavoite Kannustetaan nuoria omaksumaan terveelliset elintavat. Edistetään liikunnanopetusta, urheilua ja nuorisotyöntekijöiden, terveysalan ammattilaisten ja urheiluseurojen yhteistyötä. Painotetaan ylipainoisuuden, vammojen, riippuvuuden ja päihteidenkäytön ennaltaehkäisyä ja hoitoa sekä mielen- ja seksuaaliterveyden pitämistä kunnossa. Jäsenvaltioiden ja komission toimet niiden toimivallan mukaisesti Pannaan täytäntöön neuvoston päätöslauselma nuorten terveydestä ja hyvinvoinnista sekä kannustetaan nuoria pitämään huolta kunnostaan ja urheilemaan EU:n liikuntaa koskevien suuntaviivojen mukaisesti. 17 Edistetään nuorisotyöntekijöiden ja nuorisojärjestöjen johtajien terveyskoulutusta. Edistetään terveys- ja nuorisopoliittisten päättäjien yhteistyötä ja nuorten ottamista mukaan terveyspolitiikkaan. Pyritään yhdessä kaikkien paikallisten sidosryhmien kanssa löytämään riskitilanteessa olevat nuoret ja auttamaan heitä. Kehitetään nimenomaan nuorille ja etenkin sosiaalisen syrjäytymisen vaarassa oleville suunnattua tietoa terveydestä ja hyödynnetään siinä nuorisotiedotusverkostoja. Tuetaan vertaisryhmien antamaa terveyskasvatusta kouluissa ja nuorisojärjestöissä. Toiminta-ala 5 Osallistuminen On yhä haastavampi tehtävä saada nuoret osallistumaan täysipainoisesti kansalais- ja poliittiseen toimintaan: niin etäällä nuoret ja instituutiot ovat toisistaan. Nykyisiä osallistumisja tiedottamistavoitteita toteutettaessa on käynyt ilmi, että parantamisen varaa olisi etenkin nuorisojärjestöjen tukemisessa, osallistumisessa edustukselliseen demokratiaan ja osallistumaan oppimisessa. Poliittisten päättäjien on viestittävä nuorten kanssa heille sopivalla /C 319. KOM(2007) 391. Suositellut toimenpiteet terveyttä edistävän liikunnan tueksi (2008). FI 8 FI

46 tavalla myös kansalaistoiminnasta ja EU-asioista etenkin siksi, että viesti tavoittaisi myös järjestäytymättömät tai muita heikommassa asemassa olevat nuoret. Tavoite Huolehditaan siitä, että nuoret osallistuvat täysipainoisesti yhteiskunnan toimintaan. Sitä varten lisätään nuorten osallistumista paikalliseen kansalaistoimintaan ja edustukselliseen demokratiaan, tuetaan nuorisojärjestöjä ja erilaisia tapoja oppia osallistumaan, kannustetaan järjestäytymättömiä nuoria osallistumaan ja tarjotaan laadukkaita tietopalveluja. Jäsenvaltioiden ja komission toimet niiden toimivallan mukaisesti Kehitetään laatustandardeja nuorison osallistumiselle, nuorille tiedottamiselle ja nuorten kuulemiselle. Jatketaan nuorisojärjestöjen sekä kansallisten ja paikallisten nuorisoneuvostojen tukemista poliittisesti ja taloudellisesti. Edistetään sähköistä e-demokratiaa useamman järjestäytymättömän nuoren saamiseksi mukaan. Järjestetään lisää mahdollisuuksia nuorten ja EU:n tai kansallisten laitosten väliseen keskusteluun. Komissio uudistaa Euroopan nuorisoportaalia ja on aktiivisempi nuorten suuntaan Edistetään nuorten ja muun yhteiskunnan välistä solidaarisuutta Toiminta-ala 6 Sosiaalinen osallisuus Yhteiskunnan on osoitettava välittävänsä nuorista ja etenkin niistä, jotka ovat heikossa asemassa. Vuonna 2006 viidesosa vuotiaista eli köyhyysriskissä. Syrjäytymisen syynä voi olla esimerkiksi työttömyys, vammaisuus, yhteiskunnan ja yksilöiden asenteet maahanmuuttajia kohtaan, syrjintä, fyysisen tai mielenterveyden ongelmat, päihderiippuvuus, kaltoinkohtelu tai hyväksikäyttö, perheväkivalta tai rikosrekisteri. Syrjäytyminen voi johtaa myös radikalisoitumiseen ja väkivaltaan. Tarve saada köyhyyden ja syrjäytymisen siirtyminen sukupolvelta toiselle katkaistuksi on keskeinen tavoite sosiaalialan avoimessa koordinointimenetelmässä. 18 Köyhyyden ja sosiaalisen syrjäytymisen riskissä elävien nuorten auttaminen edellyttää yhtenäisiä toimia monella politiikan eri osa-alueella. Lapsi-, perhe- ja nuorisopolitiikan yhteydet ovat tässä suhteessa tiiviit, ja tämä tiedonanto täydentääkin komission tiedonantoa Tavoitteena lasten oikeuksia koskeva EU:n strategia KOM(2008) 418, KOM(2005) 706. KOM(2006) 367. FI 9 FI

47 Tavoite Ehkäistään muita heikommassa asemassa olevien nuorten köyhyyttä ja sosiaalista syrjäytymistä ja katkaistaan näiden ongelmien siirtyminen sukupolvelta toiselle. Siihen tarvitaan kaikkien nuoren elämään vaikuttavien tahojen yhteistyötä (vanhemmat, opettajat, sosiaalityöntekijät, terveydenhuoltoalan työntekijät, nuorisotyöntekijät, nuoret itse, poliisi ja oikeuslaitos, työnantajat jne.). Jäsenvaltioiden ja komission toimet niiden toimivallan mukaisesti Etsitään sosiaalisen suojelun ja sosiaalisen osallisuuden politiikan yhteydessä ratkaisuja nuorten ja nuorten aikuisten etenkin niiden, joilla mahdollisuuksia on vähemmän ongelmiin. Optimoidaan EU-rahoituksen ja kokeiluohjelmien käyttö nuorten sosiaalisen integroitumisen tukemiseen. Hyödynnetään nuorisotyön ja nuorisotilojen koko potentiaali osallisuuden edistäjinä. Kehitetään muiden kulttuurien tuntemusta ja monikulttuurisia taitoja kaikkien nuorten piirissä. Edistetään nuorten ottamista mukaan osallisuutta edistävän politiikan tekemiseen ja poliittisten päättäjien yhteistyötä. Annetaan tunnustusta heikossa asemassa oleville nuorille, jotka ovat selviytyneet heitä kohdanneista haasteista, esimerkiksi myöntämällä erityisiä palkintoja. Puututaan asunnottomuuteen, asuntojen saatavuuteen ja taloudelliseen syrjäytymiseen. Edistetään laadukkaiden palveluiden saatavuutta esim. liikenteen, tietoyhteiskuntaan osallistumisen, terveydenhuollon ja sosiaalipalvelujen alalla. Annetaan erityistä tukea nuorille perheille. Toiminta-ala 7 Vapaaehtoistyö Vapaaehtoistyö on nuorille tärkeä keino osoittaa solidaarisuutta muuta yhteiskuntaa kohtaan, ja lisäksi se edesauttaa itsensä kehittämistä ja oppimiseen liittyvää liikkuvuutta, kilpailukykyä, sosiaalista yhteenkuuluvuutta ja kansalaisuutta. Nuorten vapaaehtoistyö edistää voimakkaasti myös sukupolvien välistä solidaarisuutta. Neuvosto on tuoreessa suosituksessaan 20 kehottanut poistamaan esteitä, jotka haittaavat nuorten vapaaehtoisten liikkumista rajojen ylitse. Tavoite Tuetaan nuorten vapaaehtoistyötä tarjoamalla heille lisää mahdollisuuksia vapaaehtoistyöhön, poistamalla vapaaehtoistyön esteitä, tuomalla esiin vapaaehtoistyön /C 319. FI 10 FI

48 arvoa, tunnustamalla vapaaehtoistyö tärkeäksi epävirallisen oppimisen muodoksi ja vahvistamalla nuorten vapaaehtoisten rajatylittävää liikkuvuutta. Jäsenvaltioiden ja komission toimet niiden toimivallan mukaisesti Parannetaan taitojen tunnustamista Europass- ja Youthpass-järjestelmien kautta. Tunnustetaan nuorisojärjestöjen panos ja vapaamuotoinen vapaaehtoistyö. Selvitetään, miten voitaisiin suojella paremmin vapaaehtoisten oikeuksia ja varmistaa vapaaehtoistyön laatu sekä saada nuoret ja nuorisojärjestöt mukaan mahdollisesti järjestettävän Euroopan vapaaehtoistyön teemavuoden 2011 toteuttamiseen. Kehitetään maakohtaisia tapoja lähestyä nuorten vapaaehtoisten rajatylittävää liikkuvuutta. Kehitetään maakohtaisia tapoja edistää sukupolvienvälistä solidaarisuutta vapaaehtoistyön keinoin. Toiminta-ala 8 Nuoret ja maailma Globaalit haasteet kuten perusoikeuksien loukkaaminen, taloudellinen eriarvoisuus ja ympäristön tilan heikkeneminen askarruttavat nuoria eurooppalaisia. Nuoret haluavat osoittaa kantavansa huolta muusta maailmasta torjumalla syrjintää, auttamalla toisia ja suojelemalla ympäristöä. Tavoite Otetaan nuoret mukaan globaaliin politiikkaan kaikilla tasoilla (paikallisesti, kansallisesti ja kansainvälisesti) hyödyntämällä jo olemassa olevia nuorten verkostoja ja välineitä (esim. jäsenneltyä vuoropuhelua). Otetaan nuoret mukaan ilmastonmuutoksen hillitsemiseen ja YK:n vuosituhattavoitteitten toteuttamiseen. Jäsenvaltioiden ja komission toimet niiden toimivallan mukaisesti Rohkaistaan nuoria omaksumaan vihreitä kulutus- ja tuotantomalleja (esim. kierrätys, energiansäästö, hybridiajoneuvot jne.). Edistetään yrittäjyyttä ja vapaaehtoistyötä Euroopan ulkopuolisten alueiden kanssa. Tuetaan nuorisotyön kehittämistä muualla maailmassa. Lisätään nuorten tietoja perusoikeuksista ja kehitysyhteistyöstä koko maailmassa Uusi rooli nuorisotyölle Nuorisotyö 21 on koulun ulkopuolista kasvatustyötä, jota ammattimaiset tai vapaaehtoiset nuorisotyöntekijät tekevät nuorisojärjestöissä, kunnan nuoriso- ja muissa tiloissa, kirkoissa jne. ja joka edistää nuorten kehitystä. Yhdessä perheiden ja muiden alojen ammattilaisten kanssa nuorisotyöntekijät voivat paitsi tarjota vapaa-ajan toimintaa myös auttaa nuoria 21 Nuorisotyöntekijöistä käytetään perustamissopimuksen 149 artiklan 2 kohdassa oikeudellista termiä sosiaalipedagogiikan alan ohjaaja. FI 11 FI

49 selviytymään työttömyydestä, heikosta koulumenestyksestä ja sosiaalisesta syrjäytymisestä. Nuorisotyö auttaa nuoria myös kartuttamaan taitojaan ja tukee heidän aikuistumistaan. Vaikka nuorisotyö onkin luonteeltaan epävirallista, siitä on tehtävä nykyistäkin ammattimaisempaa. Nuorisotyö tukee kaikkia tässä mainittuja toiminta-aloja ja niiden tavoitteita. Tavoite Nuorisotyötä olisi tuettava, sen taloudellinen ja sosiaalinen panos olisi tunnustettava, ja siitä olisi tehtävä ammattimaista toimintaa. Jäsenvaltioiden ja komission toimet niiden toimivallan mukaisesti Varustetaan nuorisotyöntekijät tarvittavalla ammattitaidolla ja edistetään taitojen validoimista asiaan liittyvien eurooppalaisten välineiden kautta (Europass, tutkintojen viitekehys, ammatillisen koulutuksen ECVET-järjestelmä). Edistetään nuorisotyötä mm. rakennerahastojen avulla. Kehitetään nuorisotyöntekijöiden liikkuvuusmahdollisuuksia EY:n perustamissopimuksen mukaisesti. Kehitetään innovatiivisia nuorisotyöhön liittyviä palveluja, pedagogisia menetelmiä ja käytäntöjä. Komissio kehittää analyysiaan nuorisotyön taloudellisista ja sosiaalisista vaikutuksista. 5. VISIOSTA TOTTA UUSISSA INTEGROIDUISSA YHTEISTYÖN PUITTEISSA 5.1. Monialainen lähestymistapa Nuorisoon vaikuttavia seikkoja on niin paljon, että nuorisopolitiikkaa on toteutettava monialaisella mallilla sekä EU:n tasolla että kansallisesti. Nuorisopolitiikan eteneminen edellyttää toiminnan koordinointia muiden politiikanalojen kanssa. Nuorisopolitiikka voi puolestaan auttaa saamaan aikaan tuloksia esimerkiksi lapsi- ja perhepolitiikan, koulutus-, tasa-arvo-, työllisyys- ja asuntopolitiikan sekä terveydenhuollon alalla. Jäsenvaltioiden olisi hyvä omaksua politiikan tekemiseen monialainen malli. Alojenvälistä yhteistyötä olisi kehitettävä myös paikallisten ja alueellisten toimijoiden kanssa, sillä niillä on ratkaiseva rooli nuorisostrategian toteuttamisessa. Neuvoston eri kokoonpanojen yhteistyötä varten voitaisiin kehitellä järjestelyjä. Komissio puolestaan tehostaa sisäistä koordinointiaan eri yksikköjensä yhteisten työryhmien kautta. Nykyisten järjestelyjen rinnalle ei pidä luoda päällekkäisiä järjestelyjä. Lisäksi on parannettava asiaa koskevaa tietämystä ja tehostettava parhaitten toimintamallien levittämistä Vuoropuhelu nuorten kanssa Jäsennelty vuoropuhelu tarjoaa keinon seurata strategian toteuttamista ja pohtia yhdessä sen prioriteetteja. Jäsenvaltioita kehotetaan järjestämään osana nuorisopolitiikkaansa jatkuvaa ja säännöllistä vuoropuhelua nuorten kanssa. Siinä voitaisiin yhteistyössä komission edustustojen kanssa käsitellä myös EU:hun liittyviä teemoja. FI 12 FI

50 Vuonna 2010 perustetaan jäsenvaltioiden ja Euroopan nuorisofoorumin yhteinen työryhmä tarkastelemaan jäsennellyn vuoropuhelun tilannetta (paikallisten, alueellisten ja kansallisten nuorisoneuvostojen osallistumista, järjestäytymättömien nuorten osallistumista, EU:n tason tapahtumien merkitystä, jatkotoimia ja niin edelleen). Tapauskohtaisesti mukaan otetaan myös työmarkkinaosapuolet ja nuorisopolitiikan tuoreemmat sidosryhmät (kuten elinkeinoelämä, säätiöt, hyväntekeväisyysjärjestöt ja nuorisolle suunnatut viestimet). Nuorison kanssa voitaisiin käydä jäsenneltyä vuoropuhelua vuosittain. Seuraavien vuosien teemoista päätetään osallistujien kesken. Teemoja voisivat olla esim. seuraavat: nuorten työllisyys (2010) nuoret ja maailma (2011) Parempaa politiikkaa vertaisoppimisen kautta Vertaisoppimista varten ehdotetaan kahta eri järjestelyä: kun poliittinen yhteistyö on etusijalla, järjestetään huippuseminaareja, kun taas tarvitaan teknistä asiantuntemusta, muodostetaan ns. klustereita. Sidosryhmien olisi oltava mukana näissä toimissa. Tuleviksi vuosiksi ehdotetaan seuraavia: monialaisen yhteistyön huippuseminaari (2010) nuorisotyön klusteri (2011) nuorten vapaaehtoistyön huippuseminaari (2011) nuorten terveyden klusteri (2012) luovuuden huippuseminaari (2012) Toteutus Tämän strategian toteuttamisessa ovat avainasemassa jäsenvaltiot. Monialaisesta lähestymistavasta ja tehokkaammista avoimen koordinointimenetelmän välineistä on todennäköisesti paljon apua toteuttamisessa. Strategian prioriteetteja olisi käsiteltävä kansallisen tason käynnistämistapaamisissa sidosryhmien ja muiden ministeriöiden kanssa. Mukaan olisi otettava myös alue- tai paikallisviranomaiset. Eri toimijoiden osallistuminen ja toiminnan koordinointi on olennaista strategian kaikissa vaiheissa. Nuorisoasioita käsittelevien hallintoviranomaisten johtajien kokouksella pitäisi olla keskeinen rooli uusien yhteistyöpuitteitten käytännön toteutuksessa Näyttöön perustuva poliittinen päätöksenteko Paremmat tiedot ovat terveen politiikan edellytys. Ensimmäisessä vaiheessa tietoja kartutetaan nykyisillä välineillä (kuten Eurostatin tiedot, kansalliset raportit, Euroopan nuorisopolitiikan tietokeskus EKCYP ja EU:n tutkimuksen puiteohjelma) ja kolmen vuoden välein laadittavalla Euroopan nuorisoa käsittelevällä raportilla. Tutkimustuloksia olisi jaettava ja tutkijoiden olisi verkostoiduttava koko Euroopassa. Komissio ehdottaa seuraavia toimia: FI 13 FI

51 Vahvistetaan EKCYP-keskusta täydentämällä maaprofiilit. Tarkastellaan prioriteettien nykykehitystä Eurydicen kautta. Laaditaan tulostaulu käytössä olevista indikaattoreista ja vertailuarvoista, jotka liittyvät koulutukseen, työllisyyteen, osallisuuteen ja terveyteen nuorten kannalta. Perustetaan työryhmä pohtimaan mahdollisia kuvaajia, joilla mitattaisiin osallisuus-, vapaaehtoistyö-, luovuus- ja nuoret maailmassa -prioriteetteja sekä tarkasteltaisiin nuoria, jotka eivät ole yleissivistävässä tai ammatillisessa koulutuksessa tai työssä. Tehdään tutkimus seuraavista: Baby Bond eräänlainen pesämunarahasto, joka tukee nuoren itsenäistymistä (2010) nuorisotyön sosiaaliset ja taloudelliset vaikutukset (2011) nuorten sähköinen osallistuminen (eparticipation) ja tietoyhteiskunta (2012). Tehdään säännöllisesti nuorisoaiheisia eurobarometritutkimuksia. Edistetään EU:n tutkimuksen puiteohjelman käyttöä nuorisotutkimuksessa ja jatkotoimissa Yksinkertaisempi raportointi Neuvosto ja komissio esittävät kolmen vuoden välein yhteisen raportin edellä mainittujen prioriteettien toteuttamisesta. Raportissa käytetään pohjana jäsenvaltioiden vastaavia raportteja, ja siihen liitetään yhdessä jäsenvaltioiden ja nuorisojärjestöjen kanssa laadittava erityinen Nuoret lukuina -osio, jossa esitetään yleiskatsaus nuorten tilanteeseen. Komissio suosittelee, että jäsenvaltiot julkaisevat raporttinsa EU:n ohjelmien ja rahastojen hyödyntäminen Youth in Action -ohjelmasta tuetaan nuorisopolitiikkaa ja sen prioriteetteja, etenkin rajatylittävää liikkuvuutta, vapaaehtoistyötä, osallistumista, nuorisotyötä ja poliittista yhteistyötä (esim. vertaisoppimista, jäsenneltyä vuoropuhelua, tutkimuksia, eurobarometritutkimuksia ja tiedonhankintavälineitä). Myös muut ohjelmat ja rahastot tarjoavat kaikille nuorille monia mahdollisuuksia, ja niitä olisikin tehtävä tunnetuksi nuorten keskuudessa. Mahdollisuuksia tarjoavat mm. kulttuuriohjelma, elinikäisen oppimisen ohjelma, Progress-, Media- ja Erasmus nuorille yrittäjille -ohjelma, kilpailukyvyn ja innovoinnin puiteohjelma sekä rakennerahastot Yhteistyö EU:n muiden toimielinten ja kansainvälisten järjestöjen kanssa Euroopan parlamentti antaa säännöllisesti panoksensa nuorisopolitiikkaan. Komissio pyytää parlamenttia reagoimaan tähän tiedonantoon ja lupaa pitää parlamentin ajan tasalla sen toteuttamisesta. Komissio aikoo tehdä yhteisyötä myös Euroopan talous- ja sosiaalikomitean ja alueiden komitean kanssa niiden toiminta-alueilla. FI 14 FI

52 Komissio jatkaa Euroopan neuvoston kanssa tekemäänsä yhteistyötä molemmille tärkeillä aloilla, joista mainittakoon nuorten osallistuminen, nuorisotyö ja nuorison tuntemuksen parantaminen. FI 15 FI

53 EUROPEISKA UNIONENS RÅD Bryssel den 28 april 2009 (4.5) (OR. en) 9008/09 JEUN 25 EDUC 72 SOC 274 FÖLJENOT från: Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, direktör, för Europeiska kommissionens generalsekreterare mottagen den: 28 april 2009 till: Javier SOLANA, generalsekreterare/hög representant Ärende: MEDDELANDE FRÅN KOMMISSIONEN TILL RÅDET, EUROPAPARLAMENTET, EUROPEISKA EKONOMISKA OCH SOCIALA KOMMITTÉN SAMT REGIONKOMMITTÉN En EU-strategi för ungdomar Satsa på ungdomars egna möjligheter En förnyad öppen samordning för ungdomsfrågor För delegationerna bifogas kommissionens dokument KOM(2009) 200 slutlig. Bilaga: KOM(2009) 200 slutlig 9008/09 /ss DG I - 2B SV

54 EUROPEISKA GEMENSKAPERNAS KOMMISSION Bryssel den KOM(2009) 200 slutlig MEDDELANDE FRÅN KOMMISSIONEN TILL RÅDET, EUROPAPARLAMENTET, EUROPEISKA EKONOMISKA OCH SOCIALA KOMMITTÉN SAMT REGIONKOMMITTÉN En EU-strategi för ungdomar Satsa på ungdomars egna möjligheter En förnyad öppen samordning för ungdomsfrågor {SEC(2009) 545} {SEC(2009) 546} {SEC(2009) 548} {SEC(2009) 549} SV 1 SV

55 1. INLEDNING Europas framtid är beroende av dess ungdomar 1. Ändå har många unga människor begränsade möjligheter i livet. Detta är en av slutsatserna i kommissionens meddelande om en förnyad social agenda 2 som går ut på att öka möjligheterna för EU-medborgarna, skapa tillgång till möjligheter för alla och visa solidaritet. Ungdomar prioriteras i EU:s sociala vision, och den rådande ekonomiska krisen ökar behovet av att ta vara på det unga humankapitalet. Det här meddelandet utgör ett svar i form av en strategi för framtidens ungdomspolitik i EU. Här föreslås en ny, starkare form av den öppna samordningsmetoden, flexiblare och med enklare rapportering samt med stärkta kopplingar till den europeiska pakten för ungdomsfrågor inom Lissabonstrategin för tillväxt och sysselsättning. Strategin är brett upplagd och bygger på kortfristiga lösningar i en långfristig satsning på att ge ungdomar möjlighet att agera. Strategin är tänkt att skapa goda förutsättningar för ungdomarna att utveckla sina färdigheter, förverkliga sin potential, arbeta, delta aktivt i samhället och engagera sig i byggandet av EU. Ungdomarna är inte en börda utan en avgörande resurs för samhället som kan mobiliseras för att nå viktiga samhälleliga mål. 2. DAGENS UNGDOMSFRÅGOR Européerna lever längre och skaffar barn senare, så det finns därför färre ungdomar. Åldersgruppen förutspås utgöra 15,3 % av Europas befolkning 2050, medan den idag utgör 19,3 % 3. Dessa demografiska förändringar påverkar familjerna, solidariteten mellan generationerna och den ekonomiska tillväxten. Globaliseringen kan leda till tillväxt och sysselsättning, men också medföra särskilda problem för utsatta arbetstagare, t.ex. ungdomar, vilket krisen har visat 4. Klimatförändringen och energiförsörjningen förutsätter att kommande generationer ändrar sitt beteende och sin livsstil. Det är särskilt viktigt med en kärnkompetens som är så flexibel att lämpliga färdigheter kan utvecklas under hela livet, och personer som lämnar skolan i förtid är fortfarande en viktig fråga. Ungdomar sätter värde på vänskap, respekt, tolerans och solidaritet, och den här generationen är kanske den högst utbildade, mest tekniskt avancerade och rörligaste någonsin. I likhet med det övriga samhället står de dock inför ökad individualism och konkurrens och har inte nödvändigtvis samma möjligheter. Genom ett omfattande samråd i hela Europa 5 har följande särskilda frågor befunnits ligga högst på listan över vad ungdomar oroar sig för: utbildning, sysselsättning, social integration och hälsa. Europass ungdomar måste rustas så att de kan utnyttja möjligheter inom samhällelig och politisk verksamhet, volontärverksamhet, kreativitet, företagande, sport och globalt engagemang Här menas mestadels tonåringar och unga vuxna i åldrarna år. Av statistiska skäl används inte alltid de åldrarna överallt i meddelandet. KOM(2008) 412. Källa: Eurostat. KOM(2009) 34. Se den åtföljande konsekvensbedömningen och redovisningen av samrådet. SV 2 SV

56 Problem med utbildning, sysselsättning, social integration och hälsa i kombination med problem inom ekonomi, bostad och transporter gör det svårare för ungdomar att bli självständiga och komma i ett läge där de har resurser och möjlighet att sköta sina egna liv, delta i samhället och fatta sina egna beslut. 3. BEHOVET AV EN NY RAM 3.1. EU-samarbetet Ungdomssamarbete är ett välstrukturerat, inarbetat politikområde i EU. EU:s ungdomsprogram har löpt sedan Den politiska processen utvecklades genom en vitbok och bygger för närvarande på tre delar: Ungdomars aktiva medborgarskap genom den öppna samordningsmetoden med fyra prioriteringar (delaktighet, information, volontärverksamhet och bättre kunskaper om ungdomar), gemensamma mål, rapporter från medlemsstaterna samt strukturerad dialog med ungdomarna. Integration i samhället och på arbetsmarknaden genom den europeiska pakten för ungdomsfrågor 7, en del av Lissabonstrategin, med tre prioriteringar (sysselsättning och integration, utbildning samt möjlighet att förena yrkesliv med privatliv och familjeliv). Kommissionen gick i sitt meddelande Att främja unga människors fulla deltagande i utbildning, arbetsliv och samhälle 8 längre och föreslog fler åtgärder. Integration av ungdomspolitiken på andra områden (bl.a. hälso- och sjukvård och bekämpning av diskriminering) Utvärdering av ungdomspolitiken Medlemsstaterna har tillfrågats om den nuvarande ramen och om vad som kan göras i framtiden. Europaparlamentet anordnade en utfrågning om ungdomsfrågor i februari Som ett led i den strukturerade dialogen har debatter hållits med tusentals ungdomar i hela Europa. Möten med Europeiska ungdomsforumet och de nationella ungdomsråden har hållits. Ett samråd på Internet ledde till mer än 5000 svar. Forskare och programansvariga från programmet Aktiv ungdom har också lämnat synpunkter. I allmänhet anses den öppna samordningsmetoden vara en lämplig samarbetsform och prioriteringarna är fortfarande relevanta. Ramen har varit vägledande för ungdomsrelaterade strategier och lagar i medlemsstaterna. Fler länder involverar ungdomsorganisationer i beslutsprocessen. Tack vare den europeiska pakten för ungdomsfrågor har ungdomsfrågorna framhävts i Lissabonstrategin, särskilt när det gäller utbildning och sysselsättning, och framsteg hade gjorts inom hälsa och bekämpning av diskriminering. Ramen, som löper ut 2009, har dock inte alltid varit effektiv och ändamålsenlig. Den är inte tillräckligt samordnad för alla utmaningar. Det råder enighet om att det behövs ett bättre övergripande tillvägagångssätt, vilket Europaparlamentet efterlyste 2008 i en deklaration om KOM(2001) 681. Europeiska rådet: Ordförandeskapets slutsatser, mars 2005 (7619/05). KOM(2007) 498. SV 3 SV

57 att fokusera mer på egenmakt åt ungdomar. Den strukturerade dialogen bör också organiseras bättre och göra det lättare att nå ut till oorganiserad ungdom, särskilt dem med färre möjligheter. 4. UNGDOM: SATSA PÅ UNGDOMARS EGNA MÖJLIGHETER 4.1. EU:s vision för ungdomar Ungdomar bör ta vara på sina möjligheter. Den här visionen riktar sig till alla, men åtgärderna bör främst inriktas på dem med färre möjligheter. Tillvägagångssättet är tvådelat: Satsa på ungdomar: anslå mer resurser för att utveckla politikområden som påverkar ungdomar i deras vardag och förbättrar deras välbefinnande. Egenmakt åt ungdomar: främja ungdomars potential att förnya samhället och bidra till EU:s värderingar och mål. Mer samarbete mellan ungdomspolitiken och andra politikområden som utbildning, sysselsättning, integration och hälsa kommer att utvecklas, där ungdomsverksamhet och ungdomsarbete torde ha en understödjande funktion. Den förnyade öppna samordningsmetoden inom ungdomspolitiken ska uppmuntra till helhetsgrepp i beslutsfattandet genom att försörja andra processer inom den politiska samordningen med ungdomspolitikens särskilda kunnande och genom att ge ungdomar möjlighet att höras. EU:s insats blir att hjälpa medlemsstaterna, som har ansvaret för ungdomspolitiken, att samarbeta bättre En långfristig ungdomsstrategi med kortfristiga prioriteringar Med utgångspunkt i aktuella kunskaper om ungdomarnas situation 9 föreslås här en ny strategi omfattande tre övergripande, med varandra förbundna mål som anknyter till målen för den förnyade sociala agendan: Skapa mer möjligheter för ungdomar inom utbildning och sysselsättning. Förbättra tillgången och delaktigheten för alla ungdomar i samhället. Främja solidaritet mellan samhälle och ungdomar. Inom varje mål föreslås två tre handlingsområden med mål för de första tre åren, Inom varje område förtecknas en rad tänkbara särskilda åtgärder som medlemsstaterna eller kommissionen kan vidta. De för tillfället aktuella ungdomsfrågorna kommer att bedömas och rangordnas vart tredje år, så att flexibiliteten bevaras och handlingsområdena återspeglar de nya generationernas behov. Anpassningar kan också göras så snart som uppföljningen av EU:s strategi för tillväxt och sysselsättning efter 2010 är fastlagd Skapa med möjligheter för ungdomar Handlingsområde 1 Utbildning 9 EU:s ungdomsrapport SV 4 SV

58 Nästan 80 % av ungdomarna mellan 20 och 24 i Europa har gått ut gymnasiet. Trots det är en fjärdedel av femtonåringarna svaga i läskunnighet 10 och 6 miljoner ungdomar lämnar skolan utan examensbevis. Större rörlighet inom EU gör det möjligt för ungdomarna att utveckla sina talanger och sin potential 11 men begränsningar kvarstår. Europeiska kommissionen har föreslagit en öppen samordningsmetod inom utbildning 12 för att angripa följande långfristiga strategiska frågor: livslångt lärande och rörlighet; kvalitet och effektivitet; lika möjligheter för alla och aktivt samhällsdeltagande; samt innovation och kreativitet, förutom en ny inställning till att matcha arbetsmarknadens behov med färdigheter för tjugohundratalet 13. Att stärka den formella utbildningen är en viktig prioritering, men färdigheter kan förvärvas utanför klassrummet genom ungdomsarbete och med hjälp av ny teknik. Mål Som komplement till formell utbildning bör icke-formell utbildning för ungdomar stödjas för att bidra till livslångt lärande i Europa, genom att dess kvalitet utvecklas, dess resultat erkänns och dess integration med den formella utbildningen förbättras. Åtgärder av medlemsstaterna och kommissionen enligt deras respektive behörighet Utveckla möjligheter till icke-formellt lärande som en av flera åtgärder för att ta itu med folk som lämnar skolan i förtid. Ta vara på de många olika verktyg som utarbetats på EU-nivå för validering av färdigheter och erkännande av kvalifikationer 14. Främja rörlighet i lärandet för alla ungdomar. Uppmuntra samarbete mellan utbildningspolitiska och ungdomspolitiska beslutsfattare. Bemöta könsstereotyper i systemen för formell och icke-formell utbildning. Tillhandahålla vägledning och rådgivningstjänster av hög kvalitet för ungdomar. Utveckla delaktighetsstrukturer inom utbildningssystemen samt samarbete mellan skolor, familjer och lokalsamhällen. Kommissionen kommer att vidareutveckla självutvärderingsfunktionen inom Europass, särskilt för färdigheter som förvärvats i icke-formella sammanhang, och tillhandahålla intyg som ungdomspasset KOM(2008) 425. T.ex. programmen Erasmus och Aktiv ungdom. KOM(2008) 865. KOM(2008) 868. Tillvaratagande av färdigheter sker genom bl.a. Europass, EQF och ECVET, medan examensbevis erkänns i enlighet med direktiv 2005/36/EG. SV 5 SV

59 Handlingsområde 2 Sysselsättning Ungdomarnas övergång från utbildning till arbetsliv har blivit betydligt långvarigare och mer komplicerad. Ungdomsarbetslösheten är i genomsnitt dubbelt så hög som den totala arbetslösheten, och den rådande ekonomiska krisen pressar ungdomarnas arbetsmarknad ytterligare. De arbetar ofta i tillfälliga jobb med låg kvalitet och får ofta dåligt betalt. Ungdomsarbetslösheten beror ofta på bristande eller felmatchad kompetens. Det behövs rådgivnings- och vägledningssystem för utbildningsbanor och framtidens anställningsmöjligheter. Att främja insteget på arbetsmarknaden och arbetstillfällen av hög kvalitet har alltid prioriterats högt inom Lissabonstrategin för tillväxt och sysselsättning och den europeiska pakten för ungdomsfrågor. Det gäller att inte tappa fart i det avseendet. Den ekonomiska krisens inverkan på arbetsmarknaderna gör det särskilt brådskande att ta itu med ungdomsarbetslösheten på både kort och lång sikt. Den fria rörligheten för arbetstagare, som ju är särskilt relevant för ungdomar i början av karriären, är en hörnsten för den inre marknaden. Mål De sysselsättningspolitiska åtgärderna i medlemsstaterna och på EU-nivå bör samordnas över samtliga fyra delar av flexicurity för att underlätta övergången från skola till arbetsliv eller från overksamhet eller arbetslöshet till arbete. När ungdomarna väl har ett arbete bör de få möjlighet att utvecklas i yrket. Investeringar i tillhandahållandet av rätt kompetens för efterfrågade jobb på arbetsmarknaden bör ökas och förbättras, med bättre kortfristig matchning och bättre långfristigt förutseende av vilken kompetens som kommer att behövas. Åtgärder av medlemsstaterna och kommissionen enligt deras respektive behörighet Se till att ungdomsarbetslöshet förblir prioriterat. Främja gränsöverskridande arbetsrelaterade möjligheter för ungdomar, bl.a. i form av tidig introduktion till arbetslivet för ungdomar. Utveckla ungdomsarbete som en resurs för att stödja ungdomars anställbarhet. Stödja samarbete mellan sysselsättningspolitiska och ungdomspolitiska beslutsfattare och ungdomspolitiskt deltagande i sysselsättningspolitiken. Se till att EU-medel för främjande av ungdomssysselsättning, särskilt från Europeiska socialfonden, utnyttjas effektivt. Ta fram kortfristiga åtgärder i sina återhämtningsplaner för att stimulera ungdomarnas sysselsättning samt ta fram strukturåtgärder för ungdomarna. Utveckla tjänster för yrkesrådgivning och vägledning. Sänka barriärerna för fri rörlighet för arbetstagare i EU. SV 6 SV

60 Främja praktikantverksamhet av hög kvalitet inom utbildnings- och sysselsättningspolitiska program. Förbättra barnomsorgen för att göra det lättare för unga vuxna att förena arbete och familjeliv. Handlingsområde 3 Kreativitet och företagande Tekniken erbjuder dagens uppkopplade generation nya möjligheter till lärande, skapande och delaktighet, samtidigt som det också innebär problem med personlig integritet, Internetsäkerhet och medievana. Att uppmuntra företagaranda och innovation hos ungdomar ingår i ramprogrammet för konkurrenskraft och innovation och den europeiska referensramen för nyckelkompetenser, som inbegripet kultur. Kreativitet och innovation är också föremålet för det europeiska året 2009 och en av de strategiska utmaningar som anges i den nya öppna samordningsmetoden inom utbildning. Ungdomar bör uppmuntras att tänka och agera innovativt och unga talanger bör uppmärksammas. Kulturen främjar kreativiteten, och utbildning i företagande bör betraktas både som ett sätt att främja ekonomisk tillväxt och sysselsättning och som en källa till kompetens, aktivt medborgarskap, självständighet och självförtroende. Mål Utvecklingen av ungdomars talanger, kreativa färdigheter, företagaranda och kulturella uttryck bör uppmuntras hos alla ungdomar Åtgärder av medlemsstaterna och kommissionen enligt deras respektive behörighet Vidareutveckla starta eget-stöd och främja uppmärksammande av ung företagsamhet. Se till att ny teknik finns lätt tillgänglig för att stödja unga talanger och öka intresset för vetenskap och konst. Främja ungdomsarbetets bidrag till ungdomars kreativitet och företagsamhet. Bredda tillgången till verktyg för skapande verksamhet, särskilt genom ny teknik Förbättra tillgången och delaktigheten för alla ungdomar i samhället Handlingsområde 4 Hälsa och sport I EU:s hälsostrategi ( ) anges barns och ungdomars hälsa som ett prioriterat område för insatser, och rådet har bekräftat detta i en resolution 15. Många ungdomars hälsa äventyras av stress, dålig kost, brist på motion, oskyddat sex, tobak, alkohol och drogmissbruk. Mer övergripande miljörelaterade och socioekonomiska faktorer påverkar också ohälsa, vilket i sin tur kan hämma aktiv delaktighet. Därför måste de ungdomarnas särskilda hälsoproblem /C 319. SV 7 SV

61 bemötas på ett sektorsövergripande sätt. Förutom att förbättra ungdomars kroppsliga hälsa och själsliga välbefinnande har sport också en fostrande verkan och stor social betydelse 16. Mål Uppmuntra till en hälsosam livsstil för ungdomar och främja samarbete inom idrottsundervisning och sportverksamhet mellan ungdomsledare, vårdpersonal och sportorganisationer i syfte att förebygga och behandla övervikt, skador, beroende och drogmissbruk, samt upprätthålla mental och sexuell hälsa. Åtgärder av medlemsstaterna och kommissionen enligt deras respektive behörighet Tillämpa rådets resolution om ungdomars hälsa och välbefinnande samt uppmuntra ungdomars motion och sport genom att följa EU:s riktlinjer för motion 17. Främja hälsoutbildning för ungdomsarbetare och ungdomsledare. Uppmuntra samarbete mellan hälsopolitiska och ungdomspolitiska beslutsfattare och ungdomspolitikens bidrag till hälsopolitiken. Mobilisera alla berörda parter på det lokala planet för att spåra upp och hjälpa ungdomar i riskzonen. Ta fram skräddarsydd information om hälsa för ungdomar, särskilt för dem som riskerar social uteslutning, och utnyttja informationsnätverk för ungdomar. Uppmuntra kamratutbildning inom hälsa i skolan och i ungdomsorganisationer. Handlingsområde 5 Delaktighet Ungdomars fulla delaktighet i samhället och politiken blir allt svårare på grund av klyftan mellan ungdomarna och samhällets institutioner. Genomförandet av de nuvarande gemensamma målen för delaktighet och information visar att det fortfarande finns utrymme för förbättringar, särskilt när det gäller stöd till ungdomsorganisationer, deltagande i den representativa demokratin eller att lära sig vara delaktig. De politiska beslutsfattarna måste anpassa sitt sätt att kommunicera med ungdomarna, särskilt om medborgar- och EU-frågor, för att nå ut till bl.a. ungdomar utanför organisationer och missgynnade ungdomar. Mål Säkerställa ungdomars fulla delaktighet i samhället genom att öka ungdomars delaktighet i lokalsamhället och i den representativa demokratin, genom att stödja ungdomsorganisationer och olika former av inlärande genom delaktighet, genom att uppmuntra att ungdomar utanför organisationer blir delaktiga och genom att tillhandahålla informationstjänster av hög kvalitet. Åtgärder av medlemsstaterna och kommissionen enligt deras respektive behörighet KOM(2007) 391. Recommended Policy Actions in Support of Health-Enhancing Physical Activity, 2008 SV 8 SV

62 Ta fram kvalitetsstandarder för delaktighet, information och samråd för ungdomar Ge mer politiskt och ekonomiskt stöd till ungdomsorganisationer och till nationella och lokala ungdomsråd. Främja e-demokrati för att nå ut till organiserade ungdomar som står utanför organisationer. Vidareutveckla möjligheterna till debatt mellan EU-institutioner/nationella institutioner och ungdomar Kommissionen kommer att göra om den europeiska ungdomsportalen och främja bredare kontakter med ungdomar Främja solidaritet mellan samhälle och ungdomar Handlingsområde 6 Social integration Samhället behöver visa sin solidaritet med ungdomarna, särskilt de missgynnade. En femtedel av ungdomarna mellan 16 och 24 löpte risk att drabbas av fattigdom Social utslagning kan orsakas av arbetslöshet, funktionshinder, samhällets och enskildas inställning till migration, diskriminering, kroppslig och själslig hälsa, beroendeproblematik, misshandel, familjevåld och tidigare förbrytelser. Den kan också leda till radikalisering och våld. Att bryta det sociala arvet i form av fattigdom och utslagning står högt på dagordningen inom den socialpolitiska öppna samordningsmetoden 18. Att vända sig till ungdomar som riskerar att drabbas av fattigdom och social utslagning involverar en rad politikområden och kräver integrerade insatser. På det här området hänger barn-, familje- och ungdomspolitiken nära samman, och det här meddelandet kompletterar kommissionens meddelande Mot en EUstrategi för barnets rättigheter 19. Mål Förebygga fattigdom och social utslagning bland missgynnade ungdomsgrupper och bryta det sociala arvet genom att mobilisera alla aktörer verksamma på ungdomsområdet (föräldrar, lärare, socialarbetare, vårdpersonal, ungdomsarbetare, ungdomarna själva, rättsvårdande myndigheter, arbetsgivare m.m.). Åtgärder av medlemsstaterna och kommissionen enligt deras respektive behörighet Ta itu med frågor som rör tonåringar och unga vuxna, särskilt dem med färre möjligheter, inom politiken för social trygghet och social integration. Optimera användningen av EU:s medel och experimentella program till stöd för social integration av ungdomar. Ta vara på integrationspotentialen hos ungdomsverksamhet och ungdomscentrer KOM(2008) 418, KOM(2005) 706. KOM(2006) 367. SV 9 SV

63 Utveckla den interkulturella medvetenheten och kompetensen hos alla ungdomar. Uppmuntra ungdomarnas delaktighet i integrationspolitiken och främja samarbete mellan politiska beslutsfattare. Uppmärksamma utmaningar som missgynnade ungdomar bemästrat, t.ex. genom utmärkelser. Ta itu med hemlöshet och utslagning på bostadsmarknaden och ekonomisk utslagning. Främja tillgång till tjänster av hög kvalitet, t.ex. transport, e-integration, vårdtjänster eller sociala tjänster. Främja särskilt stöd till unga familjer. Handlingsområde 7 Volontärverksamhet Att visa solidaritet med samhället genom volontärtjänst är viktigt för ungdomarna och en metod för personlig utveckling, rörligt lärande, konkurrenskraft, social sammanhållning och medborgaranda. Volontärverksamhet för ungdomar bidrar också starkt till solidaritet mellan generationerna. I en nyligen framlagd rekommendation vill rådet att hinder för unga volontärers gränsöverskridande rörlighet ska undanröjas 20. Mål Stödja ungdomars volontärverksamhet genom att ta fram fler möjligheter till volontärverksamhet för ungdomar, göra det lättare att bli volontär, informera om värdet i volontärtjänst, uppmärksamma volontärtjänst som en viktig form av ickeformell utbildning och öka unga volontärers gränsöverskridande rörlighet. Åtgärder av medlemsstaterna och kommissionen enligt deras respektive behörighet Förbättra erkännandet av färdigheter genom Europass och ungdomspasset. Erkänna bidrag från ungdomsorganisationer och icke-strukturerade former av volontärverksamhet. Överväga sätt att bättre skydda volontärernas rättigheter och trygga kvaliteten inom volontärtjänsterna och få med ungdomar och ungdomsorganisationer i Europeiska volontäråret Ta fram nationella modeller för unga volontärers gränsöverskridande rörlighet. Ta fram nationella modeller för främjande av solidaritet mellan generationerna genom volontärtjänst /C 319 SV 10 SV

64 Handlingsområde 8 Ungdomar i världen Unga européer intresserar sig för globala utmaningar, såsom brott mot mänskliga rättigheter, ekonomiska klyftor och miljöproblem. De vill visa sig solidariska med övriga världen genom att bekämpa diskriminering, hjälpa andra och bevara miljön. Mål Mobilisera ungdomar i det globala beslutsfattandet på alla nivåer (lokalt, nationellt och internationellt) med hjälp av befintliga ungdomsnätverk och verktyg (t.ex. strukturerad dialog) och ta itu med klimatförändring och FN:s millenniemål Åtgärder av medlemsstaterna och kommissionen enligt deras respektive behörighet Uppmuntra miljövänliga konsumtions- och produktionsmönster hos ungdomar (t.ex. återvinning, energibesparing och hybridfordon). Främja företagaranda och volontärverksamhet i utomeuropeiska regioner. Stödja utvecklingen av ungdomsverksamhet i andra världsdelar. Öka ungdomars medvetenhet om mänskliga rättigheter och utvecklingsfrågor En ny uppgift för ungdomsarbete Med ungdomsarbete 21 menas utbildning utanför skolan under ledning av yrkesarbetande eller frivilliga ungdomsledare inom ungdomsorganisationer, kommunala lokaler, ungdomscentrer, kyrkor m.m., som bidrar till ungdomars utveckling. I samarbete med familjerna och andra yrkesverksamma kan ungdomsarbetet vara ett sätt att hantera arbetslöshet, misslyckande i skolan och social utslagning samtidigt som det bidrar till en meningsfull fritid. Det kan också bygga upp färdigheter och understödja övergången från ungdom till vuxenliv. Även om ungdomsarbetet är icke-formellt behöver det professionaliseras mer. Ungdomsarbetet bidrar till alla handlingsområden och målen på de områdena. Mål Ungdomsarbete bör stödjas och professionaliseras, och dess ekonomiska och sociala bidrag uppmärksammas. Åtgärder av medlemsstaterna och kommissionen enligt deras respektive behörighet Förse ungdomsledare med professionella färdigheter och främja erkännandet av dessa med lämpliga EU-instrument (Europass, EQF, ECVET). Främja ungdomsarbete bl.a. genom strukturfonderna. Utveckla unga arbetstagares rörlighet i enlighet med EG-fördraget. Utveckla nyskapande tjänster, pedagogiska metoder och praxis inom ungdomsarbetet. 21 Betecknar arbete med ungdomar; ungdomsledare nämns i artikel i EG-fördraget. SV 11 SV

65 Kommissionen kommer att vidareutveckla sin analys av ungdomsarbetets ekonomiska och sociala inverkan. 5. FÖRVERKLIGANDE AV VISIONEN I EN NY INTEGRERAD SAMARBETSRAM 5.1. En sektorsövergripande modell Spännvidden på de frågor som påverkar ungdomarna kräver sektorsövergripande metoder på EU-nivå och nationell nivå. Ungdomspolitiken kan inte föras framåt utan samordning med andra sektorer. Samtidigt kan ungdomspolitiken bidra till resultat på områden som barn- och familjepolitik, utbildning, jämställdhet, sysselsättning, bostadspolitik och vård. Medlemsstaterna bör överväga att genomföra sektorsövergripande beslutsfattande på det nationella planet. Sektorsövergripande samarbete bör också utvecklas med lokala och regionala aktörer, som har central betydelse för genomförandet av ungdomsstrategierna. Rådet kan överväga att införa samarbete mellan olika rådskonstellationer, och kommissionen kommer att stärka sin interna samordning med enhetsövergripande grupper. Behovet av att undvika dubbelarbete kommer att beaktas. Förbättrade kunskaper och effektiv spridning av bästa praxis krävs också Dialog med ungdomarna Strukturerad dialog är ett sätt att bevaka strategins genomförande och gemensamt reflektera över vad som prioriteras i den. Medlemsstaterna uppmanas att inom ramen för sin nationella ungdomspolitik organisera en permanent, regelbunden dialog med ungdomarna. Dialogen kan omfatta EU-frågor i samarbete med kommissionens representationskontor. En arbetsgrupp med medlemsstaterna och Europeiska ungdomsforumet kommer att inrättas 2010 för att se över den strukturerade dialogen (lokala, regionala och nationella ungdomsråds medverkan, delaktighet för ungdomar som står utanför organisationer, EU-evenemangens betydelse, uppföljning m.m.). Arbetsmarknadens parter och nyligen identifierade intressenter inom ungdomspolitiken (såsom näringsliv, stiftelser, ideella organisationer och ungdomsmedier) kommer att involveras när det är påkallat. En årlig omgång av strukturerad dialog med ungdomar föreslås. Ämnena för nästa omgång bestäms i samråd med dialogens deltagare och kan bli ungdomssysselsättning (2010), ungdomar i världen (2011) Lära av varandra för bättre beslutsfattande Två slags processer där medlemsstaterna lär av varandra föreslås: högnivåseminarier när det politiska samarbetet är avgörande, och kluster när sakkunskap krävs. Intressenterna bör involveras i de här processerna. Förslag för nästa period: Högnivåseminarium om sektorsövergripande samarbete (2010). SV 12 SV

66 Kluster om ungdomsarbete (2011). Högnivåseminarium om volontärtjänst för ungdomar (2011). Kluster om ungdomshälsa (2012). Högnivåseminarium om kreativitet (2012) Genomförande Medlemsstaterna har den centrala betydelsen för genomförandet av den här strategin. Det sektorsövergripande tillvägagångssättet och den stärka öppna samordningsmetoden torde bidra stort. Startmöten för de prioriterade åtgärderna bör anordnas nationellt med berörda parter och andra berörda ministerier. Regionala och lokala myndigheter bör också involveras. Det är oerhört viktigt med samordning och delaktighet för de relevanta aktörerna under hela det politiska kretsloppet. Möten mellan generaldirektörerna för ungdomsfrågor bör ha en central roll för genomförandet av den nya samarbetsramen Beslutsfattande på solida grunder Bättre kunskap är en förutsättning för goda politiska beslut. De nuvarande verktygen (t.ex. uppgifter från Eurostat, nationella rapporter, det europeiska kunskapscentrumet för ungdomspolitik, EU:s ramprogram för forskning) är en bra början, tillsammans med treårsrapporten om ungdom i Europa. Dessutom måste forskningsresultat spridas och forskare i hela EU knytas samman i nätverk. Kommissionen föreslår följande: Befästa det europeiska kunskapscentrumet för ungdomspolitik genom att färdigställa landsprofilerna. Se över rådande tendenser för prioriteringarna genom Eurydice. Ta fram en resultattavla över befintliga indikatorer och riktmärken för ungdom inom utbildning, sysselsättning, integration och hälsa. Inrätta en arbetsgrupp för att diskutera tänkbara deskriptorer (dvs. enkla indikatorer) för prioriteringarna delaktighet, volontärtjänst, kreativitet och ungdom i världen samt för ungdomar utanför utbildning eller sysselsättning. Inleda undersökningar om Baby Bonds, dvs. medel som fonderas för att stödja ungdomars självständighet senare i livet (2010), ungdomsarbetets sociala och ekonomiska inverkan (2011), ungdomars e-delaktighet och informationssamhället (2012). Genomföra regelbundna Eurobarometerundersökningar av ungdomar. SV 13 SV

67 Främja användningen av EU:s forskningsramprogram för ungdomsforskning och ungdomsuppföljning Förenklad rapportering Vart tredje år kommer en gemensam rapport från rådet och kommissionen att offentliggöras om genomförandet av ovanstående prioriteringar. Rapporten ska bygga på medlemsstaternas rapportering om liknande frågor tillsammans med den EU-omfattande ungdomsöversynen Ungdom i siffror som sammanställs i samarbete med medlemsstaterna och ungdomsorganisationerna. Kommissionen rekommenderar att de nationella rapporterna görs offentliga Utnyttjande av EU:s program och fonder Programmet Aktiv ungdom stödjer ungdomspolitiken och dess prioriteringar, särskilt gränsöverskridande rörlighet, volontärtjänst, delaktighet, ungdomsarbete och politiskt samarbete (t.ex. lärande av varandra, strukturerad dialog, undersökningar, Eurobarometer och bättre verktyg för kunskap). Andra program och fonder erbjuder också många möjligheter för alla ungdomar, som bör informeras bättre om dem, t.ex. kulturprogrammet, programmet för livslångt lärande, Progress, Media, Erasmus för unga företagare, programmet för konkurrenskraft och innovation samt strukturfonderna Samarbete med andra EU-institutioner och internationella organisationer Europaparlamentet bidrar regelbundet till ungdomspolitiken. Kommissionen uppmanar parlamentet att reagera på detta meddelande och har för avsikt att hålla parlamentet informerat om genomförandet av det. Kommissionen har också för avsikt att samarbeta med Europeiska ekonomiska och sociala kommittén och Regionkommittén på deras respektive områden. Kommissionen kommer att fortsätta samarbeta med Europarådet på områden av gemensamt intresse, såsom ungdomars delaktighet, ungdomsarbete och bättre kunskaper om ungdomar. SV 14 SV

68 COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION Brussels, 28 April /09 ADD 1 COVER NOTE from: JEUN 25 EDUC 72 SOC 274 Secretary-General of the European Commission, signed by Mr Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, Director date of receipt: 28 April 2009 to: Mr Javier SOLANA, Secretary-General/High Representative Subject: COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS - An EU Strategy for Youth Investing and Empowering - A renewed open method of coordination to address youth challenges and opportunities Impact Assessment Delegations will find attached Commission document SEC(2009) 545. Encl.: SEC(2009) /09 ADD 1 1 DGI - 2 B EN

69 COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, SEC(2009) 545 COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS An EU Strategy for Youth Investing and Empowering A renewed open method of coordination to address youth challenges and opportunities Impact Assessment {COM(2009) 200} {SEC(2009) 546} {SEC(2009) 548} {SEC(2009) 549} Disclaimer: This IA report commits only the Commission's services involved in its preparation. The text is prepared as a basis for discussion and does not prejudge the final form of any decision to be taken by the Commission EN EN

70 Table of content Modifications following the Opinion of the Impact Assessment Board Procedural issues and context setting Historical background of the Youth Cooperation Framework General context Specific context Consultation of interested parties Internal consultations Consultation of Member States Consultation of young people and youth organisations Consultation of experts Problem definition Problems Global challenges Problems affecting the situation of young people Assessment of the current cooperation framework Affected groups Baseline Scenario Legal basis and subsidiarity Objectives General objectives Specific objectives Operational objectives Consistency of these objectives with other EU policies Policy options Global analysis Possible scope Possible instruments Policy options not retained for analysis Ending the Cooperation Specific approach (narrow scope) Development of a set of more binding tools Options retained for analysis EN 2 EN

71 Option 1: Status quo (baseline scenario) Option 2: a reinforced Youth open method of coordination Option 3: a developed cross-sectoral approach Option 4: a global strategy Analysis of impacts Social impacts Economic impacts Environmental impacts Impacts on fundamental rights Comparing the options Option 1: status quo General objectives Specific objectives Feasibility /implementation Option 2: a reinforced OMC General objectives Specific objectives Feasibility /implementation Option 3: a developed cross-sectoral approach General objectives Specific objectives Feasibility /implementation Option 4: a global strategy General objectives Specific objectives Feasibility /implementation Monitoring and evaluation Annex 1 - List of documents linked with the current Cooperation Framework Annex 2 Priorities and objectives of the current Open Method of Coordination in the field of Youth Annex 3 - Description of the current Cooperation Framework Annex 4 - List of recent reference documents Annex 5 - General observations on the results of the public consultation EN 3 EN

72 List of main abbreviations EU: European Union EKCYP: European Knowledge Centre on Youth Policy EuNYK: European Network of Youth Knowledge OMC: open method of coordination EN 4 EN

73 Modifications following the Opinion of the Impact Assessment Board Following the opinion of the Impact Assessment Board several changes have been made to the impact assessment. In particular, the problem definition and the baseline have been further developed in section 2. Operational objectives expressing in concrete terms expected policy outcomes have been developed in section 3. Concrete information regarding proposed actions has been added in section 4. Information on indicators has been added in section 7. An annex providing a summary of the public consultation main outcomes has been added. 1. PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONTEXT SETTING 1.1. Historical background of the Youth Cooperation Framework General context Youth cooperation is a developed EU policy area 1. EU programmes for youth have been in place since 1988; the policy process is more recent. An open method of coordination was developed on the basis of a 2001 European Commission White Paper 2 and was complemented by the European Youth Pact in The Council of the European Union established a framework for European co-operation in the field of youth (hereafter the Youth Cooperation Framework) in June The framework included the four priority themes for cooperation proposed in the White Paper: Encouraging young people's participation in the exercise of active citizenship and civil society Enhancing the information addressed to young people Promoting voluntary activities among young people Encouraging greater understanding and knowledge of youth. The Member States decided to use the open method of coordination (OMC) in order to implement these priorities. They agreed on common objectives 4 for each one of the four priorities, and were responsible for the implementation of the common objectives. They reported regularly on what they have done to implement them, and on the basis of these reports, the Commission prepared progress reports which were presented to the Council. At the end of 2004, Heads of State and Government from France, Germany, Sweden and Spain decided to launch the idea of a European Pact for Youth in the context of the Lisbon Strategy revision. The aim of this Pact, endorsed by the European Council in March , was to improve education, training, mobility, employment and social inclusion of young people, while helping to achieve a work-life balance. The European Youth Pact was then See Annex 1 listing main EU policy documents related to the cooperation framework. 'A new Impetus for European Youth', COM (2001) 681, Resolution of the Council and of the representatives of the governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the youth field [2002/C 168] See Annex 2 for list of Common objectives Annex 1 of Presidency Conclusions of the European Council, Brussels, 22 and (7619/05) EN 5 EN

74 integrated in the Youth Cooperation Framework through a November 2005 Council resolution 6. This same Council resolution called on the Commission and the Member States to evaluate the framework for European cooperation in the youth field in Council conclusions of 25 May 2007 on future perspectives for European cooperation in the field of youth policy also contributed with a set of proposals on future thematic and structural perspectives 7. The White Paper on Youth also proposed a mainstreaming approach for taking better account of the youth dimension in other policy initiatives. Apart from the areas covered by the European Youth Pact, this approach has been developed in a few fields such as antidiscrimination and more recently health. The September 2007 Commission Communication "Promoting young people's full participation in education, employment and society" 8 was another milestone of the current cooperation framework. It stressed the need for a cross-cutting approach to youth issues in order to enhance young people's active participation in education, employment and in society. The Commission proposed to reinforce the partnership between EU institutions and youth representatives and to prepare every three years an EU report on youth. These different elements, coming one after another, have resulted in a complex structure, based on three pillars: The open method of coordination dedicated to active citizenship of young people, The European Youth Pact aiming at promoting social and vocational integration of young people, and The mainstreaming activities. Other tools have been progressively developed in order to support the Youth Cooperation Framework. A structured dialogue with young people has been set up since Structured dialogue means that governments and administrations, including EU institutions, discuss chosen themes with young people, in order to obtain results which are useful for policy-making. Structured dialogue cycles around different themes have already been organised. The dialogue is structured in terms of themes within a specific timeframe. Debates are organised at local, regional and national levels. Events where young people can discuss the agreed themes amongst themselves and also with EU politicians are also organised on a regular basis (in particular 'Youth Events' twice a year, and a European Youth Week every 18 months). In order to acquire a greater understanding and knowledge of young people (which is both a priority of the Youth OMC and a base of the whole cooperation framework), some tools have also been set up at European level. A European Knowledge Centre on Youth Policy (EKCYP) has been developed jointly by the European Commission and the Council of Europe. The EKCYP is a knowledge management system that aims at providing youth policy-makers and other interested stakeholders with a single entry point to retrieve information on the realities of youth across Europe. A European Network of Youth Knowledge (EuNYK) was set up by Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on addressing the concerns of young people in Europe implementing the European Pact for Youth and promoting active citizenship [2005/C 292/03] [Official Journal C 314/24 of 22 December 2007] Commission Communication 'Promoting young people's full participation in education, employment and society', COM (2007) 498, September EN 6 EN

75 the Commission in 2006 to exchange good practice on developing national youth knowledge networks between policy-makers, young people and researchers and thereby facilitate the implementation of the common objectives for a better knowledge and understanding of youth. The Commission also tried to facilitate peer learning exercises. A specific peer-learning cycle about participation of young people with fewer opportunities has been carried out in with various experts meetings taking place as well as a conference where policy makers met youth workers and NGOs to discuss and share experiences on this issue 9. During all the period, Youth Programmes have been acting beyond their financial role as policy laboratories where concrete ways to mobilise young people through international projects have been experienced. The current Programme (Youth in Action ) includes a whole strand dedicated to supporting European cooperation in the Youth field Specific context A number of important policy documents have recently highlighted the need for a renewed youth strategy. In the November 2007 Social Vision Communication, the Commission provided an overview of the social realities on the basis of the then ongoing Social Reality Stocktaking exercise. It noted that European societies are undergoing fast-moving, profound changes in both the economic and social spheres, and that these changes are directly affecting the chances of young people in life 10. This vision was supported by the Bureau of European Policy Advisers report "Investing in Youth an empowerment strategy" 11 which drew attention to the need for early investment in human and social capital. The conclusions of this report underline that "An EU consensus now exists on the need to take action to back up young people with education, employment and civic participation. ( ) An across-the-board policy vision and investment strategy in youth is needed to fully develop the potential contribution of young people to growth, jobs, and the future of Europe.( ) The EU can help to improve this policy approach on investment in youth by highlighting the issues, mobilising knowledge and actors on the question of youth across Europe." Following this, the Renewed Social Agenda has been adopted in July It aims to create more opportunities for EU citizens, improve access to quality services and demonstrate solidarity with those who are affected negatively by change. A mix of different policy tools is presented to achieve the objectives set out in the Agenda. A main priority among seven priority areas is youth and children: "Europe's future depends on its youth. Yet, life chances of many young people are blighted- they lack the opportunities and the access to education and training to realise their full potential." The Social Agenda Communication 12 mentions that "later in 2008/2009 the Commission will issue a Communication on developing the open method of coordination on youth, with a particular focus on young people with fewer opportunities" Good practices identified thanks to the peer-learning exercise are available at Commission Communication 'Opportunities, Access and Solidarity: Towards a New Social Vision for 21st Century Europe', COM (2007) 726, November Bureau of European Policy advisers, April 2007 COM (2008) 412 final EN 7 EN

76 The Lisbon Treaty has added to political expectations, as its legal entry into force would give a new youth dimension to the EU action as well as more visibility to youth at EU level under a newly modified Article 149, Community action shall be aimed among others at "encouraging the participation of young people in democratic life in Europe" Consultation of interested parties The consultation requirements have been met, throughout various consultation exercises conducted since April Internal consultations The existing Youth Inter-service Group has met twice in order to discuss main orientations of the future Cooperation Framework as well as this impact assessment. All relevant Commission services have been invited to these meetings and representatives from the following Directorate-Generals participated: Secretariat General, Bureau of European Policy Advisers, Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities DG, Justice, Freedom and Security DG, Health and Consumers DG, Research DG, Development DG, External relations DG, Europeaid DG, Humanitarian Aid DG, Information Society and Media DG and Communication DG. Complementary bilateral contacts have also taken place with some Directorate-Generals like Secretariat General, Employment, Health and Consumers, Enterprise and Industry, External relations or Bureau of European Policy advisers Consultation of Member States Member States have been asked to report by mid October 2008 on their evaluation of the current cooperation framework and their ideas for the future cooperation. Directors General for Youth of the Member States have also had the opportunity to discuss these issues in several meetings which took place in 2008 and early Member States have highlighted achievements as well as a range of difficulties in the cooperation cycle 13, as developed under section Among the achievements, it has often been mentioned that the cooperation framework increased the visibility of Youth in Europe and allowed for a better incorporation of Youth in EU policy. At national level, it has had influence on the development of many Youth strategies. The role of the cooperation framework as a platform for exchange of practices and for dialogue has also been often underlined. However, EU youth cooperation has also shown some limits according to the Member States assessment: the framework is not clear and coherent enough, and is not enough delivering in some areas, for instance, the implementation of the European Youth Pact. The structured dialogue with young people needs to be revised and more inclusive, and the cross-sector nature of youth policy needs more recognition at EU and national level. Several Member States have stressed the particular importance of having coherent policies regarding youth, family and children. A common letter from 5 countries (France, Czech Republic, Sweden, Spain, and Germany) has also been sent in October 2008 to all Youth Ministers and European Commission in order to present a common position of these five countries. This document underlines the need for a single youth policy framework merging mainstreaming efforts, in particular related to the Youth Pact and the open method of coordination, which embodies all of the youth policy priorities. 13 Ecotec-Ecorys summary of national reports, January 2009, under the Framework contract EAC/03/06 on Evaluation, Impact assessment and related services. EN 8 EN

77 Even before the consultation phase, the Council conclusions on future perspectives for European cooperation in the field of youth policy adopted in May pointed out the need to adapt the strategies in view of the demographic changes (ageing of population, need for inter-generational solidarity) Consultation of young people and youth organisations In the framework of the structured dialogue with young people, a whole cycle dedicated to future challenges for young people has been launched in April Youth organisations have been invited to organise conferences on this topic to contribute to the definition of the new Youth Cooperation Framework of the next decade and Commission has received feedback from these debates. The debates culminated during the European Youth Week in November 2008, with the adoption of Conclusions which underlined among others the need for a clear structure for dialogue between youth and decision makers, as well as a comprehensive cross sector policy for youth. A specific and regular consultation of the European Youth Forum (EU main stakeholder in the youth field, representing around 100 umbrella organisations) has also been organised via several meetings. A public consultation called 'Strategic Choices for Young Europeans' which adhered to the Commission's minimum standards has been launched on-line from 22 nd of September until 25 th of November responses have been provided, covering both individuals (88.5%) including half of youth or social workers, and organisations (11.5% that is to say over 600). When asked about the key challenges for young people in the coming decade, the respondents have mainly indicated youth unemployment, reform of education systems, environment and sustainable development, social integration and active participation in society. A majority of the respondents would like to see more done by the EU to help young people play a more active role in society, to develop opportunities or young people to live, work and travel throughout Europe, and to help young people find a job. Most of the consultations conducted among young people and youth organisations indicate a will for a pursued and reinforced action in the citizenship related fields, together with a strong request for a developed youth cross-cutting policy. These expectations can be found in the main orientation papers of the European Youth Forum 16, in the conclusions of the 2008 European Youth Week or in the results of the on-line consultation Consultation of experts A special meeting of researchers of the European Network of Youth Knowledge (EuNYK) has been organised in October The participants stressed the need to reinforce youth better knowledge tools in order to reinforce evidence-based policy making, not only for youth policies but also to provide other policies with a clearer youth perspective. The national agencies of the Youth in Action programme also provided a contribution underlining the need to develop a stronger linking of the national and the European level. This contribution also requested that youth cooperation act for the benefit of all young people (not only specific target groups, and with the aim of reaching out young people who are not See reference in footnote 7. See annex 5 for a summary of main outcomes. The details of the on-line consultation outcomes will be published as a background document on Website of the European Youth Forum: EN 9 EN

78 touched enough by existing measures), as well as a stronger support of youth work. The following issues have also been mentioned by the national agencies as particularly important for young people: mobility, innovation and entrepreneurship, links with children policy, health, culture, volunteering, participation and information. 2. PROBLEM DEFINITION 2.1. Problems The problem needs to be defined both in terms of the challenges directly faced by young people, and of how to address these challenges via the Youth Cooperation Framework. All this takes place against a backdrop of new or persisting European-wide challenges, which directly or indirectly impact on young people Global challenges Globalisation brings new competitive forces on the world market: notwithstanding its positive effects on growth, jobs and prosperity and the need to enhance European competitiveness further through structural change, globalisation may also have negative consequences for the most vulnerable and least qualified workers such as the young people. Demographic changes are also a major challenge for the European countries to cope with: Most Member States are experiencing a declining number of births and are among the most aged countries in the world 17 with a shrinking workforce, and this has progressive effects on intergenerational solidarity. Youth has become a scarce resource in Europe. According to Eurostat population projections, the percentage of people aged in the total population will be 15.3 % in 2050, whereas they currently represent 19.3%. The Council conclusions on future perspectives for European cooperation in the field of youth policy adopted in May 2007 point out the need to adapt the youth strategy in view of these demographic changes. Climate change is affecting the way we live and work, with a demand for new skills ('green jobs') as well as an increasing urge for sustainable behaviours and ways of life. Social changes impact heavily on youth. Europeans are living longer lives, facing unprecedented changes in family patterns 18, making progress towards gender equality and adjusting to new patterns of mobility and diversity. At the same time, evidence shows that individual life chances are often set by the time a child reaches school, with family background and neighbourhood environment playing a key role. Most Member States are now experiencing migratory phenomena and are confronted with integration challenges. While many immigrants in the European Union are well integrated, there are, nevertheless, growing concerns in a number of countries about the situation of young migrants and of the young people from 2 nd and 3 rd generation. In several countries, over 10% of 15 year-old have parents who were born abroad. Children and youth from migrant background tend to have lower school results than other pupils EU 2008 Demography Report Commission Communication 'Promoting solidarity between the generations' COM (2007) 244 Third Annual Report on Migration and Integration, COM (2007) 512; Green Paper "Migration & Mobility: challenges and opportunities for EU education systems", COM (2008) 423. EN 10 EN

79 The consequences of the current economic and financial crisis are not yet well known, but it is likely to affect firstly the most vulnerable groups, including low-skilled young people 20, especially when considering employability and initial access to the labour market Problems affecting the situation of young people 21 Beyond global challenges affecting European societies, other challenges more specific to youth are often mentioned. These problems have also direct consequences on the implementation of the core objectives of the European Union and its Member States in the already mentioned context of declining demographics. Lack of opportunities The Renewed Social Agenda stressed the fact that young people are not getting the best start in life: despite the fact that young people in the EU currently enjoy a wealth of opportunities, today's young generation are in a particularly fragile situation. Too many young people are not able to develop their full potential and to successfully enter the job market, and leave school without a formal qualification. While the educational attainment level of the working age population in the EU (15 to 64 year olds) has risen during the last decade, almost 1/3 of this population still have a low educational attainment level and every sixth young person (18 to 24 years old) still leaves school with only compulsory education attainment level or below 22. The rate of early school leavers stands at 14.8% 23, and is even more severe among males and young people with migrant backgrounds. The young people are the segment of the European population that work mostly in low-quality jobs which require low qualifications and are poorly paid 24. Another key challenge is linked to youth unemployment and poverty. Unemployment affects twice as many young people as adults in Europe. Youth, and the early school leavers in particular, find it difficult to get access to the labour market, with fewer unskilled jobs available and very uneven access to lifelong learning. One-fifth of those aged between 16 and 24 in Europe were at risk of poverty in , against 14% for people aged Such a situation is often combined with low social mobility, with young people coming from homes with multi-generational unemployment and/or poverty, as well as intergenerational transmission of educational disadvantage. This lack of opportunities is not only affecting disadvantaged young people. For instance, even highly educated young people may well face difficulties of access to stable and quality jobs as well as a lack of financial autonomy vis-à-vis their family. By not always making the best of youth potential, European societies risk creating many frustrations and lack of Such consequences were already visible in many countries as underlined by the Commission Lisbon strategy recommendations presented in January 2009, COM (2009) 34. The situation of young people in Europe will be described in detail in the future EU Report on youth, to be presented as a Staff Working Document at the same time as the Communication. Impact assessment accompanying the Commission Communication about an updated strategic framework for European cooperation in Education and Training, December figure. Within the Education and Training Cooperation Framework, the benchmark set in 2003 to be achieved by 2010 was to have not more than 10% early school leavers. The 2000 figure was 17.3%. Young women experience even higher unemployment rates than men and are more often in low quality, part-time and fixed-term jobs. Being at risk of poverty meaning that the disposable income of the household in which these youngsters live, adjusted for household size, was below 60% of the national median income 'Youth in the EU - figures', Eurostat, November EN 11 EN

80 incentives among all categories of young people and increasing the gap between them and the main social institutions. Difficulties of access and participation in society All young people are not always adequately equipped to deal with all the rapid changes occurring in the European societies and some of them are particularly affected. Disadvantaged young people are often excluded from opportunities to participate fully in society and to enjoy the benefits of education, employment and social welfare. Without any of these opportunities, young people might sometimes face marginalisation or radicalisation, when placed in extreme situations from an economic or social point of view. In addition, there is a growing recognition that health problems among young people represent an increasing key challenge for public authorities: there are specificities of the youth population regarding issues such as obesity, life style, addictions and mental health. Injuries often in link with risk-taking behaviours are the number one killer of young people, claiming the lives of 20,000 young people aged each year in the EU27. According to other recent estimates, one fifth of children and adolescents in the EU suffer from developmental, emotional or behavioural problems and one in eight have a mental disorder. Improving the health condition of young people and promoting a healthy lifestyle and a culture of prevention among them has thus become an important challenge 26. The available information regarding the implementation of participation objectives (one of out of the four priorities in the current framework) shows that there is still room for improvement, particularly regarding specific objectives such as greater participation by young people in the mechanisms of representative democracy or learning to participate. Young people are still not involved enough in society and in civic life. Weakened solidarities As explained in the 2007 Commission Communication 'Promoting solidarity between the generations' 27, inter-generational solidarity relationships are more complex than in the past. Greater life expectancy, population ageing and increasing geographical mobility impact the relationships between the generations and the availability of family support networks 28. While young adults live under their parents roof for longer, the parents have increasingly often to support dependent elderly people. And this is not always easy to reconcile with the weakening of family structures, combined with trends to individualisation 29. At the same time, new risks of generation divide are emerging between younger and older generations in a broader sense than solidarity within the family in terms of pay, pensions, job security and access to housing for instance 30. These various trends directly affect the situation of children and young people and their place in society; on one hand, there is a growing focus on the individual; on the other hand, the young people tend to rely more on new solidarities outside family or other traditional institutions (for instance, development of virtual communities such as Facebook, etc). This is not a problem in itself but might become such when the young people choose extreme forms Commission White Paper 'Together for Health: A Strategic Approach for the EU ', COM(2007) 630 COM(2007) 244 final EU Demography Report meeting social needs in an ageing society, SEC(2008) 2911 Social reality stock taking exercise - Commission Communication COM(2007) 726. Communication COM (2007) 726. EN 12 EN

81 of solidarity in order to find identity and protection (such as gangs or other violent communities). In link with new family patterns, many children now grow up with a single parent. Around one-third of these single parent families are at risk of poverty twice the proportion for the population as a whole. This often leads to a vicious cycle of childhood deprivation, unhealthy lifestyles, academic under-achievement and social exclusion. Young parents themselves can be particularly affected by these weakened solidarities Assessment of the current cooperation framework 31 The assessment of the results of the current cooperation cycle by the different actors involved in the process has shown some positive impacts. However, it has also highlighted a range of difficulties or limitations in the cooperation cycle, particularly when tackling the above mentioned problems affecting young people. Assessment of the Youth open method of coordination Priorities 32 Encouraging young people's participation in the exercise of active citizenship and civil society Participation was the first priority proposed in the White Paper. Good progress has been achieved in policies at national level, although there is still room for improvement. Youth parliaments or youth councils are established in the majority of countries. Most countries provide financial support for greater participation. It appears that the downward trend in participation by young people in the mechanisms of representative democracy is continuing, although at the same time more efforts are taken to consult young people. Specific initiatives in terms of learning to participate still seem to be limited. At European level, initiatives have also been successfully taken. For instance, the Youth in Action programme funds projects which are designed to encourage a sense of active European citizenship in young people and encourage young people to become more involved in the democratic process at regional, national and European level. Enhancing the information addressed to young people Progress has been made on improving young people s access to information in terms of the number of countries having an information strategy. Together with the European Youth Portal, national youth portals have been established and many Member States started setting up Youth Information Centres. However, most countries have not yet developed standard methods to assess the quality of the information. Promoting voluntary activities among young people National strategies for young volunteers still have to be developed, although there have been a number of recent developments in several Member States to revise legislation in order to better support volunteering among young people. Real progress has been achieved at EU level. The Youth in Action programme offers several opportunities for volunteering. One of them is the European Voluntary Service, through A more detailed assessment of the current cooperation framework by member States is published as a background document on (Ecotec-Ecorys summary of national reports) See annex 2 for the list of current priorities and objectives of the open method of coordination EN 13 EN

82 which young people can be full-time volunteers for up to one year in another country. A Council recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers across the European Union 33 has also been recently adopted in order to encourage youth cross-border volunteering. Encouraging greater understanding and knowledge of youth This priority is characterised by weak implementation at national level. While progress has been made since the adoption of the common objectives in 2004 and lots of good practices exist, much is still to be done in this field. The major challenge for Member States seems to be how to develop a coordinated approach to youth research that brings all the actors in the field together in a joint effort to identify and streamline youth research 34. Processes More generally, the public authorities for youth 35 in many Member States have acknowledged that the EU cooperation framework in the field of youth has inspired youth-related legislation at national level and helped many Member States develop national strategies. National laws and strategies have been very much been influenced by European common objectives and priorities either in the "old" Member States 36, or in the Member States that have joined the European Union since More and more countries involve youth organisations in their policy-making and the youth policy field is increasingly structured in a manner similar to or consistent with the EU framework at local and regional level 37. While a majority of stakeholders feel that the main instruments of the cooperation framework remain appropriate, they also demand that the OMC tools should be further improved on and the quality of cooperation should be increased. Some Member States have for instance underlined that there is a lack of understanding of the diversity of youth in the cooperation cycle, and some have also criticised a lack of representativeness of the youngsters involved in the structured dialogue. It has also been suggested that the definition of Youth oriented towards the 15 to 25 age group is too narrow in the past cooperation cycle, and that not enough attention is given to children (and children s rights). Some stakeholders also highlighted the fact that there is a low awareness of EU youth policy. More generally, some youth organisations consider that the OMC also still needs to be genuinely implemented in all Member States. In this sense, the current cooperation framework has not always proved its efficiency and its capacity to deliver. It has often been underlined that youth work a set of activities outside schools, developed by young people, youth organisations or local authorities and managed by youth workers or youth leaders has not been recognised and supported enough by the current cooperation framework. In particular, youth work has recently been evolving from activities traditionally focused on leisure time to activities dedicated to fight unemployment, educational failure, marginalisation and social exclusion; these last ones are often qualified as non formal education activities in the youth field. So far, this shift has not been sufficiently analysed OJ C319/8, 'European Research on Youth' available at Summary of national reports prepared by Ecotec-Ecorys, January 2009 For example, the Finnish Youth Policy Development Programme is presented in official documents as a national implementation of the European Youth Cooperation Framework. Many Member States actively promote the creation of local/municipal youth councils: 850 in Greece, in 200 out of 350 municipalities in Finland, half of the municipalities in France, Charter on participation of young people in local and regional life in Bulgaria, etc ) EN 14 EN

83 The assessment of the past reporting cycle and of other documents also clearly indicates that there are important gaps in the information supplied by Member States, and more generally the field suffers from a real lack of data at European level, which contradicts the need for evidence based policies. Assessment of the European Youth Pact The adoption of the European Youth Pact has been welcomed and its three strands (employment and social integration, education, training and mobility, as well as reconciliation of working and family life) are considered as very important areas for youth. Priorities Employment, integration and social advancement Some progress has been achieved on youth employment and integration after this became a priority of the Lisbon strategy since The Pact has particularly helped to develop a transversal approach of youth issues regarding employment. The implementation of the European Youth Pact, however, still needs work at EU and national levels, and the current economic crisis brings risks of relapse. The analysis of the National Reform Programmes for 2008 shows that youth unemployment is around 15.5%, that is to say 2 points less than in 2007, but remains however twice the global unemployment rate. It has not changed much since 2000, when the youth unemployment rate was 16.1% and the general rate 8.4%. Moreover, young people are likely to be particularly vulnerable in the deteriorating economic situation 38. Education, training and mobility These are still issues, particularly concerning the high rate of drop-outs from the school system and the lack of recognition of non-formal and informal education, despite some progress achieved at EU level with Youthpass and Europass. Furthermore, mobility is only possible for a limited part of the young people in Europe. Reconciliation of working life and family life This priority has not been characterised by much progress. However, there is a growing awareness of how crucial child-friendly policies are for tackling many of the issues arising among youth and for addressing demographic change. Processes At national level, the profile of youth as a priority area in employment policies has increased since However, youth ministries are not always enough involved in that process, and coordination on the youth issues between the relevant policies is insufficient in many Member States. Moreover, the involvement of youth organisations in the implementation of the Pact, as foreseen in the European Council conclusions themselves, varies according to the countries. At EU level, the youth dimension is more visible in main reporting documents, and the Youth Council presents every year key messages to the Spring European Council. 38 Council Key messages to the Spring European Council on the European Youth Pact and European cooperation in the youth field, 16 February EN 15 EN

84 The already mentioned 2007 Communication about "Promoting young people's full participation in education, employment and society" 39 went a step further in listing many concrete actions in the field of youth education, employment, inclusion and participation. Assessment of mainstreaming activities Priorities Mainstreaming activities have been developed since 2002 in few areas like the fight against racism, xenophobia and other forms of discrimination or since 2008 health and well-being on which a Council resolution has recently been adopted 40. Fight against discrimination has been characterised by a strong youth involvement in European campaigns such as For Diversity-Against Discrimination or 'All different, all equal' 41. Although we are at the beginning of the EU level mainstreaming process regarding health, the growing youth dimension of health strategies is very promising 42. Processes There is a consensus for asking more recognition of the cross-sector nature of youth policy and a broader scope for this cross-cutting approach as already illustrated in Council Conclusions of November 2007 on a transversal approach to youth policy 43 and in the European Parliament Declaration on youth empowerment 44. However, the current framework is not coordinated enough in order to tackle all the necessary issues. All in all, there is also a general feeling that the 'Youth' resource (youth organisations, youth networks, youth workers, youth leaders, and young people themselves) could be better valorised and used in order to tackle main EU challenges Affected groups This initiative will affect primarily the young people. The Europeans between 15 and 29 are around 20 % of the current EU population, that is to say 96 million people. Another affected group will be Youth non-governmental organisations. These organisations are present at every level of decision making, from the local level to the European Union. Youth organisations or councils are generally very structured and represent a whole range of youth groups. The initiative also concerns people working with young people such as youth/social workers. Youth administrations at all levels will also be affected by this initiative, as they would implement it See full reference in footnote 8 See for instance Council Resolution of 20 November 2008 on health and well-being of young people. See and See also footnote 27 Conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council of 16 November 2007 on a transversal approach to youth policy with a view to enabling young people to fulfil their potential and participate actively in society, [2007/C 282/16] The European Parliament adopted in September 2008 a written declaration on youth empowerment, with 433 MEPs signing a text calling on the Commission and Member States to take into account the needs of young people when developing policies that affect them and to develop a more horizontal youth policy. EN 16 EN

85 2.3. Baseline Scenario As already explained in chapters and 2.1.3, a framework for European co-operation in the field of youth (Youth Cooperation Framework) was established in June 2002 by way of an open method of coordination (OMC) focusing on active citizenship of young people, and complemented in 2005 by the European Youth Pact an instrument dedicated to social and vocational integration of young people within the Lisbon strategy. Other elements, such as mainstreaming activities (taking account of the youth dimension in other policy initiatives), knowledge tools, structured dialogue with young people and peer-learning, have been progressively developed within the Youth Cooperation Framework. The current Youth Cooperation Framework has three pillars: the OMC dedicated to active citizenship of young people, the European Youth Pact aiming at promoting social and vocational integration of young people, and mainstreaming activities. The current cycle of the open method of coordination will come to an end in 2009 with an assessment of the implementation of the fourth and last priority (better knowledge of the situation of young people) and with an evaluation of the whole cycle, as foreseen in Council resolutions. No other work is planned under this current framework, which means that the cooperation between Member States would cease regarding citizenship of young people without specific action being taken: extension of the current OMC beyond 2009 would hence also require a specific proposal by the Commission and endorsement by Council. The possibility of ending the cooperation has not been retained for further analysis (as explained below in section 4.2), and this extension scenario has been chosen as a status quo option under section Legal basis and subsidiarity The legal basis for this initiative can be found in Article 149 of the EC treaty. Member States have the main responsibility for the policy changes needed to respond to the challenges identified in Section 2, and most of the policies concerned are areas where the EU has only competence to carry out actions to support, coordinate or supplement the actions of the Member States. However, a more pro-active role at EU level is necessary in order to support Member State cooperation. Action by a Member State alone would not achieve the same results as described in the assessment of the current cooperation framework such as raising visibility of Youth and youth strategies, defining common objectives, developing mutual learning, exchange of practices and experience as well as structured dialogue with young people at a European level,, access to European wide data, etc. Moreover, stakeholders and Member States have found that the current OMC has provided added value (in particular by acting as a catalyst in relation to supporting development of national strategies) and have expressed keen interest in continued cooperation on key issues. As described in section 1.2, they see the need to strengthen the effectiveness of the OMC in certain ways to achieve better outcomes. The added value of the EU in implementing interlinked policies has also been underlined. All the options examined below fully respect the principle of subsidiarity. These options envisage setting up common objectives and cooperation principles, but national competences as well as diversity of national situations regarding youth and youth strategies are fully respected, as the framework will leave implementation of these objectives and principles in EN 17 EN

86 the hands of the Member States 45. Since the Youth Cooperation Framework is based on the voluntary cooperation of the various stakeholders, including the local and regional levels is also very important for achieving the common objectives. 3. OBJECTIVES 3.1. General objectives On the basis of the problem definition and challenges listed above, the next European Youth Cooperation Framework will aim to enhance the well-being of young people in Europe during the next decade, by investing properly in youth and in empowering young people for contributing in a more competitive, cohesive and sustainable EU society. The general objectives of the proposed framework are in line with its strategic orientations listed above and with the problems affecting young people themselves: Creating more opportunities for youth in education and employment Helping young people to develop their potential, particularly in terms of formal and nonformal education, employment (employability, flexicurity and work/life balance) as well as creativity. Improving access and full participation of all young people in society Ensuring access to social and civic opportunities for all young people in their diversity, particularly in terms of health and participation. Fostering mutual solidarity between society and young people Promoting both solidarity of society towards youth and of young people towards other generations or other young people, in particular through volunteering or solidarity with the rest of the world Specific objectives The specific objectives of the proposed European Youth Cooperation Framework seek to improve its coherence and its efficiency: To develop a transversal approach of issues relating to youth, in order to address these issues in a comprehensive way; To improve efficiency of the cooperation, so as to answer the concerns expressed by most of the actors; To mobilise youth organisations and young people, in order to develop youth empowerment Operational objectives The operational objectives of the proposed European Youth Cooperation Framework should enable the revised framework to tackle the issues addressed in the assessment of the current cooperation. They are the following ones: To develop coordination mechanisms between policies; To reinforce structured dialogue with young people; 45 As most coordination processes, the youth framework is mainly aimed at initiating or facilitating reforms to be conducted at the national level. EN 18 EN

87 To improve implementation of cooperation (particularly via simplified reporting and peer-learning processes); To develop knowledge based policy making Consistency of these objectives with other EU policies These objectives will help to meet the challenges mentioned in Section 2, as well as the core objectives of the European Union. They will contribute to implementing the Renewed Social Agenda, as already outlined in Section 1, as well as the goals of the Lisbon Strategy and probably the future post Lisbon objectives. Youth strategies have a key role to play for social cohesion, access to opportunities, inclusion, health or intergenerational dialogue. European competitiveness highly depends on efforts for education, training and youth employment (for instance, flexicurity). Participation and commitment are key words for youth strategies, in order to develop active citizenship of the young Europeans. There is also a strong link between these Youth strategy objectives and recent actions undertaken by the European Union regarding children's rights 46 and families. Youth strategy has also to do with integration policy, including actions aiming at facilitating access to employment, raising the educational attainments, promoting equal opportunities for all, fostering intercultural dialogue and increasing civil, cultural and political participation of immigrants. Insofar as mobility of third country nationals (students, trainees, volunteers) is concerned, Youth and immigration policies are closely interconnected. 46 Commission Communication 'Towards an EU strategy on the rights of the child', COM(2006) 327 EN 19 EN

88 4. POLICY OPTIONS 4.1. Global analysis In relation to the objectives identified, four policy options have been considered; they can be briefly differentiated according to the policy scope or to the instruments chosen Possible scope The scope could vary along two main scenarios. A specific approach characterised by a narrow scope would be focused only on active citizenship of young people, participation and commitment directly connected to Youth policy, supporting traditional youth work. A transversal approach characterised by a holistic scope would encompass all policies which concern young people, namely education, employment, inclusion, health, justice, including a renewed youth policy regarding active citizenship as well as mobilisation of young people) Possible instruments As far as the instruments are concerned: The Youth open method of coordination (citizenship focused scope) could be either based on the current tools or an improved one, with new mechanisms for reporting, monitoring, knowledge and dialogue with the stakeholders. The necessary cross-sectoral coordination could also be either: based on light mechanisms (such as now, with some mainstreaming activities in a few policies) Or improved by stronger, more global and integrated mechanisms: Identifying how youth policy can contribute to other policies and with which tools; Checking if and how the current youth needs are considered in these policies at the right level (monitoring); Ensuring a certain level of cooperation-coordination; Mobilising young people and youth organisations for implementing the relevant policies. Another way of action could be to develop a set of more binding tools in order to complement national policies Policy options not retained for analysis Ending the Cooperation Without any explicit extension of the OMC which is the core of the current framework the cooperation would cease on citizenship priorities beyond In this area, the situation would be quite similar to the one before the 2001 White Paper: the main cooperation activities would be centred on the implementation of the Youth programmes. The European Youth Pact would go on within the Lisbon strategy framework, at least until the revision planned in The few other mainstreaming activities developed under the Youth Framework might be at risk as they will lose the leverage effect of the Youth OMC. EN 20 EN

89 Under this option, most of the 'acquis' obtained through the cooperation and policy development since 2001 would thus risk being lost or diminished. It would send a negative message to the young people, at a particularly difficult moment for them from an economic point of view Specific approach (narrow scope) Restricting the scope of the EU Youth Cooperation Framework to the citizenship area would be in contradiction with all the requests for more cross sectoral approach coming from the various stakeholders in the field, including the Member States themselves. It would also be counter-productive as it would compromise an important 'acquis' (European Youth Pact, mainstreaming). With all the limitations described under section 2 above, the European framework has nevertheless encouraged the development of cross-sectoral coordination mechanisms, which are particularly relevant for better taking into account the youth dimension in other policy domains 47. Since 2005, the European Youth Pact has become a key tool of European action for youth. In this context, the specific dimension of youth lifetransitions is more taken into account when adopting new measures related to the labour market. Moreover, a narrow approach would not be in line with the policy line advocated in the September 2007 Communication Development of a set of more binding tools Within the holistic approach, the main involved policies are based on open methods of coordination or other non-binding instruments. Although the use of 'soft law' might be appropriate in specific cases (such as recently done with success under Article 149 EC in order to adopt a Council Recommendation on the Mobility of Young Volunteers across European Union), wide adoption of binding tools would be in conflict with the subsidiarity principle. Furthermore, it would only be possible to adopt such acts in areas expressly covered by Treaty provisions and would not make possible to achieve the objectives identified under section 3, particularly regarding the necessary development of a transversal approach Options retained for analysis Option 1: Status quo Option 2: a reinforced youth OMC Option 3: a developed cross-sectoral approach Option 4: a global strategy These policy options can be briefly described as follows Option 1: Status quo (baseline scenario) Under this option, continuation of the current OMC beyond 2009 would be based on a specific proposal by the Commission and endorsement by the Council. The extended Youth Cooperation Framework would then function on the basis of the current tools and objectives, and the framework would remain divided in three pillars. 47 In Latvia, for instance, eight ministries are involved in an inter-ministerial committee headed by the Minister of Children, Family and Youth affairs. These ministries have to report on how they include youth dimension in their activities. EN 21 EN

90 The OMC would keep its four 'active citizenship' priorities. It should be noted that the current youth OMC does not foresee the adaptation of these priorities. Thus, new challenges as mentioned in the problem definition above could not be highlighted as specific priorities under this extended framework. Every two years, one of the four priorities of the OMC would be reported about by the Member States. Tools such as peer-learning and structured dialogue could continue to evolve on an experimental basis. The European Youth Pact would continue to exist within both the Youth Cooperation Framework and the Lisbon Strategy at least until this process is revised in The current mainstreaming activities would go on in the current limited way, without more cooperation instruments than ad hoc ones Option 2: a reinforced Youth open method of coordination In this option, the priority would be given to improving the active citizenship of young people in Europe, as it was the 2001 Commission White Paper, with some mechanisms for mainstreaming of youth in other policies besides this. The Youth OMC should be reinforced while keeping its active citizenship orientation. Besides the reinforced OMC, other tools (such as mainstreaming) would remain the same than today. In order to implement the reinforced OMC, the following tools could be developed. It is proposed to keep and develop peer-learning processes, possibly via clusters between some Member States (meetings of experts at technical level) or high level seminars when political cooperation is essential. Structured dialogue with young people should be reinforced, possibly complemented with ad hoc dialogue with social partners. In order to develop monitoring tools, the reinforced OMC could be based on indicators, to be decided later on the basis of the results of a special working group. The current tools for better knowledge of young people (such as Eurostat data, national reports, the Knowledge Centre) would have to be complemented mainly regarding citizenship of young people. On this basis, one could probably reinforce the networking of researchers in order to support the analysis. Another tool of the reinforced OMC would be a triennial presentation and discussion of Commission/Council joint reports, on the basis of national reports. This triennial report dealing also mainly with citizenship of young people would also be the time for evaluating the framework and if necessary updating the priorities chosen for implementing the objectives. Besides this reinforced OMC, the cooperation framework would not have stronger tools than today for mainstreaming youth in other policy fields Option 3: a developed cross-sectoral approach In this scenario, the main focus would be put on cross-sectoral approach in policies being of first importance for young people, such as employment, education, inclusion, health, etc. The OMC would keep its current tools and objectives without any reinforcement, considering that it is not necessary to go further in the development of tools for active citizenship of young people. The cross sectoral approach would be developed along the following lines: - Through developed coordination mechanisms for policies with a strong youth dimension (such as employment, inclusion or health for instance) at EU and national level whenever EN 22 EN

91 possible, in order to ensure a priority to youth in other policies whenever relevant; the principle of a cross-sectoral approach at national level could be agreed, and the way to implement it should be left to the Member States responsibility. At EU level, Commission should also devise coordination mechanisms such as developing Youth Interservice group and Council could envisage setting up ad hoc cooperation between Council formations when dealing on transversal youth issues. - Via mobilisation of youth as a resource in policies where youth actors, young people and youth organisations can play a role and/or provide expertise. Young people and especially youth organisations and youth leaders have a specific role and responsibilities in some areas such as environmental awareness 48, creativity and innovation, solidarity (intergenerational, with young migrants, with young people with fewer opportunities, with rest of the world), the fight against discriminations, etc Option 4: a global strategy This option would be characterised by a general evolution, both in the tools and in the issues covered by the framework. The main instruments of the future framework would be a reinforced open method of coordination as well as a developed cross sectoral approach. Both tools have already been described above, in options 2 and 3. In this scenario, the cross sectoral approach would furthermore also benefit from the tools used in the reinforced OMC, such as reporting, structured dialogue, and knowledge. This option is the most ambitious one as it plans an upgrading in terms of priorities and tools. It would embrace the different aspects of the life of young people, whether at school, at work, at leisure time or outside these environments. Within this option, synergies between youth OMC and cross-sectoral approach could be developed, by using tools developed in the framework of the OMC such as structured dialogue with young people, better knowledge instruments, peer-learning and mobilisation capacities in order to contribute to the implementation of other policies. In terms of structure, this option would favour an integrated approach rather than maintaining the fragmented three pillar one. The new structure would, in particular, fully integrate the issues addressed by the European Youth Pact. 48 See for instance Commission campaigns directed at children and young people, at EN 23 EN

92 5. ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS The impact of the current Youth Cooperation Framework is not easily measured in quantitative terms, and the same will also apply to other policy options in the field. Although the final aim of all the options is to improve policy outcomes for young people, it is difficult to assess the direct impact of the framework due to the multitude of contributing factors. The analysis below is thus more an assessment of potential qualitative impacts of the various options, regarding social, economic and environmental outcomes, as well as impact on human rights. The microeconomic aspects (such as administrative costs mainly) are duly taken into consideration when comparing the feasibility of the various options Social impacts None of the options considered would have a negative social impact, but not all would be equal as to potential consequences on social outcomes. Without any revision of the cooperation framework as planned in option 1 (status quo), the existing cycle would risk being out of touch with current and future needs of the young people as well as the main renewed Social Agenda orientations. All other options are in line with the renewed Social Agenda and would have a more positive social impact. Option 2 (a reinforced Youth OMC) would put an emphasis on an increased civic participation and more solidarity of young people. However, options 3 (a developed cross-sectoral approach) and 4 (a global strategy) would have the most important social impact, by setting up tools in order to develop efficient strategies specifically dedicated to encourage employment, inclusion and general well-being of young people, as well as reinforcing participation and solidarity for option Economic impacts As for social impacts, none of the options considered would have a negative economic impact, but not all would be equal as to potential consequences on economic outcomes. The same analysis than for social impacts is valid regarding option 1: the existing cycle, characterised by a limited flexibility, would risk being quickly (if not already) out of touch with the everyday problems of the young people, such as the high unemployment rate of young people and its macro-economic consequences. This also goes for option 2 which would not change the efficiency and scope of the current transversal actions regarding other policies. Options 3 and 4 would have a greater positive impact on competitiveness and would positively feed into the Growth and Jobs Strategy: the development of cross-sectoral approach which they foresee aims at reinforcing the positive consequences of the Youth cooperation on the employment and education levels of young people, and would also allow taking better into account the future needs of youth and of European societies in this area. For options 2 and 4, the impact on the administrative burden would be quite positive, as this scenarios include a triennial reporting obligation rather than a more frequent one as today. The various options have no impact on the EU budget Environmental impacts None of the assessed option would have direct environmental impacts. In the long run, no option among those proposed would have a negative impact on the environment. Options 2 and 4 could have secondary positive environmental impacts. EN 24 EN

93 Option 2 (a reinforced Youth OMC) could be used for inviting young people to consider environmental issues as important. Option 4 (a global strategy) would combine youth work and citizenship focused strategy with cross-sectoral approach. Environment is one of the areas where above mentioned synergies between the youth OMC and the cross-sectoral approach could be developed. By using tools developed in the framework of the OMC, mobilisation capacities of young people can contribute to the implementation of policies such as environment, energy or transport Impacts on fundamental rights All the options are compatible with the obligation to respect fundamental rights as laid down in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights that have a particular link with youth issues are Article 24 (Rights of the child) as well as Article 21 (Non-discrimination including based on age) and Article 32 (Prohibition of child labour and protection of young people at work). Other provisions of particular interest for this field are Article 7 (Respect for private and family life), Article 14 (Right to education), Article 15 (Freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work), Article 23 (Equality between women and men) and Article 33 (Family and professional life). Generally speaking, all options would have a positive impact on the rights of children and young people. Options 3 and 4 would have more positive impacts on the fundamental rights connected with family and professional life, as they would offer the possibility to develop a transversal approach for youth in these areas. 6. COMPARING THE OPTIONS The four options have been compared on the basis of their impact on the objectives to be achieved and on the basis of their feasibility. In this context the concept of feasibility refers mainly to political acceptance of the options, availability of human resources and financial means, and administrative burden. EN 25 EN

94 The ranking of impacts (compared with the baseline scenario) is defined in the table below: Table 1 Ranking criteria Impact compared baseline scenario with Positive impact Small positive impact Neutral impact Small negative impact Negative impact Feasibility/ Implementation feasible more or less feasible feasibility difficult assess to slightly difficult difficult Table 2 Comparing the options with regard to the impacts on the objectives General objectives Option 1 (status quo) Option 2 (A reinforced Youth OMC) Option 3 (a developed crosssectoral approach) Option 4 (a global strategy) Objective 1 Creating more opportunities Objective 2 Improving youth access Objective 3 Fostering mutual solidarity Specific objectives Objective EN 26 EN

95 Transversal approach youth issues of Objective 5 Improve the efficiency of the framework 0 +/0 +/0 + Objective 6 Mobilisation young people of 0 + +/0 ++ Table 3 Comparing the options according to rating of feasibility/implementation Option 1 (status quo) Option 2 (a reinforced Youth OMC) Option 3 (a developed crosssectoral approach) Option 4 (a global strategy) Feasibility / implementation Based on the description in table 2 and 3 regarding impacts on objectives and feasibility, the following conclusions can be drawn regarding the four options Option 1: status quo General objectives This option will not lead to creating more opportunities and improving access and participation than now, as this option only foresees an extension of the current approach. As already discussed, it does not appear as an appropriate answer to tackle challenges enumerated above under section Specific objectives This option would suffer from a lack of interaction and in particular of coordination between policies. It would also be difficult to mobilise young people and their representatives with such an option Feasibility /implementation This option would be straightforward easy to implement as it is an extension of the current situation. However, political acceptance might be an issue as it would not provide a sufficient answer to the message both of Member States in favor of a more efficient OMC and of a stronger transversal approach. It would not make administrative burden lighter, as the current reporting cycle would continue to apply. EN 27 EN

96 6.2. Option 2: a reinforced OMC General objectives This option would reinforce mainly access to civic and volunteering opportunities, a limited even if important part of the specific objectives, and would not have more positive impacts than with the current cooperation on the creation of opportunities for employment and education. The general effects on inclusion of young people would be quite limited, as it would not include real developments in the cross-sectoral approach Specific objectives This option could bring some improvements in the implementation of youth cooperation and youth work at the European and national levels (dialogue with young people, exchange of practices, etc ), and allow greater participation and mobilisation of youth for society, in line with the modification of Article 149 proposed by the Lisbon Treaty (as mentioned above, under modified Article 149, Community action shall be aimed among others at "encouraging the participation of young people in democratic life in Europe"). However, this would enable developing only a partial knowledge of the situation of young people in Europe. Moreover, no improvement would be obtained regarding interaction between policies Feasibility /implementation Based on the experience of other OMCs (social, education, culture, etc.), proposed improvements are certainly realistic. This option would be appreciated by ministries responsible for youth as far as the improvement in OMC mechanisms would maintain a reasonably light approach. However, it does not fit with the demand for more coordination expressed by the same ministries for youth and by Member States in general Option 3: a developed cross-sectoral approach General objectives This option could provide a good answer to tackle some essential objectives very important for young people in terms of education, employment, social inclusion, health, justice. However, taking on board more policies without upgrading instruments would limit the potential impacts regarding these areas, as tools would not match the objectives. It also runs the risk of minimizing within the cooperation framework the role of policies which have been developed by youth ministries in supporting youth work for non-formal education, active citizenship, volunteering and creativity of young people. EN 28 EN

97 Specific objectives This option could provide a good interaction and coordination between policies. However, in this scenario, youth policy itself would suffer from a lack of efficiency due to the fact that the OMC tools would not be upgraded, which would cause disappointment of stakeholders dealing with young people outside the formal infrastructures. This option would enable developing only a partial knowledge of the situation of young people in Europe, even if not the same knowledge than in option 2. This option would also include limited tools to mobilise young people themselves for dealing with other policies as planned under options 2 and 4 with a reinforcement of youth OMC. It would also have limited effects on solidarity purposes, as the cross-sectoral approach would not include a reinforcement of tools for youth volunteering Feasibility /implementation This option would be more difficult to implement particularly at the national level, due to the necessary respect of the subsidiarity principle and the diversity of national situations, with some Member States where coordination is not a strongly developed practice; at the European level there are already some mechanisms of coordination like the European Youth Pact and regular inter-services consultations in all domains of interest for youth. All in all, such a development of the cross-sectoral approach seems absolutely necessary in order to achieve a quantum leap improvement of the situation. As mentioned for option 1, maintaining the current tools of the OMC might not be politically well accepted in particular by Member States. Focusing the strategy on developing cross-cutting activities while keeping a somehow low profile on the youth policy area itself might also be a challenge for public authorities in charge of youth, who generally have their main competences in the area of youth work and citizenship. EN 29 EN

98 6.4. Option 4: a global strategy General objectives This option would be the best one for creating opportunities for young people in acting through different fields and policies: education, employment, youth work, entrepreneurship, etc This would also be the best one for working towards a better involvement of all young people in the society, either in terms of social inclusion or citizenship, in acting through different fields and policies: inclusion, health, and participation. Finally, it seems also the best option to capitalise all the potential of the framework for solidarity purposes, and to mobilise young people in activities such as volunteering. In this regard the synergy effects expected from using some OMC tools for other policies, such as development aid or environment for instance, could be very helpful Specific objectives This would be the most advanced option for achieving interaction and coordination of all policies able to properly invest in youth. In acting holistically (transversal approach), it would be the most efficient approach to create synergies between youth policies and other policies. Option 4 would also benefit from synergy effects due to global impact of instruments (coordination tools, structured dialogue, exchange of practices, better knowledge of the situation of young people), which would allow for a better efficiency. This would also be the best option to empower young people, while illustrating that their concerns are taken into account in a global perspective, also in line with the modification of Article 149 proposed by the Lisbon Treaty of which it could make a more global use, based on the interconnection between policies affecting youth Feasibility /implementation This option would globally face the same challenges and opportunities as the option 3 (a developed cross-sectoral approach), regarding the development of cross-sectoral cooperation mechanisms. As for option 2, this option would be appreciated by ministries responsible for youth as far as the improvement in OMC mechanisms would maintain a reasonably light approach. It would also enhance the visibility of youth strategies. On the basis of the assessment above and in tables 2 and 3, the preferred option is Option MONITORING AND EVALUATION Monitoring and evaluation of the Cooperation framework would take place via triennial joint progress reports and adaptations would be made on a regular basis. Emphasis on monitoring by the stakeholders (in particular via structured dialogue with young people) will also be put in the new framework. On the basis of results of evaluation, proposals for improvement would be done on a regular basis. EN 30 EN

99 A possible way of evaluating success of the Youth Cooperation Framework could be by looking at: Successful consensus building on coordination between policies with an important youth dimension; Identification of policy developments in Member States linked with the implementation of key priorities at EU level; Regular dialogue with European stakeholders; Involvement of the regional and local levels in youth strategies; Awareness of policy priorities by national stakeholders (National Youth Councils and other youth dedicated organisations); Triennial reporting about implementation of priorities and situation of youth in Europe; Dashboard of existing indicators or benchmarks from other policy areas relevant for youth (such as early school leaving rate, child poverty, or youth unemployment rate) in order to illustrate the level of knowledge of the field; Development of tools describing youth work activities; a working group to discuss possible descriptors could be set up. EN 31 EN

100 ANNEX 1 - LIST OF DOCUMENTS LINKED WITH THE CURRENT COOPERATION FRAMEWORK 1. Open method of coordination European Commission White Paper of 21 November A new impetus for European youth [COM (2001) 681 final - Not published in the Official Journal]. Resolution of the Council and of the representatives of the governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the youth field [Official Journal C 168 of ]. Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of 24 May 2005 meeting within the Council on the evaluation of activities conducted in the framework of European cooperation in the youth field [Official Journal C 141/01 of 10 June 2005] 1.1 Information and participation Communication from the Commission to the Council - Follow-up to the White Paper "A New Impetus for European Youth" - Proposed common objectives for the participation and information of young people, in response to the Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the youth field [COM(2003) 184 final - not published in the Official Journal]. Commission staff working paper - Analysis of Member States' replies to the Commission questionnaires on youth participation and information [SEC/2003/0465 final - not published in the Official Journal]. Council resolution of 25 November 2003 on common objectives for participation by and information for young people [Official Journal C 295 of ] Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of 24 May 2005 meeting within the Council on implementing the common objective "to increase participation by young people in the system of representative democracy" [Official Journal C 141/02 of 10 June 2005] Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of 24 May 2005 meeting within the Council on implementing the common objectives for youth information [Official Journal C 141/03 of 10 June 2005] Communication from the Commission to the Council on European policies concerning youth participation and information [COM(2006) 417 final - Not published in the Official Journal]. Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the recognition of the value of non-formal and informal learning within the European youth field [Official Journal C 168, ] Resolution of the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on implementing the common objectives for participation by and EN 32 EN

101 information for young people in view of promoting their active European citizenship [Official Journal C 297 of 7 December 2006] Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, of 25 May 2007 on creating equal opportunities for all young people full participation in society [Official Journal C 314 of 22 December 2007] Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Government of the Member States meeting within the Council of 22 May 2008 on the participation of young people with fewer opportunities Volunteering Communication from the Commission to the Council, of 30 April Follow-up to the White Paper on a New Impetus for European Youth - Proposed common objectives for voluntary activities among young people in response to the Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the youth field [COM(2004) 337 final - not published in the Official Journal]. Resolution of the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council of 15 November 2004 on common objectives for voluntary activities of young people Commission Staff Working Document accompanying document to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions "Promoting young people's full participation in education, employment and society" Analysis of national reports from the Member States of the European Union concerning the implementation of the common objectives for voluntary activities of young people, SEC(2007) Council Resolution of 16 November 2007 on voluntary activities of young people Council recommendation of 20 November 2008 on the mobility of young volunteers across the European Union, OJ C319/8, Better knowledge Communication from the Commission to the Council of 30 April Follow-up to the White Paper on a New Impetus for European Youth. Proposed common objectives for a greater understanding and knowledge of youth, in response to the Council Resolution of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the youth field [COM (2004) 336 final - Not published in the Official Journal]. Resolution of the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council of November 2004 on common objectives for a greater understanding and knowledge of youth EN 33 EN

102 2. European Youth Pact Conclusions by the Council of 21 February 2005 on Youth in the framework of the mid-term review of the Lisbon Strategy [Official Journal C85 of 7 April 2005] European Youth Pact (Annex 1 of Presidency Conclusions of the European Council, Brussels, 22 and (7619/05)) Commission Communication of 30 May 2005 on European policies concerning youth: Addressing the concerns of young people in Europe - implementing the European Youth Pact and promoting active citizenship [COM (2005) 206 final - Not published in the Official Journal]. Council resolution of 24 November 2005 on addressing the concerns of young people in Europe - implementing the European Pact for Youth and promoting active citizenship [Official Journal C 292 of ]. Conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the implementation of the European Pact for Youth [Official Journal C 70 of 22 March 2006]. Contribution of the Council (in the field of youth policy) to the Spring European Council on the implementation of the European Pact for Youth Key messages to the Spring European Council, February 2007 Contribution from DG EAC to the preparation of Commission's December 2007 Annual Progress Report (internal document) Commission's December 2007 Annual Progress Report Contribution of the Council (in the field of youth policy) to the Spring European Council on the implementation of the European Pact for Youth Key messages to the Spring European Council, February 2008 European Council Conclusions, March 2008 Contribution of the Council (in the field of youth policy) to the Spring European Council on the implementation of the European Pact for Youth Key messages to the Spring European Council, February Future perspectives Conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, of 25 May 2007 on future perspectives for European cooperation in the field of youth policy [Official Journal C 314/24 of 22 December 2007] Questionnaires sent to the Member States by the Commission on future perspectives, February 2008 Answers from the Member States 4. Others Communication from the Commission of 5 September 2007 to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on EN 34 EN

103 Promoting young people's full participation in education, employment and society [COM(2007) 498 final - Not published in the Official Journal] Commission staff working document on youth employment in the EU - Accompanying document to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Promoting young people's full participation in education, employment and society {SEC(2007) 1084} Conclusions of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council of 16 November 2007 on a transversal approach to youth policy with a view to enabling young people to fulfil their potential and participate actively in society [Official Journal C 282/16 of 24 November 2007] Resolution of the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council of 20 November 2008, on the health and well-being of young people European Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy (EKCYP) country sheets: EN 35 EN

104 ANNEX 2 PRIORITIES AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CURRENT OPEN METHOD OF Participation COORDINATION IN THE FIELD OF YOUTH 4 Priorities 14 Common Objectives (1) Increase young people s participation in the civic life of their community (2) Increase young people s participation in the system of representative democracy (3) Provide greater support for various forms of learning to participate Information (1) Improving young people s access to information services (4) Increasing the provision of quality information (5) Increasing young people s participation in youth information, for example in the preparation and dissemination of information Volunteering (1) Develop voluntary activities with the aim of enhancing the transparency of the existing possibilities, enlarging their scope and improving their quality (6) Make it easier for young people to carry out voluntary activities by removing existing obstacles (7) Promote voluntary activities with a view to reinforcing young people s solidarity and engagement as citizens (8) Recognise the voluntary activities of young people with a view to acknowledging their personal skills and their engagement for society Greater understanding and knowledge of youth (1) Identify existing knowledge in priority areas of the youth field (participation, information and voluntary activities) and implement measures to collect, analyse and update this information and facilitate access to it (9) Determine existing knowledge in further priority areas of interest to the youth field (e.g. discrimination, education and training, employment, social inclusion and health) and implement measures to collect, analyse and update this knowledge and facilitate access to it (10) Ensure quality, comparability and relevance of knowledge in the youth field by using appropriate methods and tools (11) Facilitate and promote exchange, dialogue and networks to ensure the visibility of knowledge in the youth field and to anticipate future needs. EN 36 EN

105 ANNEX 3 - DESCRIPTION OF THE CURRENT COOPERATION FRAMEWORK Current European Youth Cooperation Framework SOCIAL AND OCCUPATIONAL INTEGRATION PRIORITIES Employment and social inclusion Education and Training Reconciliation of work and family life INSTRUMENTS ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP OF YOUNG PEOPLE PRIORITIES Participation Information Volunteering Better knowledge and understanding of youth INSTRUMENTS YOUTH IN OTHER POLICY FIELDS PRIORITIES Fight against racism and xenophobia and discriminations Health INSTRUMENTS European Youth Pact (Lisbon Strategy) Education and training OMC Social OMC Life Long Learning and Youth in Action Programmes European Social Fund Open Method of Coordination Youth Youth in Action Programme European Knowledge Centre on Youth Policy STRUCTURED DIALOGUE Mainstreaming Youth in Action Programme Other EU programmes EN 37 EN

106 ANNEX 4 - LIST OF RECENT REFERENCE DOCUMENTS "Towards an EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child", Communication from the Commission, , COM (2006) 367 final "Investing in youth: an empowerment strategy", Bureau of European Policy Advisers (BEPA), April 2007 "Promoting solidarity between the generations" Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, , COM (2007) 244 final "Together for Health: a Strategic Approach for the EU ", Commission White Paper, , COM (2007) 630 final "Opportunities, access and solidarity: towards a new social vision for 21st century Europe", Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, , COM(2007) 726 final "Child Poverty and Well-Being in the EU - Current status and way forward", Social Protection Committee Report, January "Renewed social agenda: Opportunities, access and solidarity in 21st century Europe" Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, , COM(2008) 412 final "A renewed commitment to social Europe: Reinforcing the Open Method of Coordination for Social Protection and Social Inclusion", Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, , COM (2008) 418 final "Migration & mobility: challenges and opportunities for EU education systems", Commission Green Paper, , COM (2008) 423 final "Improving competences for the 21st Century: An Agenda for European Cooperation on Schools", Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, , COM(2008) 425 final. Declaration on youth empowerment, European Parliament, 2 September "Acting now for a better Europe - Commission Legislative and Work Programme 2009", Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, , COM (2008) 712 "Demography Report 2008: Meeting Social Needs in an Ageing Society", Commission Staff Working Document, November 2008, SEC (2008) 2911 "An updated strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training" Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, 16 December 2008, COM (2008) 865 EN 38 EN

107 "New skills for new jobs - Anticipating and matching labour market and skills needs" Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, 16 December 2008, COM (2008) 868 EN 39 EN

108 ANNEX 5 - GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE RESULTS OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION 1. Background of the public consultation On 22 September 2008 the Commission launched a two-month online public consultation in the youth field, called "Strategic choices for young Europeans - An EU-wide public consultation on the future of youth policy". The aim of the consultation was to evaluate what the European cooperation on youth policy has achieved since its beginning in the year 2000 and propose new objectives for the decade to come. The idea of this exercise was to provide the possibility to different stakeholders (organisations, public authorities, individuals) from all Member States as well as from Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Turkey, Croatia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to give their opinion on the priorities and the challenges for the future of the European youth policy. The Commission sought answers on how EU youth policy should develop in the coming years and what proposals could be made to EU member countries. 2. Questionnaire The questions were grouped in five major thematic blocs: Profile of the respondents; Addressing key challenges for young people in Europe; Identifying policy priorities for European Union cooperation; Specific questions on: education, employment, social issues, citizenship; Youth and the European Union Only the answers to the closed questions (which were 18 out of 20) have been examined for this note. 3. Statistics and profile of the respondents In the period 22 September until 25 November 2008 a total of 5426 responses were received, out of which the majority (88.6%) came from individual persons not representing any type of organisation or public body. This may be perceived as a very positive outcome indicating that the consultations may have reached groups of people which are not professionally involved in the youth field and normally do not participate in social polls in this area. 11.4% of the responses received (over 600) were generated on behalf of different organisations. Many of these entities were small organisations, which are difficult to reach by other methods of consultations. Their participation is a positive phenomenon showing their interest in the area. The individual respondents were predominantly young people of up to 30 years (61.4%), still studying (43.1% as to 32.9% working and 12.7% other), female (54.7% as to 33.9% of men). The nationals which were the most involved and provided most input in the online consultations originated from: Italy (13 %), Portugal (11.6%), Germany (8.1%), France (7.5%), Romania (6.7%), Poland (6%) and Spain (5.9%). All Member States are represented. Almost half of the individual query participants are professionally involved with young people on a regular basis (48%, that is to say around 2000 persons), most of all by means of youth organisations (38.2%), non-governmental organisations (29.8%) or a public authority (17%). EN 40 EN

109 4. Addressing key challenges for young people in Europe 75.9% of all the answers provided in the public consultation indicated youth unemployment as the prime concern and challenge for young people in Europe in the coming decade. Reform of education systems emerged as the second key priority which will have most direct impact on young people's lives (70.4% of answers). Over half of the respondents indicated environment and sustainable development as a priority (62.7%). Social integration and exclusion came on fourth place (57.9%). Still over half of the consultation participants marked active participation in society as the most important subject for the coming years. Just as little bit less important were the migration/multi-ethnic/multireligious issues, youth violence, and discrimination racism - xenophobia. Slightly less popular challenges indicated by the query participants concerned: work/life balance (46%), poverty (46.1%) and demographic changes as falling birth rate and aging population (43.6%). Terms like discrimination against women and domestic violence are considered as key challenges in this particular context by only around 19% of the respondents. 5. Identifying policy priorities for European Union cooperation Taking into account the identified challenges for young people in Europe the participants of the public consultation were asked to indicate what policies should the European Union focus on. Priority was given to helping young people play a more active role in the society (66.1% respondents), followed by helping young people get a job (62.1% votes). A lot of emphasis was also placed on providing better standards of life for the youth. Developing opportunities for young people to live, work and travel throughout Europe was marked by 61.6 % of people. The general idea is that providing higher standards of life is crucial and it can be done by focusing on employment, facilitating travelling, participation in the society, supporting youth organisations and youth leaders, promoting work and life balance, improving young people's health and well-being. 6. Specific questions on education, employment, social issues, citizenship 6.1. Education 67% of the queried were not satisfied with the school or higher education system in their country of residence. 47.7% found it the EU's and its member countries' competence to reform the official education systems. In general terms, people tended to think that it was the EU countries which should be responsible for the educational reform (35.8%) rather than the EU (only 10.2%). In the opinion of 56.4% of the respondents, closer cooperation with the formal education system is the key to ensuring that non-formal learning is properly recognised. 52.1% found it equally important to engage in the spreading of the knowledge of non-formal learning to employers and better promotion at European level (49.8%). The learning happening in youth organisations could be better appreciated if the employers took it into account more (36.7% of votes) and schools gave credits for the learning in youth organisations (31.6%) Employment With reference to the employment three top actions to be undertaken in order to prepare young people for finding work were identified: giving more opportunities for internships and training on the job (65.8%), closer partnerships between schools and stakeholders in the EN 41 EN

110 labour market (65.5%) and better matching between learning outcomes and the labour market (49.8%) Social issues Even though 60.3% of the queried answered that social integration of young people facing difficulties such as poverty, educational problems, unemployment should be considered as priority, they underline that the European cooperation should rather focus on all young people. Moreover, a greater interconnection between different policy fields relevant to youth is said to be necessary (49.2%), especially with the involvement of young people in the policy making (41.1%). Financial support is recognised to be one of the most important factors supporting the youth organisations, youth workers and leaders (51.2%), followed by more exchanges of good practices and better recognition of the role of youth workers and leaders (45 % and 39.3% respectively). Apart from employment and education the following issues have also been identified as problematic: alcohol and drug abuse (77.7%), social exclusion (68.9%) and stress and psychological disorders (68.2%). A high position of the last problem relating to health (which was placed even before the "poverty" factor, which usually is indicated as one of the main concerns) may be quite worrying. This is due to the fact that it affects all youth and not only young people from less privileged socio-economical backgrounds. Awareness raising campaigns were indicated as one of the most important tools to deal with discrimination (53%). Much lower attention was given to stronger laws (24.3%) Citizenship As a general rule the respondents perceive that the young people lack ways to make their voice heard in the society. However, the tendency is that at the European level the situation is not good but there are more and more opportunities to do so. On national level the situation is much worse and also the situation is not improving so fast. The best ways to speak up may be found on local and regional level. There, the young seem to have growing opportunities to play an influential role. The five most effective methods for young people to make their voices heard by policy makers were in the opinion of the consultation participants: joining and being active in political parties, youth organisations, other NGOs or trade unions (68.2%), participating in debates with policy makers (65.6%) and voting in the elections (44.3%). The youth policies in the opinion of the consultation respondents should recognise the prominent role of young people in social challenges (58.9%), democratic participation (49.9%) and building the EU (43.1%). Volunteering abroad is very much dependent on knowing where to find more information about the opportunities in other countries (59.7%), knowing that the experience will be recognised and knowing the quality of the volunteering experience (having recommendation from others or having it certified). 7. Youth and the European Union In the last closed questions respondents were asked to select the terms that they have heard of before in the context of the European Union's work in the field of youth. The term with which most of the participants were familiarised with was the European Voluntary Service (53.1%) and the Youth exchanges in the framework of the Youth in Action Programme (51.5%). 44.2% of the people have heard of the Europass and of the Life-long learning strategy. The least known tool was the European Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy (only 9.7%). EN 42 EN

111 8. How the consultation was taken into account The problem definition, the general objectives and the chosen policy option reflect the outcomes of the various consultations. As regards the public consultation, this is particularly the case for the challenges identified by respondents and the priorities highlighted as key issues to be tackled by the European Union. EN 43 EN

112 EUROOPAN UNIONIN NEUVOSTO Bryssel, 28. huhtikuuta 2009 (04.05) (OR. en) 9008/09 ADD 2 JEUN 25 EDUC 72 SOC 274 SAATE Lähettäjä: Euroopan komission pääsihteerin puolesta Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, johtaja Saapunut: 28. huhtikuuta 2009 Vastaanottaja: Javier SOLANA, pääsihteeri, korkea edustaja Asia: KOMISSION YKSIKÖIDEN VALMISTELUASIAKIRJA Oheisasiakirja KOMISSION NEUVOSTOLLE, EUROOPAN PARLAMENTILLE, EUROOPAN TALOUS- JA SOSIAALIKOMITEALLE SEKÄ ALUEIDEN KOMITEALLE ANTAMAAN TIEDONANTOON EU:n nuorisostrategia Satsataan nuorten vaikutusmahdollisuuksiin Uudistetulla avoimella koordinointimenetelmällä kiinni nuorison haasteisiin ja mahdollisuuksiin Tiivistelmä vaikutusten arvioinnista Valtuuskunnille toimitetaan oheisena komission asiakirja SEK(2009) 546. Liite: SEK(2009) /09 ADD 2 si DGI - 2B FI

113 EUROOPAN YHTEISÖJEN KOMISSIO Bryssel SEK(2009) 546 KOMISSION YKSIKÖIDEN VALMISTELUASIAKIRJA Oheisasiakirja KOMISSION NEUVOSTOLLE, EUROOPAN PARLAMENTILLE, EUROOPAN TALOUS- JA SOSIAALIKOMITEALLE SEKÄ ALUEIDEN KOMITEALLE ANTAMAAN TIEDONANTOON EU:n nuorisostrategia Satsataan nuorten vaikutusmahdollisuuksiin Uudistetulla avoimella koordinointimenetelmällä kiinni nuorison haasteisiin ja mahdollisuuksiin Tiivistelmä vaikutusten arvioinnista {COM(2009) 200} {SEC(2009) 545} {SEC(2009) 548} {SEC(2009) 549} FI 1 FI

114 TIIVISTELMÄ EU:N NUORISOSTRATEGIAN VAIKUTUSTEN ARVIOINNISTA Tämä vaikutustenarviointi liittyy tiedonantoon EU:n nuorisostrategia: Satsauksin voimaa nuorille. Ongelman määrittely Vuonna 2002 luotiin puitteet nuorisoon liittyvälle Euroopan tason yhteistyölle ( nuorisoalan yhteistyöpuitteet ). Yhteistyössä hyödynnetään avointa koordinointimenetelmää, jossa keskitytään nuorten aktiiviseen kansalaisuuteen. Yhteistyöpuitteita täydennettiin vuonna 2005 tehdyllä Euroopan nuorisosopimuksella, joka osana Lissabonin strategiaa tavoittelee nuorten sosiaalista ja ammatillista integroitumista. Yhteistyöpuitteissa on vaiheittain kehitetty muitakin osatekijöitä, kuten nuorisoasioiden ottamista huomioon kaikessa toiminnassa, tiedonhankintavälineitä sekä nuorten kanssa käytävää jäsenneltyä vuoropuhelua ja vertaisoppimista. Nuorisoalan avoimen koordinointimenetelmän nykyinen kierros päättyy vuonna 2009, ja jo aikaa sitten päätettiin, että silloin asiaa arvioidaan ja tarkastellaan uudelleen. Tässä yhteydessä on tärkeää kartoittaa kaikki nuorten nyt ja tulevina vuosina kohtaamat haasteet, olipa kyse heihin vaikuttavista koko Euroopan laajuisista tekijöistä tai heidän tilanteeseensa suoraan vaikuttavista ongelmista. Näiden haasteiden vuoksi Euroopan nuorilta puuttuu mahdollisuuksia: liian moni nuori kärsii edelleen työttömyydestä, köyhyydestä ja heikosta koulutuksesta. Heikkojen koulutus- ja työmahdollisuuksien lisäksi nuorilla eurooppalaisilla on vaikeuksia osallistua sosiaaliseen ja kansalaistoimintaan. He saattavat joutua kamppailemaan syrjäytymisen ja terveysongelmien kanssa. Nuoret voivat myös jäädä tai jättäytyä syrjään yhteiskunnan toiminnasta ja tuntea itsensä varsin eristetyiksi, kun yhteenkuuluvuus ja kontaktit heikkenevät. Nykyisillä toimintapuitteilla ei ole voitu ratkaista kaikkia ongelmia, jos kohta nuorisoalan yhteistyöpuitteitten tulokset onkin arvioitu yleisesti myönteisiksi. EU:n nuorisoalan yhteistyöpuitteet ovat saaneet jäsenvaltiot laatimaan nuorisoon liittyvää lainsäädäntöä, ja niistä on ollut monille maille apua kansallisten strategioiden kehittämisessä. Yhteistyöpuitteet ovat parantaneet nuorison ja nuorisopolitiikan näkyvyyttä niin kansallisesti kuin EU:nkin tasolla. Myös puitteitten merkitystä toimintamallien vaihtamisen ja keskustelun foorumina on korostettu moneen otteeseen. Arviointijärjestelyt eivät kuitenkaan ole riittävän selkeitä ja johdonmukaisia, eikä niillä ole päästy riittäviin tuloksiin tietyillä osa-alueilla, joista yksi on Euroopan nuorisosopimus. Nuorten kanssa käytävää jäsenneltyä vuoropuhelua on muokattava, ja siitä on tehtävä kattavampi. Nuorisopolitiikan monialainen luonne olisi lisäksi tunnustettava paremmin sekä EU:n tasolla että kansallisesti. Toissijaisuuskysymysten analyysi Päävastuu haasteiden edellyttämistä politiikan muutoksista on jäsenvaltioilla. Kaikki seuraavassa esitettävät, analysoitavaksi otetut vaihtoehdot ovat toissijaisuusperiaatteen mukaisia. Ne ovat myös oikeasuhteisia ja jättävät yhteistyöhön sovellettavien yhteisten tavoitteitten ja periaatteitten toteuttamisen jäsenvaltioille ja niiden alueellisille elimille. EU:n tasolla tarvitaan kuitenkin ennakoivampaa otetta jäsenvaltioiden yhteistyön tueksi. Pelkästään jäsenvaltion toimin ei päästä samoihin tuloksiin kuin EU:n tason yhteistyöllä pyrittäessä parantamaan nuorten ja nuorisostrategian näkyvyyttä, määrittelemään yhteisiä tavoitteita, oppimaan toisilta, vaihtamaan toimintamalleja ja kokemuksia, hyödyntämään Euroopan laajuisia tietoja jne. FI 2 FI

115 Yhteistyöpuitteita on siksi tarkistettava siten, että niissä otetaan paremmin huomioon nuorten nykyiset ja tulevat tarpeet. EU:n toimien tavoitteet Uudistetuille nuorisoalan yhteistyöpuitteille on edellä kuvattujen haasteiden perusteella määritelty seuraavassa esitettävät tavoitteet. Jotta voitaisiin parantaa Euroopan nuorten hyvinvointia seuraavan vuosikymmenen aikana, yleisenä tavoitteena on tarjota nuorille enemmän mahdollisuuksia koulutukseen ja työntekoon, parantaa kaikkien nuorten mahdollisuuksia osallistua täysipainoisesti yhteiskunnan toimintaan sekä edistää yhteiskunnan ja nuorison välistä solidaarisuutta (etenkin osallistamisen, vapaaehtoistyön ja muuhun maailmaan kohdistettavien toimien kautta). Ehdotettujen Euroopan nuorisoalan yhteistyöpuitteitten erityisinä tavoitteina on 1) kehittää monialainen tapa lähestyä nuoriin vaikuttavia kysymyksiä, 2) tehostaa puitteitten toimintaa ja 3) saada nuorisojärjestöt ja nuoret mukaan toimintaan. Toiminnallisena tavoitteena on kehittää politiikanalojen välisen koordinoinnin järjestelyjä, nuorten kanssa käytävää jäsenneltyä vuoropuhelua, yhteistyön eri välineiden käyttöä sekä tietoon perustuvaa poliittista päätöksentekoa. Toimintavaihtoehdot Tarkemmin tarkasteltaviksi otettiin seuraavat neljä toimintavaihtoehtoa: 1 Vaihtoehto 1: nykytilanteen säilyttäminen (nykyisten puitteitten käyttöä jatkettaisiin sellaisenaan, eivätkä välineet tai tavoitteet muuttuisi) Vaihtoehto 2: tehostettu nuorisoalan avoin koordinointimenetelmä (tehostetaan yhteistyön välineitä mutta säilytetään painopiste aktiivisessa kansalaisuudessa ja muutamissa toimissa, joilla pyritään nuorisoasioiden huomioimiseen kaikessa toiminnassa) Vaihtoehto 3: pitemmälle kehitetty monialainen lähestymistapa (säilytetään entiset avoimen koordinointimenetelmän välineet ja perustetaan lisäksi menettely vahvasti nuorisoon liittyvien politiikanalojen välistä koordinointia varten) Vaihtoehto 4: yleisstrategia (kehitetään yhtä aikaa avoimen koordinointimenetelmän välineitä ja monialaista lähestymistapaa synergiaetujen hyödyntämiseksi). Vaikutusten arviointi Kun tarkastellaan kaikkien vaihtoehtojen mahdollisia laadullisia vaikutuksia, jotka liittyvät sosiaalisiin, taloudellisiin, ympäristö- ja ihmisoikeuskysymyksiin, vaikuttaisi siltä, ettei millään vaihtoehdolla olisi kielteisiä vaikutuksia. Vaihtoehdon 1 myönteiset vaikutukset näihin seikkoihin jäisivät pienemmiksi kuin toisten. Vaihtoehdot 3 ja 4 menisivät sosiaalisilta ja taloudellisilta vaikutuksiltaan muiden edelle. Vaihtoehtojen vertailu Kun vertaillaan vaihtoehtojen vaikutuksia asetettuihin tavoitteisiin ja niiden toteutettavuutta, käy ilmi, että vaikka kaikki niistä ovat toteuttamiskelpoisia, vaihtoehdon 4 kyky puuttua yksilöityihin haasteisiin ja saavuttaa tavoitteet nostaa sen muiden edelle. Vaihtoehto 1 ei 1 Kolmea muutakin vaihtoehtoa harkittiin, mutta ne jätettiin perusteellisemman tarkastelun ulkopuolelle. Vaihtoehdot olivat yhteistyön lopettaminen, erityisen lähestymistavan omaksuminen ja sitovampien välineiden kehittäminen (tarkemmin kohdassa 4.2). FI 3 FI

116 muuttaisi nykyistä tilannetta tavoitteiden suhteen, ja vaihtoehdot 2 ja 3 toisivat siihen vain osittaista parannusta. Seuranta ja arviointi Nuorisoalan yhteistyöpuitteitten seurannassa ja arvioinnissa käytettäisiin pääasiassa kolmen vuoden välein laadittavia yhteisiä edistymisraportteja sekä käytössä olevien indikaattorien ja vertailuarvojen muodostamaa tulostaulua. Seurantaa tehostaisi, jos sidosryhmät otettaisiin siihen entistä vahvemmin mukaan. Puitteisiin ehdotettaisiin säännöllisesti parannuksia. FI 4 FI

117 EUROPEISKA UNIONENS RÅD Bryssel den 28 april 2009 (4.5) (OR. en) 9008/09 ADD 2 JEUN 25 EDUC 72 SOC 274 FÖLJENOT från: Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, direktör, för Europeiska kommissionens generalsekreterare mottagen den: 28 april 2009 till: Javier SOLANA, generalsekreterare/hög representant Ärende: ARBETSDOKUMENT FRÅN KOMMISSIONENS AVDELNINGAR som åtföljer MEDDELANDET FRÅN KOMMISSIONEN TILL RÅDET, EUROPAPARLAMENTET, EUROPEISKA EKONOMISKA OCH SOCIALA KOMMITTÉN SAMT REGIONKOMMITTÉN En EU-strategi för ungdomar Satsa på ungdomars egna möjligheter En förnyad öppen samordningsmetod för ungdomsfrågor Sammanfattning av konsekvensanalysen För delegationerna bifogas kommissionens dokument SEK(2009) 546. Bilaga: SEK(2009) /09 ADD 2 /ss DG I - 2B SV

118 EUROPEISKA GEMENSKAPERNAS KOMMISSION Bryssel den SEK(2009) 546 ARBETSDOKUMENT FRÅN KOMMISSIONENS AVDELNINGAR som åtföljer MEDDELANDET FRÅN KOMMISSIONEN TILL RÅDET, EUROPAPARLAMENTET, EUROPEISKA EKONOMISKA OCH SOCIALA KOMMITTÉN SAMT REGIONKOMMITTÉN En EU-strategi för ungdomar Satsa på ungdomars egna möjligheter En förnyad öppen samordningsmetod för ungdomsfrågor Sammanfattning av konsekvensanalysen {COM(2009) 200} {SEC(2009) 545} {SEC(2009) 548} {SEC(2009) 549} SV 1 SV

119 SAMMANFATTNING AV KONSEKVENSANALYSEN AV EN EU-STRATEGI PÅ UNGDOMSOMRÅDET Denna konsekvensanalys åtföljer meddelandet om en EU-strategi på ungdomsområdet: Satsa på ungdomars egna möjligheter. Problemformulering I juni 2002 fastställdes en ram för europeiskt samarbete på ungdomsområdet (nedan kallad ramen för samarbete på ungdomsområdet). Den gick ut på en öppen samordningsmetod som var inriktad på ungdomars aktiva medborgarskap och den kompletterades år 2005 med den europeiska pakten för ungdomsfrågor som gällde ungdomars integration i samhället och i arbetslivet inom ramen för Lissabonstrategin. Andra inslag har successivt utarbetats inom denna ram, exempelvis integreringsinsatser, verktyg för kunskapsförvärvande samt en strukturerad dialog med ungdomar och lärande av varandra. Den aktuella omgången av den öppna samordningsmetoden för ungdomsfrågor löper ut i slutet av 2009, och det beslutades för länge sedan att en utvärdering och översyn skulle genomföras i år. I det sammanhanget är det viktigt att kartlägga alla de utmaningar som unga människor står inför idag och inom den närmaste framtiden, både sådana som gäller hela Europa och som påverkar deras situation, och problem som berör ungdomarna direkt. Dessa utmaningar har lett till att ungdomar i Europa saknar en hel del möjligheter. Alltför många drabbas fortfarande av arbetslöshet, fattigdom och dålig utbildning. I samband med denna brist på arbets- och utbildningsmöjligheter har unga européer också svårt att hävda sig i samhället, de måste kanske kämpa mot utslagning eller lider av hälsoproblem. De kanske också är utestängda från deltagande i samhällslivet, eller så stänger de sig själva ute och blir helt isolerade på grund av försvagande solidaritetsband. Inom den aktuella ramen har inte alla dessa utmaningar kunnat behandlas. Den övergripande utvärderingen av resultaten av ramen för ungdomssamarbete har dock varit allmänt positiv. Ramen för EU-samarbete på ungdomsområdet har varit en inspirationskälla till nationell lagstiftning som berör ungdomar och den har hjälpt många medlemsstater att utarbeta nationella strategier. Den har gjort ungdomsfrågor och ungdomspolitik på nationell och europeisk nivå synligare. Man har också ofta betonat att samarbetsramen utgjort en plattform för utbyte av rutiner och för dialog. Emellertid är inte ramen tillräcklig klar och konsekvent, och ger inte tillfredsställande resultat på somliga områden, som den europeiska pakten för ungdomsfrågor. Den strukturerade dialogen med ungdomar måste ses över och breddas, och ungdomspolitikens sektorsövergripande natur måste få mer erkännande på europeisk och nationell nivå. Analys av subsidiariteten Det är medlemsstaterna som har huvudansvaret för att införa de ändringar i politiken som behövs för att ta itu med dessa utmaningar. I alla alternativ som analyserats och som presenteras nedan tas hänsyn till subsidiaritetsprincipen. De är dessutom proportionerliga och överlämnar genomförandet av de gemensamma målen och principerna för samarbetet till medlemsstaterna eller deras organ på lägre nivå. Det behövs dock mer föregripande verksamhet på EU-nivå för att stödja samarbetet mellan medlemsstaterna. Insatser av en enda medlemsstat skulle inte uppnå samma resultat som EUsamarbetet för att göra ungdomsfrågor och ungdomsstrategier mer synliga och för att man kan kunna fastställa gemensamma mål, lära av varandra, utbyta bra lösningar och erfarenheter, få tillgång till uppgifter för hela Europa osv. SV 2 SV

120 Därför måste samarbetsramen ses över för att man bättre ska kunna beakta ungdomars aktuella och kommande behov. Syftet med EU:s initiativ Med utgångspunkt i dessa utmaningar har följande mål fastställts för en förnyad samarbetsram på ungdomsområdet. För att förbättra ungdomarnas situation i Europa under det kommande årtiondet är de allmänna målen att skapa fler möjligheter för ungdomar inom utbildning och arbetsliv, förbättra möjligheterna för alla ungdomar att delta i samhällslivet och främja solidaritet mellan samhället och ungdomarna (särskilt genom integrering, volontärarbete och insatser till förmån för resten av världen). De särskilda målen i den föreslagna europeiska samarbetsramen på ungdomsområdet syftar till att utveckla följande: 1) Ett övergripande synsätt i ungdomsfrågor, 2) en effektivare ram samt 3) en mobilisering av ungdomsorganisationer och ungdomar. De operativa målen är utarbetande av samarbetsmekanismer mellan politiska åtgärder, en strukturerad dialog med ungdomar, bättre användning av samarbetsverktygen och en utformning av politik på solid faktagrund. Val av åtgärder Fyra möjligheter till åtgärder har undersökts ingående, nämligen 1 : - Alternativ 1: status quo (den aktuella ramen förlängs i nuvarande skick, och skulle alltså fortsätta med samma verktyg och mål). - Alternativ 2: en förstärkt öppen samordningsmetod på ungdomsområdet (förstärkta instrument för samarbete alltmedan man behåller fokus på aktivt medborgarskap och några insatser för integrering). - Alternativ 3: ett utvecklat sektorsövergripande tillvägagångssätt (man behåller samma instrument för den öppna samordningsmetoden men inrättar en samordningsmekanism för de politiska åtgärder som har tydlig koppling till ungdomar). - Alternativ 4: en övergripande strategi (man utvecklar samtidigt verktygen för den öppna samordningsmetoden och det sektorsövergripande tillvägagångssättet för att utnyttja synergieffekterna i bägge delarna). Konsekvensbedömning Bedömningen av potentiella kvalitativa effekter på samhälle, ekonomi, miljö och mänskliga rättigheter tyder på att ingen av de analyserade möjligheterna skulle innebära negativa effekter. Alternativ 1 skulle ha en mer begränsad positiv effekt. Alternativ 3 och 4 skulle få större sociala och ekonomiska effekter. Jämförelse mellan alternativen Av en jämförelse mellan alternativen vad gäller inverkan på målen och genomförbarhet framgår att även om alla alternativen är genomförbara är det fjärde alternativet att föredra, eftersom man med den kan angripa utmaningarna och uppnå målen. Det första alternativet 1 Ytterliga tre alternativ övervägdes men togs inte med i den ingående analysen: att avsluta samarbetet, att anta ett särskilt tillvägagångssätt eller att utarbeta en rad mer bindande åtgärder (se punkt 4.2. för ytterligare uppgifter). SV 3 SV

121 skulle inte innebära någon förbättring för det nuvarande läget vad gäller målen, medan möjlighet 2 och 3 skulle innebära endast en partiell förbättring. Övervaknig och utvärdering Mekanismerna för övervakning och utvärdering av genomförandet av samarbetsramen på ungdomsområdet bör huvudsakligen vara genomensamma lägesrapporter vart tredje år, och en resultattavla med befintliga indikatorer och riktmärken. Intressenter bör också engageras i övervakningen. Förslag till förbättring av ramen bör läggas fram regelbundet. SV 4 SV

122 COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION Brussels, 28 April /09 ADD 3 COVER NOTE from: JEUN 25 EDUC 72 SOC 274 Secretary-General of the European Commission, signed by Mr Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, Director date of receipt: 28 April 2009 to: Mr Javier SOLANA, Secretary-General/High Representative Subject: COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT accompanying document to the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS - An EU Strategy for Youth Investing and Empowering - A renewed open method of coordination to address youth challenges and opportunities Analysis of national reports from the Member States of the European Union concerning the implementation of the common objectives for a greater understanding and knowledge of youth Delegations will find attached Commission document SEC(2009) 548. Encl.: SEC(2009) /09 ADD 3 1 DGI - 2 B EN

123 COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, SEC(2009) 548 COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT accompanying document to the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS An EU Strategy for Youth Investing and Empowering A renewed open method of coordination to address youth challenges and opportunities Analysis of national reports from the Member States of the European Union concerning the implementation of the common objectives for a greater understanding and knowledge of youth {COM(2009) 200} {SEC(2009) 545} {SEC(2009) 546} {SEC(2009) 549} EN EN

124 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction Background Common objectives Objective 1: Identify - including at local and regional level - existing knowledge in priority areas of the youth field and implement measures to supplement, update and facilitate access to it Objective 2: In a second stage identify - including at local and regional level - existing knowledge in further priority areas of interest to the youth field and implement measures to supplement, update and facilitate access to it Objective 3: Ensure quality, comparability and relevance of knowledge in the youth field by using appropriate methods and tools Objective 4: Facilitate and promote exchange, dialogue and networks to ensure visibility of knowledge in the youth field and anticipate future needs Consultation of young people Difficulties/Suggestions Conclusions and proposals for the future of evidence-based policy-making EN 2 EN

125 1. INTRODUCTION On 15 November 2004, the Council adopted common objectives for greater understanding and knowledge of youth 1. In this Resolution the Member States committed themselves to report on national contributions to the implementation of these common objectives by the end of These national reports allow the Commission to evaluate the progress made by the Member States. The Commission has prepared this synthesis report, which is one of the documents complementing the Commission Communication "Youth: Investing and Empowering." At the request of the Member States, the Commission proposed a common structure for the national reports, which was endorsed by all parties, but the reports differ from one country to another. Due to the differences between the various contributions, a detailed comparative approach was not possible. This report describes the state of implementation of the four common objectives concerning greater understanding and knowledge of young people, and presents a selection of good practices. The report finishes by drawing conclusions on progress on and further development of EU initiatives in the field. Sometimes references to individual Member States are made in the text: these references are to be understood as examples, not as an attempt to rank or compare progress. They may not include all Member States having similar practices. At the time of closing this document 24 Member States have sent in their reports. Countries from the European Economic Area could contribute on a voluntary basis. Iceland decided to take part in this exercise Background One of the aims of the White Paper A new Impetus for European Youth 2 was to improve public awareness of young people s concerns. It recognises the central importance of knowledge about and understanding of youth and the realities of young people for informed policy making. The Council Resolution of 2004 recognised that a knowledge-based approach to policy making is particularly valuable in the youth field, where the situation of the younger generation in Europe is evolving rapidly, and it identified the following general aims: facilitating the compilation of studies on youth matters and the networking of research structures, considering what further work might be necessary to support current priorities and agreeing on relevant topics for the future as well as on common objectives. 1 2 Resolution of the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council on common objectives for a greater understanding and knowledge of youth, 13997/04 of 15 November 2004 COM(2001) 681 final of 21 November 2001 EN 3 EN

126 2. COMMON OBJECTIVES 2.1. Objective 1: Identify - including at local and regional level - existing knowledge in priority areas of the youth field and implement measures to supplement, update and facilitate access to it Action lines Seven action lines were agreed for the implementation of this objective, four of which address the national, regional and local levels and three the European level. Those referring to the national, regional and local levels concern the identification and organisation of existing knowledge in the youth field for participation, information and voluntary activities; the augmentation and regular update of knowledge on such themes, (also taking into consideration practical knowledge), the facilitation of access to knowledge on such themes and information on the corresponding actors, as well as activities to ensure the userfriendliness of relevant information. The European level action lines encourage making the best use of available and relevant instruments such as current and future programmes in the youth field, Eurobarometer, Eurostat and the current and future framework research programmes, the dissemination of information collected to interested actors, and making the best use of any instrument being developed by the Commission in co-operation with the Council of Europe. Measures taken by Member States National strategy and policy on youth related information and knowledge There is a significant variety among the Member States in relation to the presence or absence of a legal basis, specific strategies, policies and systems to encourage activities and structures working for better understanding and knowledge of young people. Few countries have robust policies and structures in place. One has even explicit support of data obtainment written into its Constitution. Two have recently introduced new legal acts consolidating the statutory basis of youth policy, and thus creating a more systematic approach to youth policy including data collection and knowledge provision. Where such robust policies and structures exist, results are better in terms of increased cooperation between those who provide knowledge and data. They also allow for a better focus on priority areas. A stronger cross-sectoral approach can also be noted. The fact that research on young people falls under the remit of a number of areas is also a challenge, alongside with different approaches applied by different governmental bodies and institutions. This makes it difficult to identify the full range of research outputs. It appears that while data and research on youth are available in all countries, coordination and a systematic collection are lacking in most. In addition there often persist also difficulties between the different levels (local, regional, national). Institutional ownership and structures in the field of youth research and data collection, updating, systematisation and dissemination EN 4 EN

127 The national reports present a significant variety among the Member States in relation to the set of institutions engaged in knowledge generation on youth related issues. Only in few cases there is evidence of a central co-ordination. A group of countries have one single body in charge of youth research, such as specifically appointed specialised academic or other bodies that are responsible for undertaking and coordinating youth research and data collection, sometimes in cooperation with other stakeholders. In other countries there is a central coordination with a significant part of youth research and data being produced by universities, specialist research bodies and networks, government agencies, national statistics offices, advisory councils etc. One country established an observatory on young people. Sometimes the coordination body's remit includes the collection, compilation and processing of data and information on young people, as well as analyses and publication of data, communication of results and support of decision making. There are also countries where various governmental institutions, NGOs and research organisations are engaged in producing youth related research and data collection. A few countries are rather still at the beginning of the process, with a regular data collection and reporting on youth just starting. Existing knowledge in priority areas of youth policy (including local and regional): participation, information and voluntary activities The information available in the national reports does not allow getting a comprehensive picture of the existing knowledge on the EU priorities of participation, information and voluntary activities of young people. A general observation is that existing knowledge in the Member States does not necessarily seem to be organised by priority areas, as proposed by the common objectives and action lines. Ad hoc reporting, mainly as a contribution to EU-wide studies and a few national studies, seems to be typical for a number of countries. Specific Member State actions and measures on information organisation and access to knowledge The range of actions and measures used by the Member States includes the development of national registers, data bases, information systems, on line portals accompanied by interactive and networking tools, information and counselling, technical assistance to the national Eurodesk offices, inventories of available research, developing online reference points and special reports that also include lists of relevant institutions and websites as well as available EU tools, such as the European Youth Portal. National registers and databases are developed to organise and make available knowledge about existing volunteering and youth organisations, with others providing online networking possibilities and information about researchers working on youth issues. Web-based information systems assembling research, statistical and up-to-date information about youth, including interactive tools, are being developed in some countries. There are examples where the inter-ministerial young people s portal was created as a direct result of the adoption of the common EU objectives on youth policy. New Member States report about the recent opening of new online portals with information on events, youth policy EN 5 EN

128 matters, projects, data bases of youth organisations and youth affair coordinators and interactive tools. One country is developing a frame of reference on youth research, building an inventory of existing research, facilitating access to existing materials and developing new research topics. Measures at European level The Commission aimed at making the best use of available and relevant instruments. Several Eurobarometers on youth were launched, the most recent one in It gave a good overview of young people's interests, views and behaviours in a series of areas relevant to them. Cooperation with Eurostat proved to be fruitful throughout the years, and in particular when preparing the first European Youth Report, that is also an annex to the Communication "Youth: Investing and Empowering". In cooperation with the Council of Europe the Commission created the European Knowledge Centre (EKCYP) to: - transfer knowledge from research to policy and practice; - provide country information on youth policy and monitor youth policy; - follow up on the implementation of the common objectives under the OMC; - enhance exchange between researchers, policy makers and practitioners. Its information derives from national correspondents who provide data and information on their countries based on questionnaires. EKCYP is financially supported by the Youth in Action Programme. EKCYP was launched in June 2005 under Luxembourg's EU Presidency. It was presented to the Youth Ministers at a conference in Budapest in September Following its launch, EKCYP entered into a pilot phase that was followed by a number of improvements. Nevertheless, EKCYP does not yet respond to all expectations. The main problems are incomplete or not-up-to date country information; need for a more comprehensive overview of youth research; lack of comparative research and a quite varying degree of availability of correspondents from different Member States. Significant progress has been made in Conclusions Member States have taken a variety of different approaches to identifying, augmenting, updating and providing access to information on youth. Policy and institutional frameworks and structures are in place or are being developed in many countries, and a significant amount of valuable research on youth exists. Reporting systems show wide variations from regular national reports to ad hoc activities focused around EU reporting cycles. The EU reporting requirement acted as a stimulus encouraging countries to engage in youth research and to develop and organise existing knowledge around the agreed priorities. However, in many countries work remains to be done to achieve synergies across the various policy areas of relevance to youth. It would also be important to promote, stimulate and facilitate wider co-ordination and deeper co-operation between research actors and to strengthen research networks. 3 "Looking Behind the Figures: The main results of the Eurobarometer 2007 survey on youth", Office of Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxemburg, 2007, ISBN EN 6 EN

129 Significant challenges also remain in terms of achieving a common European understanding of descriptors and definitions, which would allow trans-national comparative analysis. EN 7 EN

130 Good practice examples Finland has made significant progress in terms of achieving closer cooperation between the formerly unconnected domains of children, family and youth policy research and development. The stress on horizontal youth policy in the Youth Pact in particular stimulates increasing research cooperation between youth and other social policies. Youth research is coordinated by the Youth Research Society. The Youth Research Network, the Advisory Council for Youth Affairs, the National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES) and Statistics Finland cooperate in producing youth data and research. In France the National Institute of Young People and Education (INJEP) promotes research in the field of young people and education, produces regular reviews containing quantitative and qualitative information. INJEP also hosts the National Observatory on Young People (ONJ), which was created in 2008 and has a remit to collect, compile and process data and information on young people, analyse and publish data, communicate results and support decision making. In Flanders in Belgium JOP (Youth Research Platform) plays a central role. Its aim is to develop a frame of reference for youth research in Flanders, prepare an inventory of existing research, facilitate access to existing materials, and develop new research areas. Sweden is in the process of developing an increasingly cross-sectoral youth policy and youth research approach. Aspects of youth policy are broadly mainstreamed across the full range of national policies, and the collection, analysis and dissemination of knowledge on the living conditions of young people is fundamental to national policies on youth. Approximately fifteen government agencies provide data on 80 quality of life indicators for young people in their annual reports. These reports are sent to the National Board for Youth Affairs, which carries out annual in-depth thematic analyses of one or more priority areas. In the Netherlands, Youth Monitor, introduced in 2007, is the main source of statistical information. An initiative of the Ministry for Youth and Families, in collaboration with other ministries and Dutch municipalities, Youth Monitor provides information on the situation of children and young people concerning important policy areas such as health, diversity, justice, lifestyles, education and employment. Youth Monitor applies seven indicators that give a general overview of the state of youth, while the total set of 60 indicators provides a comprehensive picture. Forum 21 is an information and communications project implemented jointly between France, Germany and the UK. It has published two reviews: a European review on the politics of children and young people and a European review of research on children and young people. Luxembourg has started developing indicators in the youth field that relate to concrete issues such as the situation of youth on the labour market, violence or drug use. In the field of nonformal learning, the validation of the voluntary service has led to considerations about indicators to make competences acquired through non-formal learning measurable. EN 8 EN

131 Poland has launched a series of research either exclusively on youth or focusing also on youth, such as a survey on career pathways and participation in culture and it is planning another one on health Objective 2: In a second stage identify - including at local and regional level - existing knowledge in further priority areas of interest to the youth field and implement measures to supplement, update and facilitate access to it Clarification Concerning this objective the focus is on the content of the research, which relates to other priorities in the youth field than the ones covered by the first common objective, namely on areas such as autonomy, non-formal learning, discrimination, education and training, employment, entrepreneurship, creativity, transition from education to employment, social inclusion and health. Action lines Seven action lines were agreed for the implementation of this objective, four of which address the national, regional and local levels and three at the European level. Those referring to the national, regional and local levels concern the identification and organisation of existing knowledge in the youth field for further priority areas of interest such as autonomy, non-formal learning, discrimination, education and training, employment, entrepreneurship, creativity, transition from education to employment, social inclusion and health; the augmentation and regular update of knowledge on such themes, (also taking into consideration practical knowledge), the facilitation of access to knowledge on such themes and information on the corresponding actors, as well as activities to ensure the userfriendliness of relevant information. The European level action lines encourage making the best use of available and relevant instruments such as current and future programmes in the youth field, Eurobarometer, Eurostat and the current and future framework research programmes, the dissemination of information collected to interested actors, and making the best use of any instrument being developed by the Commission in co-operation with the Council of Europe. Measures taken by Member States In terms of the information provided in the national reports, there is a lack of specific information regarding existing knowledge on priorities targeted by this objective. Where these priority areas are mentioned, they cover a wide range of topics relating to young people, such as values, student rights, employment, transition between school and the labour market, social integration, social inclusion, training, education, service for young people, marginalised youth, recreation and leisure, family life, peers and relationships, young Roma, health and lifestyles of young people. Other research topics include inter-generational relationships, evaluation of the politics of engagement of young people, independence of young people, the situation of adolescents and pre- adolescents in society, and the European awareness of young people. Structures and processes that facilitate knowledge mainstreaming in policy making processes exist in some countries. An example for such a structure is a body consolidating knowledge EN 9 EN

132 about youth that is also in charge of providing support to youth policy-making at municipal level, which eventually led to the development of a youth service system. Knowledge about youth is also disseminated via conferences and seminars. Some countries report that youth organisations are involved in these and are consequently consulted in decision-making. Measures at European level The Commission incited that scientific evidence on issues such as employment, health and life-styles be taken on board of EKCYP. The collection of data is finalised; they are currently being interpreted and will be uploaded into EKCYP at the latest by the end of the year. Other topics already covered by EKCYP, apart from above-mentioned and apart from the OMC priorities, are non-formal learning and antidiscrimination. The Youth in Action Programme funded a study on the existing national practices regarding the access of young people to culture. Another Thematic study on policy measures concerning disadvantaged youth deals with issues, which relate very specifically to one of the strands of the European Youth Pact. The Commission produced a synthesis of the research activities in the youth field, carried out under the 6th and 7th Research Framework Programmes 4. Conclusions Member States routinely collect, compile and make available a range of statistical data which include information about young people for example health, employment and education. The extent to which this data is used to conduct research on youth in the further priority areas is not clear from the reports. Cooperation in the youth field goes beyond these issues and as youth policy advances, the need for scientific evidence evolves. It is therefore important that research on new priorities is launched and existing and new research is regularly uploaded into EKCYP so that all Member States, European institutions, researchers and civil society can easily find and access the existing knowledge. Good practice examples In Ireland there were a number of publicly supported research initiatives and publications which have enhanced understanding of diverse aspects of young people s lives and lifestyles, including the priority and further priority areas. The latter include the first full-length academic text book on young people in Ireland 5. It provides a synthesis of existing research into young people in Ireland along with a commentary and analysis, and places the Irish findings in a comparative European and international context. In Slovenia the Youth Office invited several researchers, youth organisations and young people to discuss the issue of qualitative spending of leisure time activities. As a follow-up, a publication with contributions from different stakeholders was published. The Youth Office is also planning a comprehensive research project on youth Lalor, de Róiste and Devlin, 2007 EN 10 EN

133 2.3. Objective 3: Ensure quality, comparability and relevance of knowledge in the youth field by using appropriate methods and tools Action lines Five action lines were agreed for the implementation of this objective, two of which address the national, regional and local levels and three the European level. Those referring to the national, regional and local levels concern: the development of appropriate tools and methods to reinforce understanding and knowledge of young people and facilitate the exploitation of results as well as the promotion of education and training of youth researchers and experts as well as of any other actors developing knowledge in the youth field. The European level action lines concern cooperation to identify and define common concepts and minimum core content in order to reinforce a common understanding of the defined priority themes; co-operation to determine quantitative and qualitative evaluation methods to exploit and compare results on commonly identified themes; and cooperation to better identify indicators to evaluate the impact of current and future programmes in the youth field. Measures taken by Member States Methods and tools to ensure quality, comparability and relevance of knowledge Quality Only a few Member States have fairly structured processes for quality assurance in place. One country reports about an external review commission that monitors the progress and quality of youth research. Another Member State has an orientation committee in place that carries out a pre-quality check in order to ensure the quality and cohesion with its youth and families research programme. Statistical offices regularly check the quality of their data. Some countries make specific reference to evaluation methods. They report evaluating the quality and quantity of research. Where indicators are used they focus on qualitative and statistical indicators. Member States report applying indicators on issues such as child wellbeing, socio-demographic developments, education outcomes, health, social and emotional behaviour, etc. Another means of striving for better quality is to ensure that youth research is in the hands of professional researchers, that they engage in continuing professional development and that young researchers are supported and helped in their development. Support of young researchers once they have obtained their doctor's degree is one means to interest young people in research and make them consider this as their life pathway. There exist also measures in the Member States to strive for a higher educational level of those working with youth. Other measures aim at improved mobility and exchanges of students and researchers. Comparability Advances in information technology have helped making in particular data, such as statistics, but also research findings more accessible and user-friendly but also easier to compare. They also allow for an easier cooperation and exchange between those who develop statistics. EN 11 EN

134 Countries also report that a means to gain a greater understanding and knowledge and thus the chance to put their own research into a European context, is to participate in European statistics, longitudinal studies, sample surveys and youth opinion polls. At national level the measures to ensure the relevance of youth research vary. One recurrent approach is the establishment of committees, platforms or expert groups that take stock, analyse, synthesise, publish and support exchange, which helps raising the visibility and enlarge the outreach of youth research. Measures at European level At EU level EKCYP provides tools and networks for cooperation to identify and define common concepts and minimum core content in order to reinforce a common understanding of the defined priority themes. These goals are also supported by the Commission and Member State peer learning activities on participation, information and health. The active participation of researchers in European networks such as the European Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy (EKCYP) is qualified as being beneficial for contributing to the European database and development of youth policy, but also to put the own research into relation to research activities of other Member States. In order to ensure cooperation to better identify indicators to evaluate the impact of current and future programmes in the youth field, a Memorandum of Understanding between Eurostat and DG EAC was signed in Conclusions A range of methods and tools is being applied to youth research across Europe, and the results are disseminated in a variety of ways. Some progress has been made in individual Member States on developing indicators to monitor and evaluate research. Measures are in place to support and develop research capacity on youth issues. The impression persists that systematic approaches are rather rare. The situation of youth research appears to be tight in many countries, and there are still not enough young researchers. At EU level more comparative research and descriptors would be needed. Good Practice examples In its process of developing and drafting a national youth strategy Hungary makes sure to include quality indicators. Austria aims at securing the quality of statistical data through a series of measures, such as the introduction and application of international standards and scientific validation, the promotion of mobility of researchers, and financial support for research. In Germany the Youth Welfare Association (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Jugendhilfe, AGJ) provides an institutionalised and broad exchange network for youth researchers and youth policy makers. EN 12 EN

135 Latvia has a system of indicators which was created to evaluate local youth policy and to facilitate its implementation. Municipalities can use the indicators to evaluate the local situation with respect to youth work, identify fields where developments can be made and ensure implementation of targeted youth policy. The indicators include both qualitative and quantitative data. The German-speaking community, and in particular the Jugendbüro (Youth Office), of Belgium attributes importance to the use of international comparative studies, such as the Pisa study, exchanges with youth research experts from other regions in Belgium as well as from other countries. In the Czech Republic quantitative and qualitative surveys on various topics of relevance to young people are used to monitor the situation of young people. The results of these surveys are published and made public, which helps achieving a higher visibility of youth research. In Lithuania the Department of Youth Affairs has promoted youth research among young people by implying them directly into research projects. It financed projects and initiatives for youth and youth organisations by launching a call for proposals on Participation of Youth in the Creation of Knowledge Society. This resulted in a number of pilot projects in several regions and municipalities, where the situation of youth was analysed and comprehensive knowledge gathered. This pilot project encouraged other municipalities to carry out similar analyses on their own initiative. It thus contributed to making youth research known to a larger public and in particular to those concerned by it. Malta plans to launch a major youth research project this year in which it will invest a significant amount of funding and whose aim is to facilitate the collection, analysis and dissemination of information about youth on the Maltese islands. The results will be collected and analysed and political and practical action will be taken accordingly. In the Slovak Republic an expert group focusing on youth research was established in 2007 under the supervision of the National Youth Institute (IUVENTA) and the Slovak Agency for Youth Research. This expert group monitors and evaluates surveys among young people, provides methodological help and individual consultations, publishes research outcomes but also information about theoretical and methodological issues and procedures and standardised research techniques for different areas of young people s lives. In this way it has helped to raise awareness, visibility and relevance of youth research and has improved its quality Objective 4: Facilitate and promote exchange, dialogue and networks to ensure visibility of knowledge in the youth field and anticipate future needs Action lines Four action lines were agreed for the implementation of this objective, three of which address the national, regional and local level, and one the European level. Those referring to the national, regional and local levels concern: the development of national networks between policy makers, researchers, young people and their organisations; discussing future needs, trends within these networks and identifying new priorities and methods; and promoting cross-sectoral cooperation, exchanges and dialogue between different sectors and knowledge areas (through conferences, seminars and events). EN 13 EN

136 The European level action line concerns coordination of the national networks through the setting up by the Commission in cooperation with the Council of Europe, of a European Union Network of Youth Knowledge. Measures taken by Member States The situation concerning networks between policy makers, researchers, young people and their organisation differs from one country to another. At best networks of all relevant youth stakeholders exist. Sometimes specific organisations are set up, such as youth institutes, a youth curator, a consultative commission, a council for youth affairs or for youth policy coordination or a research group. There are also countries that have neither formal nor permanent networks but which organise regular meetings with stakeholders, seminars or consultations. The work of networks, structures or consulting bodies, where they exist, is extensive and comprises advising the government on policy development, developing research and procedures in the youth field, dialogue, mutual exchange and information but also training and project-based work. When it comes to cross-sectoral cooperation, it takes at best place in the framework of crosssectoral, multi-disciplinary networks of policy-makers, researchers and civil society. Some of the countries that do no have fully-fledged cooperation structures in place ad hoc dialogue, exchange and cooperation on youth issues take place across different policy and research fields. It is interesting to note that scientific cooperation between different countries seems to be well developed, as countries refer to trans-national or interregional interdisciplinary networks, such as between Scandinavian countries. The European Youth Information and Counselling Agency (ERYICA) is mentioned as positive example for providing European-wide information and knowledge about youth and to provide a useful exchange network. Measures at European level The Commission has created the European Network of Youth Knowledge (EUNYK), the network of policy makers, young people and researchers to help with the implementation of the common objectives. This network gathers in Brussels at least once a year. It advices the Commission on youth policy issues and contributed to the reflections on the future of youth policy. Member States reported that EUNYK has inspired the setting up of research structures at national level. In July 2006 the Finnish Presidency organised, in cooperation with researchers and young people, a youth event in Hyvinkää that was co-funded by the YOUTH programme. This event enabled tripartite discussions between policymakers, researchers and young people. Conclusions In general Member States acknowledge the EU's driving force in the matter and the common objectives' impetus for the development of national networks. The national reports reveal a diverse range of networks, from formally established ones to ad hoc groups. Member States recognise the necessity of youth research, yet it would need to be organised in a more systematic way in most countries. EN 14 EN

137 At EU level EUNYK was created, but needs more support from Member States. Good Practice In Spain INJUVE, a public institute under the Ministry for Equality brings together different administrative departments and actors in the youth field with the aim of promoting activities in favour of young people. It also aims at facilitating international exchange and access to knowledge and experiences in the youth field. It has also created a prize for researchers who focus their doctoral thesis on youth In Bulgaria the State Agency for youth and sports developed Compass, a national network, which provides the opportunity for online exchange of information between actors in the youth field at national and regional level. This networking facility was used when a national debate entitled Structured Dialogue and Young People in Bulgaria was held. A result of the discussions and suggestions made was the drafting of a Youth Declaration. Greece has established a network focusing on youth entrepreneurship. This Observatory for Youth Entrepreneurship and Youth Entrepreneurship Structures brings together the relevant actors in this particular field, aiming at encouraging young people to become young entrepreneurs. It promotes information and gives guidance on youth entrepreneurial and employment issues. Apart from that it also offers training. Portugal has created a web portal in the youth field that aims at setting up a virtual youth community and at strengthening links, also at international level. It contains a wealth of information about the youth field. In Estonia the Ministry of Education and Research is developing a network of youth researchers. Its main partner is the Youth Research Institute. There are also a number of research groups established that conduct research projects, which deal with knowledge creation in the youth field; these are financed from both the Estonian science financing schemes and the international financing schemes. Italy is, through ISFOL - Istituto per lo sviluppo della formazione professionale dei lavoratori (Institute for the development of professional training of workers) actively engaged in international research and information networks, such as ReferNet, a structured, decentralised, networking system of collection, documentation and dissemination of research and information. "ReferNet" contributes to developing a common approach to research through exchanges and with the aim of transparency, synergies and dissemination of national and European vocational education and training research through a specific database. It involves raising awareness and disseminating results of the activities of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop). Iceland reports that a major turning point for youth research was the establishment of an Institute of Educational Studies which conducted a landmark nationwide survey among youth aged 14 to 20 years. With the more general youth surveys being later handed over to the Icelandic Centre for Social Research and Analysis, a non-profit research centre specialising in youth research and special research for policymakers, and its association to the School of Health and Education at Reykjavik University, Iceland has good experiences with the creation of research structures that explicitly allow for a focus on youth research. EN 15 EN

138 2.5. Consultation of young people There is very little evidence that Member States have consulted young people when their reports on the implementation of the common objectives on better knowledge and greater understanding were prepared. Only few Member States refer to such consultations and most of those which do give information about how young people are consulted in general in their countries Difficulties/Suggestions Difficulties Changes of administrative structures at all levels and reorganisations are sometimes perceived as a reason for the lack of ability to build continuous and permanent structures in the knowledge of the youth field. A lack of cross-sectoral cooperation on youth issues and consequently also on youth research is mentioned by a number of countries. Reasons mentioned are a lack of coordination between different departments, lack of cooperation between relevant institutions but also between different research fields and researchers themselves. Member States express themselves in favour of a better integration of youth activities, including better knowledge across policy areas. There is also the wish for improved cooperation between youth policy, youth research and youth work. Other difficulties that Member States report are a lack of reliable and comparable data. There is also regret of a lack of studies, surveys and opinion polls aimed at young people. The balance between qualitative and quantitative research is addressed. Some find national evaluation for the identification of new youth research areas insufficient and regret the lack of central steering and coordination of contents of youth research. Another weakness highlighted is the lack of a young generation of researchers, which is particularly problematic given that "youth" is the subject matter in question. Suggestions Reliable and comparable data concerning young people are one major demand of Member States. Another demand was that for the elaboration of a European youth report a proposal that the Commission has anticipated by presenting the first European Youth Report as another annex to the current Communication "Youth: Investing and Empowering", to which this report is also an annex. EU Research should be reinforced. Cooperation with the Commission's Directorate-General for Research has led to different youth specific projects under the 5 th and 6th Research Framework Programme, and DG Research has recently finalised a Policy Review "European Research on Youth", which distils some common recurring themes which are of interest to policymakers Under the 7 th Research Framework Programme the programme on research for socio-economic sciences and humanities including youth has launched in 2008 a cluster of 5 research projects on "Youth and social exclusion", testifying to the importance the EC attaches to this domain. Further projectys in "Democratic ownership and participation" are ongoing and proposals on "Education and Training" have been invited In order to further reinforce the EU's Research efforts, priorities, such as youth and entrepreneurship, youth and health, youth and culture, economic value of volunteering, trends in political participation, EN 16 EN

139 education and employment,poverty could feature in the research working programme The Youth in Action Programme could support studies relevant for the EU strategy for young people. Another proposal of the Member States targets a strong and sustainable infrastructure for youth research; some call it an observatory for youth research. From this point of view EKCYP is a good starting point for the collection of data. Based on structures like Eurydice and in cooperation with the Council of Europe a better exploitation of those data will be considered by the European Commission. A strengthened cooperation between policy, practice and research at national and European level is proposed, with a stronger implication of civil society and young people. There is also strong desire to develop better tools for sharing research results between the Member States, to create more opportunities for meetings and exchanges between researchers and for more joint working between researchers from Member States. Apart from that the promotion of regional cooperation networks is proposed. 3. CONCLUSIONS AND PROPOSALS FOR THE FUTURE OF EVIDENCE-BASED POLICY- MAKING Evidence-based policy making is appropriate, it even is a necessity, but in order for policy to actually make use of scientific evidence the latter must be timely and respond swiftly to concrete needs as they occur. Policymakers must have the tools to be able to rapidly respond to societal challenges. In order to identify and anticipate them, it is primordial to bring all actors together on a regular basis. Member States evaluate the common objectives for better knowledge and a greater understanding as a useful incentive towards stepping up evidence-based policy making in the youth field. The common objectives appear to have supported countries with an already well developed research approach and network to focus their efforts and to reinforce their crossborder cooperation within the EU. In countries with a relatively new or less developed youth research they incited action and helped orientate their efforts. While progress has been made since the adoption of the common objectives in 2004 and lots of good practices exist, much is still to be done in this field. As a first measure it is proposed to confirm the common objectives and to identify action lines on which the focus would be in the coming years. The major challenge seems to be a coordinated approach to youth research that brings all the actors in the field policy makers, researcher, civil society, youth workers, young people, business and private sponsors, and any other relevant actors together in a joint effort to identify, streamline and focus youth research. Another issue is the identification of topics for youth research. Of course, there will always be specific national research needs, but there should also joint content priorities be set. In this context it is proposed to focus scientific work in the youth field on the new topics proposed in the Communication "Youth: Investing and Empowering". The creation of networks that encompass all relevant actors in the youth field and in other policy fields of relevance for youth is an inevitable pathway towards better bringing together needs for scientific evidence and actual research projects. EN 17 EN

140 It appears to be important that a cross-sectoral and, in the best case, a cross-border approach is chosen. Cooperation between researchers from different disciplines and countries needs to be encouraged. The involvement of young researchers as well as their development should be reinforced and future career perspectives should be made much more attractive. Once the research has been carried out, it is important to make it known to the largest possible public across the EU. To this end all actors should develop the habit of putting new research on the European Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy (EKCYP). Only in this way it can live up to its convocation of becoming a real centre of European youth policy knowledge. Research costs money. Member States report about financial and human resource difficulties when it comes to youth research. New ways of thinking are encouraged; new sponsors, such as foundations, charities and even from industry need to be found, cross-sectoral, multidisciplinary and cross-border cooperation might help share costs and knowledge. New ways and means of communication and new technologies need to be used more. The need for descriptors/indicators in the youth policy field has been underlined by Member States in their reports. While Member States are encouraged to develop national indicators, the Commission will set up a group of interested Member States, researchers and stakeholders to elaborate indicators. This group will take the work of the peer learning group on participation and information further, but will not exclude elaborating indicators also for other priorities. EKCYP has helped facilitate access to scientific research in the youth field but it has not yet achieved fully its objectives. It is proposed to not create new structures. Correspondents must be able to dedicate time to update and upload information regularly. A strong commitment from all Member States towards EKCYP is necessary to concentrate on the core tasks, which are to: - Complete country information - Enlarge youth policy information - Provide more and comparative research - Improve availability of correspondents. As Member States expressly approve of the EUNYK network, it is proposed to reinforce it. Apart from the annual meetings it is proposed to also call meetings on specific topics, as occasions arise and according to new developments. It is proposed to launch a pilot project with Eurydice 6 The pilot project could consist of the production of an overview of existing major evidence on important issues of youth policy, such as participation, information, voluntary activities, health, etc. Concluding, it can be stated that a paradigm shift is needed from collecting better knowledge to actively promoting the outreach of the specialised scientific evidence in the youth field to other policy areas. 6 An EU institutional network for gathering, monitoring, processing and circulating reliable and readily comparable information on education systems and policies EN 18 EN

141 COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION Brussels, 28 April /09 ADD 4 COVER NOTE from: JEUN 25 EDUC 72 SOC 274 Secretary-General of the European Commission, signed by Mr Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, Director date of receipt: 28 April 2009 to: Mr Javier SOLANA, Secretary-General/High Representative Subject: COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT accompanying document to the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS - Youth - Investing and Empowering - EU YOUTH REPORT Delegations will find attached Commission document SEC(2009) 549. Encl.: SEC(2009) /09 ADD4 1 DG I - 2 B EN

142 COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, SEC(2009) 549 COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT accompanying document to the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Youth - Investing and Empowering EU YOUTH REPORT {COM(2009) 200} {SEC(2009) 545} {SEC(2009) 546} {SEC(2009) 548} EN EN

143 COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT accompanying document to the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Youth - Investing and Empowering EU YOUTH REPORT EN 2 EN

144 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION DEMOGRAPHY Close to 100 million young people live in the European Union Changes in the working population Youth immigration and mobility TRANSITION FROM EDUCATION TO EMPLOYMENT Education Longer schooling for children Choosing paths after compulsory schooling Educational orientation and early transition to work Gender differences in upper secondary education More students in the knowledge triangle An emerging gender gap in tertiary studies Older students Learning foreign languages Increased mobility, but not for everyone The level of education: a comparison between generations Early school leavers Parents' education and academic success Public financial support in accessing higher education Youth participation in non-formal education From school to work Activity rates Who are the young economically inactive people? Off the beaten paths: away from education and activity Transition between education and work takes place mainly between 18 and The higher the level of education, the lower the risk of unemployment Diplomas no guarantee for employment Young people in unemployment...33 EN 3 EN

145 Long term youth unemployment Working while studying, studying while working Temporary contracts Part-time work Young entrepreneurs Focus of activity Young people and social exclusion Unequal access to opportunities Living conditions Young people at risk of poverty ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP Citizenship and participation Active citizenship: today s choices, the life of tomorrow s community Information: the key to participation? Youth Participation A decline in traditional membership of organisations Interest in participative democracy Legal framework for participation structures Youth councils Youth parliaments Other participatory structures Youth interest in politics Participation by young people in the mechanisms of representative democracy Promoting participation through the European Union Trust in institutions Voluntary activities Older generations are more active in voluntary activities Youth and voluntary activities: more advocacy than practise Obstacles Initiating voluntary projects at the European level LIFESTYLES...61 EN 4 EN

146 4.1. Family life General trends Leaving the parental home Reasons for staying at home longer than before Household composition Marital status of young people Becoming a parent More babies born outside marriage Youth and Health Young people expect to live longer Young Europeans perceive themselves as healthy Young people and their weight Majority of young people die due to external factors Death due to transport accidents Death due to suicide Death due to drugs Death due to AIDS/HIV Youth attitudes toward smoking Youth attitudes towards drinking Youth attitudes towards drugs Young people and leisure time Free time decreases with age Leisure time activities among year olds Attending cultural events Attending live sports events Cultural visits Travels and tourism Culture: united in diversity Culture and multiculturalism Intercultural dialogue The digital generation...89 EN 5 EN

147 Young people play a leading role in applying new technologies A generational gap in ICT E-mobility E-skills Using the Internet E-commerce recommendations derived from research for policymakers and youth workers Recommendations to policymakers Recommendations to youth workers...99 EN 6 EN

148 INTRODUCTION This is the first time that the Commission is publishing a report on Youth in the European Union. It is a first effort to compile data and statistics in order to give a picture of the situation of young people in Europe. This report was requested by the Council of the European Union and constitutes one of the supporting documents of the Commission's Communication for the new youth cooperation framework, entitled "An EU Strategy for Youth: Investing and Empowering". The objective of this first youth report is twofold. First, it is to support the new youth cooperation framework by collecting much of the available statistics and data on the conditions of young people. Second, any effort to address young people's challenges and improve their situation must be evidence-based. The report "European Research on Youth" with results of youth-related projects funded under consecutive Commission research framework programmes from 1996 to now, as well as a forthcoming Eurostat publication with data and statistics on the situation of young people, will provide additional information. By making accessible evidence and knowledge on the situation of young people in Europe, this report also gives some indications for where there is a lack of research and data on youth and possible venues for future improvement. By elaborating this first European report on youth, the ambition of the Commission is to contribute to better integrated youth policies. This dynamic is also valid at the national level where ongoing knowledge production can also improve conditions for developing youth policy. Target group covered by the report: definition of youth There is no clear-cut definition of youth. The period of when a person is seen as young may be considered a transition phase. Youth has been defined as the passage from a dependant childhood to independent adulthood. Young people are in transition between a world of rather secure and standard biographical development to a world of choice and/or risk where individuals have to choose and plan their own orientation and social integration. Finding a common definition of youth is not an easy task. Age is a useful but insufficient indication to characterise the transition to adulthood. Other qualitative information also reveals how societies acknowledge the increasing maturity of young people. The age limit of child benefits, the end of full-time compulsory schooling, the voting age and the minimum age for standing for elections may be considered as key milestones to adulthood. The age limit of child benefits usually ranges from 15 (in the Czech Republic and Latvia) to 18, but it is often prolonged when children are still in education. The end of compulsory education may also be seen as the time when individuals are free to make their own choices. It ranges from 14 to 17 years. Considering civic rights, the voting age for national elections in the European Union is 18 in all countries except Austria (16). In Italy the legal voting age is 18 but the Senate is elected only by people aged 25 and over. The age to stand for elections as a candidate varies from 18 to 40 across Member States, and may depend of the type of election (see chapter 3). EN 7 EN

149 Aside from the above-mentioned key milestones that are mainly related to age, adulthood is also considered as the time when young people become financially self-sufficient. The increase in the length of studies (especially through increased participation in higher education ), combined with difficulties in getting a first job and access to affordable housing have increased the length of the transition from youth to independence. For these reasons this report focuses mainly on the population aged between 15 and 29, but statistics are sometimes available for different age ranges. Method Areas covered in the report are among those considered to be important for the development of youth policy. However, more coverage been given to areas and issues where useful data on the situation of young people in Europe has been easily accessible. Sources Chapters 1, 2 and 4 build primarily on data and analyses provided by Eurostat based on the following main surveys: - European Union Labour Force Survey (EU LFS) - European Union Survey on Income and Living Conditions (EU SILC) For chapter 3, the main sources are reports to the Commission by Member States, data from the European Knowledge Centre on Youth Policy (EKCYP) 1 and some Eurobarometer surveys. Eurobarometer surveys are not statistical tools but opinion polls based on subjective responses, and are not always exhaustive. The European Social Survey (ESS) 2 has also provided data for some parts of chapters 3 and 4. Content The aim of this report is to provide data and analysis on the different pathways of young people, and how they influence and are themselves influenced by underlying demographic, economic and social contexts. This regards in particular the transition from education to the labour market. Other important elements are the analysis of young people s active citizenship as well as their well being, their family life, and more generally some aspects of their lifestyle. Frequency In line with the request from the Council of the European Union, youth reports are expected to be produced every three years. These reports will continue to build on the basis of the current report. In 1 2 EKCYP has been developed jointly by the European Commission and the Council of Europe. This is a knowledge management system that aims at providing youth policy-makers and other interested stakeholders with a single entry point to retrieve information on the realities of youth across Europe. The European Social Survey (ESS) is an academically-driven social survey designed to chart and explain the interaction between Europe's changing institutions and the attitudes beliefs and behaviour patterns of its diverse populations. Now in its fourth round, the survey covers over 30 nations. This survey received funding from the EU Research Framework Programmes. More information is available at EN 8 EN

150 this way, a constructive dynamic should be developed: the process of analysing data - or identifying areas where there is insufficient data - will suggest what kind of other information and analysis could be useful, the results of which can be introduced in the next report. EN 9 EN

151 1. DEMOGRAPHY Past decades have shown a continuous increase in life expectancy in Europe. This increasingly affects the general organisation of life and the length of the main life periods: school life, working life and retirement all tend to become longer with time Close to 100 million young people live in the European Union Figures from 2007 indicate that some 96 million people aged between 15 and 29 reside in the European Union. An excess of 34 million European inhabitants are between 25 and 29 years of age, slightly more than the populations of the other two age groups (20-24 and 15-19), which are recorded at some 32 million and 30 million respectively. In terms of share of the population, youth represents just under a fifth of the total (19.4%), with the proportion of young people aged between 25 and 29 (6.9 %) slightly higher than the share of young people aged (6.5 %) and (6 %). The share of youth aged between 15 and 29 in the total population at the national level ranges between 22% and 24% for the Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania), Cyprus and Malta, whereas it is less than 20% (average proportion at the European Union level), in Austria, Germany, Finland, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Sweden and Belgium, Spain and the United Kingdom. Young people (15-19, 20-24, 25-29) as a share of total population, EN 10 EN

152 1.2. Changes in the working population In the near future the European Union will face two demographic challenges, namely the ageing and impending decline of its population. The population share of young people will drop further, while that of older people will increase. As a consequence, the characteristics of the working population will change. Two indicators in particular are useful to evaluate this trend: population of working age (20-59 and 60-65), and activity rates per age. Over the past decade, both the working population (aged years) and the population aged 60 years and above have been growing by 1 to 1.5 million people per year on average. According to Eurostat demographic projections, it is foreseen that from now on the population aged 60 years and above will be growing by 2 million people every year for the next 25 years. The growth of the working-age population is slowing down fast and will stop altogether in about 6 years; from then on, this segment of the population will be shrinking by 1 to 1.5 million people each year. The projections of the old and young age dependency ratios 3 indicate that by 2050, the population under 14 will account for less that one fourth of the population aged while the population aged over 65 will represent more than 50 % of the year olds. From 2004 to 2050, the young age dependency ratio will remain stable while the old age dependency ratio will nearly double. Projection of young and old age dependency ratios, EU-25, Young age depency ratio old age dependency ratio Source: Eurostat - population projection By 2050, the old age dependency ratio will be lower than 50 % in just over half of the EU Member States, but higher than 60 % in countries such as Bulgaria, Spain and Italy. The young age dependency ratio is projected to be below 30 % in all Member States, with the highest scores (over 3 The dependency ratio is an age-population ratio of those typically not in the labour force and those typically in the labour force. The young-age dependency ratio is the ratio of the number of young persons at an age when they are generally economically inactive divided by the number of persons of working age. The old-age dependency ratio is the ratio of the number of elderly persons at an age when they are generally economically inactive divided by the number of persons of working age. EN 11 EN

153 27 %) in Ireland, France, Luxembourg and Sweden and the lowest (under 22 %) in Bulgaria, Germany, Spain, Italy, Austria and Romania Youth immigration and mobility Member States of the European Union are attractive to young people coming from other countries. They may come from neighbouring countries outside the Union, from former colonies of Member States, or from other countries outside of Europe. Mobility inside the EU also contributes to changing the structure of society. Regarding international migration patterns, European countries have experienced major changes since the end of the Second World War, most notably through a progressive shift from emigration to immigration. This trend has gained strength, international migration has become a key factor in European population growth and immigration flows have increased. Population ageing, including the ageing of the workforce could continue to function as a pull factor for international migration. The figures we refer to in the following paragraphs come from Eurostat (Eurostat- LFS and Eurostat population-international Migration and Asylum). Measuring migration among young people takes also into account student mobility. Mobility of young Europeans Young EU nationals mostly tend to move to Belgium, Germany, Spain, Italy, Cyprus, Austria, Sweden and the United Kingdom. In Luxembourg almost 40 % of young people are from other EU Member States, but the UK and Spain remain the main hosting countries for young people. Migration flows also reveal that young people tend to move to neighbouring countries. For example, the main young foreign nationals residing in Slovenia are Germans and in the United Kingdom young persons were born in Ireland. Mobility from outside EU Immigration from outside the EU is influenced by diverse factors such as former colonial links, (Belgium, France, UK, the Netherlands, or Spain and Portugal), strategic geographical position as a gateway to Europe (Estonia, Spain, Greece, or Finland), favourable economic conditions (Luxembourg for example), or a combination of some or all of these factors. Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom are the countries with the largest absolute numbers of young non-eu foreigners between the ages of 15 and 29 (1.8, 1.4 and 1.25 million respectively). In 2007, more than 15% of young people in Spain were non-eu citizens. This was the second highest proportion after that of Luxembourg, among the 18 EU Member States for which these data are available. Austria and Germany follow with 13.6% and 12.4% respectively. The lowest proportions are found in three of the most recent EU Member States (Poland, Romania and Slovakia). Spain is the main destination of young immigrants from the American continent and from Africa, while most young immigrants from Asia tend to go to the United Kingdom. Many young immigrants in the Netherlands were born in Asia, followed by America, Africa and Turkey. The largest group of third-country citizens living in Austria, Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands are from Turkey, and the majority of the third-country foreigners in France and Spain have Moroccan citizenship. In France, geographic and cultural proximities also ease mobility. Young people from Iceland and Norway tend to emigrate to Sweden or Denmark, while youngsters from Croatia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia go firstly to Slovenia. EN 12 EN

154 KEY FIGURES RELATING TO DEMOGRAPHY Currently 96 Million young people aged in the European Union Young people aged constitute 19.4 % of the total population within the EU Projected share of young people in 2050: 15.3 % of the total population N 13 EN

155 2. TRANSITION FROM EDUCATION TO EMPLOYMENT 2.1. Education In Europe, the extension of schooling is a long-term phenomenon. The rapid economic growth between 1950 and 1975 increased the demand for qualified labour through increased levels of education. More recently, higher unemployment rates and increasing world-wide competition have stressed the need to improve the overall level of education of the working force in Europe. The knowledge-based economy that already characterises many European countries requires people to be able to renew their skills continuously through lifelong learning so as to secure employment over time, and participate and integrate fully in a changing society. USEFUL CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS School expectancy: School expectancy is an estimate of the number of years a typical 5-year-old child can expect to be enrolled in the education system during his or her lifetime if current enrolment patterns remain unchanged. It is calculated by adding the net educational enrolment percentages for each single year of age and age band. The net enrolment rates are calculated by dividing the number of students (ISCED 0 to 6) of a particular age or age group by the number of persons in the population in the same age or age band. Source: The UNESCO/OECD/EUROSTAT (UOE) database on education statistics Early school leavers refer to persons aged 18 to 24 in the following two conditions: the highest level of education or training attained is ISCED 0, 1, 2 or 3c short and respondents declared not having received any education or training in the four weeks preceding the survey Formal Education is defined as education provided in the system of schools, colleges, universities and other formal educational institutions that normally constitutes a continuous ladder of full-time education for children and young people, generally beginning at age of five to seven and continuing up to 20 or 25 years old. In some countries, the upper parts of this ladder are organised programmes of joint part-time employment and part-time participation in the regular school and university system: such programmes have come to be known as the dual system or equivalent terms in these countries. Non-formal Education is defined as any organised and sustained educational activities that do not correspond exactly to the above definition of formal education. Non-formal education may therefore take place both within and outside educational institutions, and cater to persons of all ages. Depending on country contexts, it may cover educational programmes to impart adult literacy, basic education for out of school children, life-skills, work-skills, and general culture. Non-formal education programmes do not necessarily follow the ladder system, and may have a differing duration. Informal Learning is defined as intentional, but it is less organised and less structured.and may include for example learning events (activities) that occur in the family, in the work place, and in the daily life of every person, on a self-directed, family-directed or socially directed basis. Source: Eurostat - Classification of learning activities -Manual The International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) is an instrument suitable for assembling, compiling and presenting comparable indicators and statistics of education both within individual countries and internationally. It presents standard concepts, definitions and classifications and N 14 EN

156 covers all organized and sustained learning opportunities for children, youth and adults including those with special needs education, irrespective of the institution or entity providing them or the form in which they are delivered. LEVEL 0 Pre-primary education: Programmes at level 0, (pre-primary) defined as the initial stage of organized instruction are designed primarily to introduce very young children to a school-type environment, i.e. to provide a bridge between the home and a school-based atmosphere. LEVEL 1 Primary education or first stage of basic education: Programmes at level 1 are normally designed on a unit or project basis to give students a sound basic education in reading, writing and mathematics along with an elementary understanding of other subjects such as history, geography, natural science, social science, art and music (and sometimes religion). LEVEL 2 Lower secondary or second stage of basic education: The contents of education at this stage are typically designed to complete the provision of basic education which began at ISCED level 1. In many, if not most countries, the educational aim is to lay the foundation for lifelong learning and human development on which countries may expand, systematically, further educational opportunities. The end of this level often coincides with the end of compulsory education where it exists. LEVEL 3 (Upper) secondary education: This level of education typically begins at the end of fulltime compulsory education for those countries that have a system of compulsory education. More specialization may be observed at this level than at ISCED level 2 and often teachers need to be more qualified or specialized than for ISCED level 2. The entrance age to this level is typically 15 or 16 years. LEVEL 4 Post-secondary non-tertiary education: ISCED 4 programmes can, depending on their content, not to be regarded as tertiary programmes. They are often not significantly more advanced than programmes at ISCED 3 but they serve to broaden the knowledge of participants who have already completed a programme at level 3. Typical examples are programmes designed to prepare students for studies at level 5 who, although having completed ISCED level 3, did not follow a curriculum which would allow entry to level 5, i.e. pre-degree foundation courses or short vocational programmes. LEVEL 5 First stage of tertiary education (not leading directly to an advanced research qualification): This level consists of tertiary programmes having an educational content more advanced than those offered at levels 3 and 4. There is a distinction between 5A: the programmes which are theoretically based/research preparatory (history, philosophy, mathematics, etc.) or giving access to professions with high skills requirements (e.g. medicine, dentistry, architecture, etc.), and 5B: those programmes which are practical/technical/occupationally specific. LEVEL 6 Second stage of tertiary education (leading to an advanced research qualification): This level is reserved for tertiary programmes which lead to the award of an advanced research qualification. The programmes are therefore devoted to advanced study and original research and are not based on course-work only. The term Early-Stage Researcher refers to researchers in the first four years (full-time equivalent) of their research activity, including the period of research training. According to the ISCED classification, general and vocational educations have the following definitions: General education: Education which is mainly designed to lead participants to a deeper understanding of a subject or group of subjects, especially, but not necessarily, with a view to preparing participants for N 15 EN

157 further (additional) education at the same or a higher level. Successful completion of these programmes may or may not provide the participants with a labour-market relevant qualification at this level. These programmes are typically school-based. Vocational or technical education: Education which is mainly designed to lead participants to acquire the practical skills, know-how and understanding necessary for employment in a particular occupation or trade or class of occupations or trades. Successful completion of such programmes lead to a labourmarket relevant vocational qualification recognised by the competent authorities in the country in which it is obtained (e.g. Ministry of Education, employers associations, etc.). Source: International Standard Classification of Education ISCED 1997, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Longer schooling for children As a result of life expectancy, the number of years that a young person will spend within the formal education system is higher than before (it is today on average 17 years). For instance, in Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden and Poland, this means that children aged 5 can expect to spend more than one fourth of their remaining lifetime at school and university. School expectancy depends on various factors that structure each educational system: the length of compulsory schooling, the access and patterns of pre-primary education, the different types of upper secondary education (vocational or general) and the way pupils are oriented towards them, the type of admission and the variety of choices in tertiary education. Beyond compulsory education, school expectancy is also affected, among other factors, by the attitudes of parents who may consider the investment in their children's education a security ensuring status, a decent future income and protection against unemployment. In addition to investing in secondary education, however, the development of lifelong learning opportunities reinforces the need to consider also the time spent in non-formal education and informal learning during the entire life in order to evaluate the total time devoted to education in a lifetime Choosing paths after compulsory schooling In most European countries, compulsory schooling ends between the ages 14 and 17, which corresponds to the end of lower secondary education. Nowadays it is by no means exceptional to remain in education after the end of compulsory schooling. From this age, young Europeans may choose at any time whether to continue their education or to become economically active. Most young people choose to continue their studies beyond compulsory education, but some choose alternative ways. However, many young people do not take a clear-cut decision on whether to pursue education or employment. Instead, they opt for a transitional phase during which they try to conciliate studies and work. In most European countries, over 80 % of the population remains at school at least one year after the end of compulsory education. Attendance rates tend to decline more in the second year after the end of compulsory education, but remain above 70 % in most countries. The exceptions are Germany and the United Kingdom, where less than 50 % of young people remain in education two years following compulsory education. Young women remain in education longer than their male counterparts. In most countries, female attendance rates two years after the end of compulsory education are higher than for their male counterparts. N 16 EN

158 At the age of 19, more than 60 % of young Europeans are still in formal education, although at different levels due to the differences in the education systems and their own academic progression. In Bulgaria, Luxembourg, Austria, Romania, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, more than half of young people aged 19 have are no longer in formal education. In these countries, the transition to the labour market has already started for a majority of young people. In the Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland, Hungary and Austria, the share of 19-year-olds attending post secondary vocational education (which is more work oriented) reach around 10 %. In Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands more than 40 % of the 19 years old population is still in upper secondary education Educational orientation and early transition to work Further participation in higher education depends on the educational orientation (general or vocational) of upper secondary education. At EU level, a little more than half of the students in upper secondary education attend vocational-oriented programmes. The percentage of students that prepare themselves to enter the labour market at this level is especially high (more than 70 %) in the Czech Republic, Austria, and Slovakia. To a lesser extent, most of students in upper secondary choose vocational orientation in Belgium, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherland, Romania, Slovenia, and Finland. At the opposite, in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Ireland, Greece, Hungary, and Portugal, more than 60 % of students follow general programmes in a view to continue further education. In Cyprus, more than 80 % of students are in this situation. Young men and women who graduate from vocational programmes in upper secondary education are mainly prepared to work in business and industry. At European level, 62 % of graduates of vocational programmes at this level studied either social science, business and law or engineering, manufacturing and construction programmes. Graduates in health and welfare as well services come next Gender differences in upper secondary education In 2006, the number of boys attending upper secondary education is not very different from the one of girls. Most EU Member States show a balanced distribution and at European level, there are 98 girls for every 100 boys. However, in some countries, the number of women to every hundred men is more unbalanced. This is the case in Germany (89 women to every 100 men), Malta (88) Austria (89) and Poland (90). Conversely, in Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Ireland, Spain, Luxembourg, Portugal and the United Kingdom, women are more numerous in upper secondary education. Despite the fact that the gender gap in upper secondary education is low in most of the countries, strong differences across sexes emerge when considering attendance by educational orientation. In all European countries, girls outnumber boys in general upper secondary education meaning that they mainly prepare for further education whereas boys are more focused in preparing access to the labour market. This is illustrated by the fact that within EU Member States, nearly 54 % of girls in upper secondary education are attending general programmes whereas only 43 % of boys do so. The reverse is true when considering vocational programmes, except in Ireland and the United Kingdom where girls are more numerous than boys independent of programme orientation. In Bulgaria, Denmark, Malta and Poland, a majority of women are attending the general secondary educational programme whereas the majority of men are attending vocational programmes. In Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Greece, Cyprus, Hungary, Malta, and Poland there are less than 70 girls for every 100 boys in vocational programmes. N 17 EN

159 More students in the knowledge triangle Tertiary education is the final stage of formal or regular education. Education, research and innovation (also known as the knowledge triangle) play a key role in facing the challenges of globalisation and the development of knowledge society. When creating new knowledge and including it in the education of students, the basis is set up for further innovation, creativity and contribution to future prosperity. In 2006, there were almost 19 million tertiary students in the European Union. The number of tertiary students has increased by 25 % between 1998 and There are about 3 million more students in higher education and 1 million more graduates per year than in At EU level, 11.5 % of the population aged between 18 and 39 attend tertiary education. Attendance rates vary across countries, however: more than half of the countries for which data is available show attendance rates higher than 10 %. In Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Ireland, Greece, France, Poland and Finland, the participation rate is higher than 15 %. One probable reason why participation rates are lower in Cyprus, Malta, and Luxembourg may be that many young people are studying abroad. Number of tertiary students per country (1000), 2006 UK SE FI SK SI RO PT PL AT NL MT HU LU LT LV CY IT FR ES EL IE EE DE DK CZ BG BE An emerging gender gap in tertiary studies Source: Eurostat The past decade ( ) has witnessed an increase in the gender gap in higher education. In 1998, there were nearly 112 women to every 100 men in higher education. This ratio increased to 123 in These numbers show that the 'feminisation' of tertiary education is stronger than in upper secondary education. This is probably linked to the fact that the majority of women attend general programmes that prepare them for further education at tertiary level rather than vocational programmes. N 18 EN

160 Older students Most full time students are economically inactive and thus rely (partly or fully) on the financial support from their parents and/or from public support schemes. Thus, the distribution by age of full time students can provide some indication as to the age at which young people are probably not yet economically active. There is a strong diversity across Europe. This diversity may be explained by several factors: Different education systems have different starting age of tertiary education (due to various length of secondary education). They also differ on the length of tertiary education programmes and the types of financial support students can get from public authorities. The obligation to do military service, as well as public policies aiming to encourage lifelong learning at tertiary level, also increases the average age of a student of higher education. Finally, the levels of participation in programmes which lead to advanced research degrees also have an impact on the age of the student population. Among EU Member States, half of the students are older than 22. Across Europe, the median age 4 of tertiary students ranges from 20.5 in Greece to near 26 in Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Germany and Austria: in these countries half of the students are older than 23. Moreover, in the three Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Sweden) as well as in Latvia and the United Kingdom, 15 % of full time students are older than 35. The same countries also tend to show the highest diversity in terms of age of the student population. Most of the European countries have witnessed an ageing of the oldest population of full time students between 1998 and 2006: old students tend to become older. In 1998, 15 % of European full time students were older than 29. In 2006, 15 % of students were older than 30. The three Baltic States have registered a dramatic increase in the average age of the oldest students over the same period: the average age of the 15 % oldest students increased by 7 years in Lithuania and by nearly 10 in Latvia. Significant but yet lower increases are also registered in Ireland, Greece, Hungary and Malta, where the average age increased by more than 5 years. The reverse applies in Germany, Austria, and Poland, where the average age of the 15 % oldest students has actually decreased Learning foreign languages Multilingualism (i.e. the ability to speak and use several languages) has become a key issue in the development of the European Union. The European Commission s Communication on A New Framework Strategy for Multilingualism states that the many mother tongues are a a source of wealth and a bridge to greater solidarity and mutual understanding, but also that the ability to understand and communicate in more than one language is a desirable life-skill for all European citizens. It enables people to take advantage of the freedom to work or study in another Member State". Learning languages is thus a key for the future. It should be given to all pupils in general, including in vocational upper secondary education. At the EU level, learning languages at school is a reality for most pupils in upper secondary education regardless of educational orientation: less than 10 % of pupils do not learn any foreign languages. Pupils in prevocational and vocational programmes at upper secondary level tend to learn less foreign languages than their counterparts in general programmes. The majority (64 %) of pupils in vocational programmes learn one language and a little more than 25 % learn two. However in Estonia, for instance, more than 80 % of students in vocational programmes learn two foreign languages. In most countries for which data are available, all or nearly all pupils in general programmes at upper secondary education learn at least 4 Median is the middle value of a sample N 19 EN

161 one foreign language. The exceptions are Portugal and the United Kingdom, where 40 % or more pupils do not learn any foreign language Increased mobility, but not for everyone A high level expert forum on mobility, established by the European Commission, has stated that learning mobility should become a natural feature of being European and an opportunity provided to all young people in Europe. Learning mobility is important for strengthening Europe's competitiveness, for creating a knowledge-intensive society and for deepening citizenship within young generations. Mobility concerns various young populations: pupils and students in secondary and tertiary education, trainees, apprentices, volunteers and participants in professional training in or outside Europe. However, statistical information on mobility in Europe is only partially harmonised and exists most often only on tertiary education. Moreover, data on mobility based on the citizenship criterion within the field of higher education is not fully comparable across countries since national legislation governing the acquisition of citizenship differs across Europe. Six EU countries (Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, France, Germany and United Kingdom) have more than 10 % foreign students in their total student population. Three of these countries, Cyprus, Austria, and the United Kingdom, have a proportion higher than 15 %. Various European Union programmes support learning mobility across Europe. The Youth in Action Programme, successor of the YOUTH programme, supports EU s mobility and non-formal education of young people, particularly young people with fewer opportunities: each year young people are involved in more than projects. Since 1988, 1.5 millions young people and youth workers participated in the programme. In the formal education field, Erasmus has had a growing popularity over the years, supporting 3244 students in its first year (the academic year 1987/88) and nearly students in 2006/07. Overall, the Erasmus programme has supported more than 2 millions students so far. EUROPEAN COMMISSION PROGRAMMES IN THE FIELD OF LIFELONG LEARNING AND YOUTH Comenius: The Comenius programme focuses on the first phase of education, from pre-school and primary to secondary schools. It is relevant for all members of the education community: pupils, teachers, local authorities, parents associations, non-government organisations, teacher training institutes, universities and all other educational staff. Comenius seeks to develop knowledge and understanding among young people and educational staff of the diversity of European cultures, languages and values. It helps young people acquire the basic life skills and competences necessary for their personal development, for future employment and for active citizenship. Leonardo: The Leonardo da Vinci programme links policy to practice in the field of vocational education and training (VET). Projects range from those giving individuals the chance to improve their competences, knowledge and skills through a period abroad, to Europe-wide co-operation between training organisations. The programme funds a wide range of actions, notably cross-border mobility initiatives; co-operation projects to develop and spread innovation; and thematic networks. The potential beneficiaries are similarly wide from trainees in initial vocational training, to people already in the labour market, as well as VET professionals and private or public organisations active in this field. Erasmus: The Erasmus programme aims at enhancing the quality and reinforcing the European dimension of higher education as well as at increasing student and staff mobility. It enriches not only the N 20 EN

162 students lives in the academic field but also in the acquisition of intercultural skills and self-reliance. Staff exchanges also have beneficial effects both on the persons concerned and on the institutions involved. Erasmus Mundus is the globally open counterpart of the Erasmus programme. Youth in action: The Youth in Action programme aims at inspiring a sense of active citizenship, solidarity and tolerance among young Europeans, promoting the employability, and involving them in shaping the Union's future. It promotes mobility within and beyond the EU borders, non-formal learning and intercultural dialogue and encourages the inclusion of all young people, regardless of their educational, social and cultural background. It supports a large variety of activities of young people and youth workers through five Actions. Source: DG Education and Culture The level of education: a comparison between generations The percentage of the population which has completed higher education is increasing. 29 % of young Europeans aged between 25 and 29 have completed higher education, against 18 % of the population aged between 55 and 59. The same trend exists for secondary education: slightly more that 50 % of the age group has finished secondary education compared to 42 % of the age group. However, a few countries experience that the proportion of people aged between 25 and 29 having completed at least upper secondary education is lower than the one for the and age groups. This is the case in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania. Population by age group (25-29, 55-59) sex and highest level of education completed Almost all member states show an increase in the proportion of people having completed at least upper secondary education through generations. The only exceptions are Germany, the Baltic States, Romania and Sweden Early school leavers One out of seven young persons aged 18 to 24 in the EU leaves the education system with no more than lower secondary education and participates in no form of education and training (early school leaver). N 21 EN

163 There has been a continuous improvement in recent years, but progress will need to speed up in order to reach the EU benchmark set for At the European level, the percentage of early school leavers has continuously decreased over the period. It is now standing at 14.8 %. Europe tends to show a north/south divide on this issue. Some of the southern countries record more than 30 % of early school leavers (Spain, Malta, and Portugal) whereas other countries (principally from north Europe) register much lower numbers. In all countries except Bulgaria, the percentage of early school leavers is higher for male than for female. Seven Member States the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland and Sweden have shares of less than 10 %. Among these countries, Poland, the Czech Republic and Finland are still progressing. Other countries, like Malta and Portugal, have considerably decreased their initially very high percentages of early school leavers. N 22 EN

164 Percentage of early school leavers by country, 2007 United Kingdom Sweden Finland Slovakia Slovenia Romania Portugal Poland Austria Netherlands Malta Hungary Luxembourg Lithuania Latvia Cyprus Italy France Spain Greece Ireland Estonia Germany Denmark Czech Republic Bulgaria Belgium EU RESEARCH FINDINGS OF THE UP2YOUTH PROJECT: YOUTH - ACTOR OF SOCIAL CHANGE 5 Young migrants' transitions from education to work Source: Eurostat (Labour Force Survey) The UP2YOUTH project centres around three areas of social change with regard to youth and its transition to adulthood: young parenthood; social participation; and the transitions of young people with an ethnic minority or migrant background. UP2Youth analyses to what extent social change results from young people s agency and what they need to act in ways which contribute both to social integration and to subjectively meaningful biographies. Learning is a key to an agency perspective in understanding changing pathways to adulthood and citizenship. In the individualisation of transitions to adulthood learning is relevant in a double perspective: young people are expected to acquire knowledge and skills in formal trajectories, but 5 The UP2Youth project was funded under the 6th framework programme of the European Union (Citizens and governance programme) and involved research partners from 15 countries (Germany, Denmark, France, Italy, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Portugal, Spain, Finland, Romania, Austria, Slovakia and Ireland), running from May April 2009 Info: N 23 EN

165 individual learning increasingly takes place in non-formal and informal settings. Today formal learning is most necessary but not sufficient to help young people s social and labour market integration. Approaches of non-formal learning are concerned with compensating a lack of formal learning especially with regard to youth and to allow for reconciliation between adult expectations and youth cultural forms of praxis. The development of alternative learning settings holds considerable resources to compensate for missing formal certificates. This is especially the case for young people with learning problems in formal education, as is often the case for young people with an ethnic minority or migrant background, due to linguistic and cultural challenges or interrupted educational trajectories. While belonging to an ethnic minority may be considered a biographical and social resource in globalised post-modern life (governed by flexibility and cultural diversity), it may also bring them at the edge of society, marginalized by the larger society and separated by cultural and religious life styles. Thus a significant proportion of young people with migration background is involved in a processes of ethnic differentiation reinforced by discrimination, restricted educational achievements and a low socioeconomic status. Especially male youngsters from migrant and ethnic minority communities are regarded as developing informal peer cultures, being lived as social spaces of social participation and socialization on citizenship practices, which often conflict with school cultures. Moreover, the improvements in education and vocational training have led to a deficit of low/ unqualified labour force in some sectors and a structural dependency on unskilled, immigrant labour force in the labour market. The immigrants coping strategies respond to these labour markets demands, which have in most cases a de-motivating effect on their career aspirations and educational improvement plans. Comparative research on the social integration of young people from an ethnic minority or migrant background found rather weak links of successful integration processes to integration policies. Most of the success in labour market transitions is attributable to the general economic, education and social policies that are framing labour market transitions. Social integration appears to be a matter of attachment and belonging predominantly to the local surroundings and a daily life. Therefore integration processes might best be carried out in local or smaller contexts, in which common interest and activities among local inhabitants can be found Parents' education and academic success The chances young people have to become highly qualified are often influenced by their socio-economic background. Evaluating the social background of people is complex and usually approximated by different variables. However, in all EU Member States for which data is available, the majority of people aged with parents who have at most lower secondary education have either completed the same level (lower secondary) or at most upper secondary education. Conversely, young people aged whose parents have a tertiary education, have a much higher chance of completing a tertiary education themselves. They are also less at risk of getting only a N 24 EN

166 secondary education than those who have parents with only a secondary education. In more than two thirds of EU Member States for which there is data available, more than half of all young people aged who have parents with tertiary education have themselves completed education at the same level. In most countries, less than 5 % had taken only a lower secondary education. Level of education for people (25-34) whose parents have higher (tertiary) education, % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% BE CZ DK DE EE ES FR IE GR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT SI SK FI SE UK IS NO Low Medium High Public financial support in accessing higher education In all European countries, access to higher education is facilitated by public financial support schemes dedicated to students and their parents. These schemes may have different purposes (for instance to cover the costs of living, to pay administrative fees and/or contribute to tuition costs) and take several forms (e.g. loans or combination of grants and loans). The impact of these financing schemes on the social and economic situation of students is difficult to assess, but recent data suggests that students in tertiary education still rely mainly on parents and family contributions Youth participation in non-formal education Among EU Member States, the average participation rates in non-formal education and training is below 10 % among all age groups (15-24, and 30-54). However, Denmark, Spain, Austria, Sweden and the United Kingdom all have a higher participation in non-formal education activities than the average. Participation rates are especially high in Denmark and the United Kingdom, where it is around 20 % for all age groups. Participation rates show low differences across age groups in a majority of countries, but in Spain, Greece, Cyprus, Sweden and the United Kingdom, younger people participate more in non-formal education activities than their elders. When considering the level of education of young adults who have taken part in non-formal education activities, participation rates are more diverse. In all countries except Greece, Cyprus and Sweden, young people with a higher level of education participate to a larger extent in non-formal education activities than their peers with a lower level of education. N 25 EN

167 This pattern is even more pronounced when considering participation in non-formal education of employed people of the same age group. In all European countries, young employed people with a higher education participate more in non-formal education than other young people. A majority of young employed people who attended non-formal education did so in relation to their job. This is especially true for people with at least upper secondary education. However, in Estonia, France, Luxembourg, Hungary, the Netherlands, Austria and Romania, young employed people with at most upper secondary education are proportionally more numerous in attending job-related non-formal education than those having tertiary education. One dimension of non-formal education that may not be completely covered by the statistics referred to above is activities carried out by non-governmental volunteer organisations and/or within the context of youth work. Such activities often target young people in particular and are typically carried out during young people's leisure time. Non-formal education activities conducted by professional youth workers and non-governmental youth organisations are becoming increasingly recognised as an important element of lifelong learning. KEY FIGURES RELATING TO EDUCATION There are about 3 million more students in higher education and 1 million more graduates per year today than in The number of students increased by 25% between 1998 and There are 19 million students in higher education in the European Union; this constitutes 11.5 % of the population between 18 and 39. There are 23 % more women than men in higher education. Nearly 80 % of young people between 25 and 29 have completed upper secondary education. Still, one fifth of children do not have basic standards of literacy and numeracy. 6 million young people, 1 in 7 of years old, achieve only compulsory education or less % of the EU population aged attends tertiary education. At the European level, the percentage of early school leavers has continuously decreased over the period but still amounts to 14.8 %. The number of years in the formal education system is on average 17 years. At age 19, more than 60 % of young Europeans are still in formal education. More than half of all students in upper secondary education attend vocational programmes. Girls prepare for higher education while boys prepare for employment: 54 % of girls in upper secondary education attend general programmes, whereas 57 % of boys attend more employmentoriented vocational programmes. 15 % of students in the European Union are older than 30 years old. However, 10 % of pupils do not learn any foreign language in school. N 26 EN

168 More than 50 % of young Europeans between 25 and 29 have completed upper education and 29 % higher education. Less than one third of young people aged who have a disadvantaged socio-economic background complete higher education. N 27 EN

169 2.2. From school to work The transition from education to employment is an important process for young people. The transition process may vary significantly between different countries and different national systems in terms of the length and the nature of the transition process, level and persistence of youth unemployment, and types of jobs and contracts obtained by young people. The reference population analysed in this chapter is usually young people aged Whenever possible, this is further divided into two age categories, and 25-29, in order to take into account the diversity of young people s situation. The majority of the younger age cohort is still in education, while the older is supposed to already have a foothold in the labour market. EUROPEAN UNION LABOUR FORCE SURVEY (EU LFS) The main data source in this section is the European Union Labour Force Survey (EU LFS). The EU LFS is a quarterly large sample survey covering the population in private households in the EU, EFTA (except Liechtenstein) and Candidate Countries. It provides annual and quarterly results on labour participation of people aged 15 and over as well as persons outside the labour force. The EU LFS sample size amounts approximately to 1.5 million individuals each quarter. The quarterly sampling rates vary between 0.2 and 3.3 % in each country. This makes the LFS one of the largest household surveys in Europe. The concepts and definitions used in the survey are based on those of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). In consequence, results from the EU LFS count among the most comparable international labour market statistics. Despite the fact that today s young people are smaller in number and better educated than their previous generation, difficulties remain in entering the labour market. Many of those who have already gained employment often hold unstable jobs. There are several reasons for this, such as the mismatch between skills acquired in education and training and labour market requirements, as well as general labour market conditions. In financially difficult times, companies will also downsize their recruitment programmes, in addition to the fact that there will be more qualified experts available on the job market Activity rates As chapter 2.1 shows, most young people remain in education at least until the ages which correspond to the end of full-time compulsory school. Furthermore, a majority of 19 year-olds, who are beyond the compulsory school age, are still in formal education. USEFUL CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS The economically active population (labour force) comprises employed and unemployed persons. Employed persons are persons aged 15 and over who during the reference week performed work, even for just one hour, for pay, profit or family gain or were not at work but had a job or business from which they were temporarily absent because of, e.g., illness, holidays, industrial dispute or training. This can also include students when they are also employed. N 28 EN

170 Unemployed persons are persons aged who were without work during the reference week, were currently available for work and were either actively seeking work in the past four weeks or had already found a job to start within the next three months. Inactive persons are those who neither classified as employed nor as unemployed because they are still for instance in the education system. Activity rates represent active persons as a percentage of same age total population. Inactivity rates represent inactive persons as a percentage of same age total population. Source: International Labour Office / Labour Force Survey The first step towards the labour market is to become economically active (employed or unemployed actively searching for a job). However, young people s decision to pursue education or not is not so clear cut. Aspects to take into account include motivation to continue studying, financial means, the cultural context, socio-economic background and the general situation of the labour market. Activity rates among young people aged 15-29, 2007 United Kingdom Sweden Finland Slovakia Slovenia Romania Portugal Poland Austria Netherlands Malta Hungary Luxembourg Lithuania Latvia Cyprus Italy France Spain Greece Ireland Estonia Germany Denmark Czech Republic Bulgaria Belgium EU Source: Eurostat (Labour Force Survey) In 2007, 57.5 % of young Europeans aged were categorised as economically active. This was a drop by one per cent from With regard to this age group, Member States can be separated into three categories: those having activity rates below 50 % (Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, and Romania), those who displayed activity rates of more than 70 % (Denmark and the Netherlands) and finally those having activity rates between 50 % and 70 % (remaining countries). With 44 % of young people categorised as economically active in 2007, Lithuania recorded N 29 EN

171 the largest drop in activity level from 2000 (minus 10.5 %) while Sweden registered the highest increase (7.9 %) going from 55 % to 63 %. Activity levels vary according to gender. In most Member States, more than half of young men aged were economically active. There is no such main trend for young women, where activity rates varied between 70 % (Denmark and the Netherlands) and 39 % (Hungary). Activity rates also vary according to the level of education with the most educated young people displaying activity rates of more than 75 %. Furthermore, education seems to lessen the gender imbalance and to ease young people entry into the labour market Who are the young economically inactive people? At the EU level, more than 65 % of young people with at most lower secondary education are economically inactive; they are only 16 % among high educated ones. Among young inactive people two categories can be distinguished: those who do not want to work and those who would like to work but do not look for a job due to specific reasons: own illness or disability, education or training, family responsibilities. On average around 80 % of young inactive people aged do not seek employment, many of them still being in the formal education system. At the EU level, 65 % of young inactive people aged do not seek an employment because of education or training (at Member State level, the percentages reached a minimum of 76.8 % for Sweden and a maximum of 97 % for Luxembourg). This is not surprising as the majority of young people aged are still in education. More than 60 % of the young inactive people not seeking employment are women. In addition, inactive young people not looking for a job are more widespread among the youngest age class having only lower secondary education. This proportion decreases with the level of education until reaching a one digit percentage for those having attained the tertiary level Off the beaten paths: away from education and activity Since inactivity is partly accounted for by growing share of young people who tend to stay in education beyond the age of compulsory schooling, the following indicators consider all those who are, voluntary or involuntary, Neither in Education. Employment nor Training (NEET) allowing to better estimate young people most at risk on the labour market. This group of either unemployed or inactive youth and not following any education may face difficulties to find work or may drop out of the labour force altogether because of being discouraged to work or for other unspecified reasons (as opposed to those who are inactive because of family commitments, military service, travel or leisure). At the European level, more than one third of young people aged were NEET. The EU average sometimes hides big differences between the Member States. Indeed, this share reached more than 50 % for Bulgaria and Hungary and around 20 % in Denmark and the Netherlands. By the age of 25 the share of young people in NEET is lower compared to the youngest age class: one might suppose that this decline is mainly due to those who have already found a job or enrolled again in education. Nevertheless, in many countries there are still more than 20 % of young people aged years considered as NEET. N 30 EN

172 Transition between education and work takes place mainly between 18 and 24 Half of 20 year-old young people were on the EU labour market in In a number of countries, the age of entry onto the labour market has increased between 2000 and In this period, the youngest age at which at least 50 % of young people entered the labour market increased by 2 years in Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Romania and Slovakia. On the other hand, Austria experienced in the same time period that the youngest age at which at least 50 % of young people entered the labour market was reduced by two years. In 2007, the vast majority of 15 year-olds were in education/training and not active in employment. The exception here is Denmark, where nearly half of the 15 year-olds (48.5 %) were both in education and active in the employment market. The proportion of young people devoting themselves exclusively to education or training decreases with age whereas the proportion of young people characterised as active increases with age. Indeed, 90.7 % of all Europeans aged 15 years old in 2007 were in education or training, while this number dropped to 3.2 % for 29 year-olds. At the age of 29, roughly three-quarters of the young population were categorised as economically active. Transition from education to employment mainly takes place between 18 and 24. An indicator of this is that among 18 year-olds, 59 % were exclusively in education or training in 2007, while only 13 % were categorised as exclusively economically active. At the age of 24, on the other hand, the proportion has switched, with a majority of young people being active. Around 20 % of 18 year olds in the EU combine education or training with employment. For 24 year olds, the rate is slightly reduced to 16 %. In some Member States (Denmark, the Netherlands, Austria, the United Kingdom), the majority of 18 year-olds were in education or training while they were also active on the employment market. In most Member States, however, a majority of young people were still only in education/training and inactive on the labour market In both 2000 and 2007 at least half of all 20 year-olds were on the labour market either as unemployed or employed (full-time or part-time). There were striking differences across the European Union, however, with young people entering the labour market much earlier in some countries (Denmark, the Netherlands, Austria, and the United Kingdom) than in others (Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Hungary and Romania). Among 24 year-olds, a majority of young people were economically active and not in education. In Denmark, however, almost half combined both work and education, while in the Netherlands, Finland and Slovenia three out ten 24 year-olds did the same. At the same time, these countries were among those that recorded the highest employment rates. In 16 EU Member States, more than 50 % of year-olds were inactive in the labour market one year after leaving school. This is double the rate as for year-olds. In a majority of EU Member States (except in Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom) more than 70 % of 29 year-olds were economically active and no longer in education The higher the level of education, the lower the risk of unemployment USEFUL CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS Employment rate represent persons in employment as a percentage of the economically active population. N 31 EN

173 Unemployment rate represent unemployed persons as a percentage of the economically active population. Unemployment ratio represents unemployed persons as a percentage of the total population. Long-term unemployed persons are persons who have been unemployed for one year or more. Long term unemployment is computed as a percentage of total unemployed in the same age group. Source: Eurostat, "Labour force survey: Methods and definition" Unemployment rates decrease with the level of education. Among EU Member States, people with lower secondary education are nearly 3 more times at risk of unemployment than people with higher education. The unemployment gap between those with low levels and high levels of education slightly increased from 2000 to It is probable that people with a low level of education are more subject to labour market adjustment, particularly as economies are impacted by internationalisation and increasing competition with emerging economies Diplomas no guarantee for employment In 2007, only 20.7 % of young Europeans who attained lower secondary education were employed one year after they left initial education. This proportion trebled for young people with a tertiary qualification (65.8 % of those were employed one year after leaving education). Still, whatever their level of education, the transition to employment takes time for a significant proportion of young people. The more demanding they are (in terms of expected wages, working conditions, etc.), the more difficult it will be to find a job. This may also reveal the inadequacy of some tertiary education programmes to the need of the national labour market. The majority of the member States followed the European trend with Greece getting out of the lot with generally highest unemployment rates recorded among young people having higher level of education. RESEARCH FINDINGS OF THE SPREW PROJECT: SOCIAL PATTERNS OF RELATION TO WORK 6 Are there changing patterns of relation to work among younger and older generations? The overall objective of the SPReW project was to examine the factors leading to solidarity or tensions in intergenerational relations, in the specific area of work and correlated fields. While age is also an important variable, it can be observed from the SPReW results, that other variables (in particular gender, but also education, socio-professional groups, economic development, institutional contexts) may overwhelm the effect of the generation variable. Contrary to a widespread opinion that young people are more instrumental and less interested by work, young people (< 30) have a more "expressive" relation to work, i.e. a greater request for self-fulfilment in work (esp. when they are highly educated): the human relations at work and the social usefulness are important to them, as well as the opportunities to express oneself at work, the interest of the work, the feeling of success and the level of autonomy. 6 The SPREW project was funded under the 6th framework programme of the European Union (Citizens and governance programme) and involved research partners from six countries (BE, FR, DE, HU, IT, PT), running from May August 2008 Info: N 32 EN

174 Both the educational level of workers and the feminisation of the labour market increased significantly in recent years. Women appear to be more expressive, although they are likely to change their attitude when they have a family to care for. Women s working pattern changes after maternity, from a very expressive to a more instrumental one. Young people (< 30) are more exposed to low wages, precariousness and unemployment although they benefit from a positive educational and digital differential in comparison with the older. Although they are less afraid about instability and precariousness than the previous generations, they ask for more social protection and higher income but also for more freedom and opportunity for selfdevelopment. Despite objectives differences, a perception of conflict among generations does not really emerge. Nevertheless, we should consider the possibility that more awareness of generations may initiate social tensions in the future. The two "extreme" groups on the labour market seem to face an identical problem, since both lack a fair recognition at work. From one side, young people feel undervalued as for their education, whereas the older generation people feel undervalued as for their work experience. Above all, they fear about losing their job because they are aware that companies are not going to consider any longer the result of many years of learning-by-doing as a real resource Young people in unemployment Once the transition from education to employment is over, a later step should be surmounted: find a stable job. This is probably an important step for those who want to settle down (set up a family or buy a house). Indeed, unstable job (i.e. temporary or part-time job) might have repercussions on the family life such as the difficulty to get a real estate loan, to leave parental home, to set up a family, to have children. Unemployment rates by age group (15-24, 25-74, total), EU-27, 2008 N 33 EN

175 Total Source: Eurostat (Labour Force Survey) Youth unemployment rate (15.3 % in 2007, 15.4 % in 2008) is nearly twice the percentage observed among the whole working population and nearly three times higher than for the older economically active population. But the EU Member States show a large spectrum of results. In 2007; the Netherlands and Denmark had the lowest youth unemployment rates for (respectively at 5.9 % and 7.9 %). The only other Member States with youth unemployment rates below 10 % for the age class were Austria, Ireland and Lithuania. At the other extreme, for the age group years, youth unemployment rates above 20 % were recorded in Greece, Italy, Poland, Romania and Slovakia in N 34 EN

176 Unemployment rate by country, 2007 United Kingdom Sweden Finland Slovakia Slovenia Romania Portugal Poland Austria Netherlands Malta Hungary Luxembourg Lithuania Latvia Cyprus Italy France Spain Greece Ireland Estonia Germany Denmark Czech Republic Bulgaria Belgium EU Source: Eurostat (Labour Force Survey) For the age group unemployment rates exceeded 10 %, in Greece, Portugal, Italy, Spain, France, Poland and Slovakia. Youth unemployment rates in Europe as a whole decreased by about 3 % from 2000 to 2007 for both age groups. At Member States level, the situation varies. For the youngest age group, four Member States (Sweden, Portugal, Hungary and Luxembourg recorded significant increases (more than 5 %). Regarding the oldest age group, only Portugal recorded a noteworthy raise (more than 7 %). Nonetheless the crisis can change a lot the situation on the labour market in different countries. As regards gender difference, unemployment rates for young women in the EU are generally higher than for young men. While some Member States show small differences between male and female youth unemployment rates, there are a few countries with very significant gender gaps. The most extreme case is Greece, where the female youth unemployment rate is almost twice as high as for young males for both age groups. Other Member States with a particular large youth unemployment gender gap are Spain and Portugal Long term youth unemployment Young people in unemployment and especially those in long term unemployment are at risk of social exclusion. Generally, those people have a socially unacceptable income not allowing a life which fits the societal standards. At the European level 26 % of unemployed aged and 35 % of unemployed were unemployed for 12 month or more. N 35 EN

177 At the Member State level, there is a strong heterogeneity. For the younger age-group (15-24) the long term-unemployment rate ranges from less than 4 % in Sweden to 57 % in Slovakia. In Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, Hungary and Poland more than one third of unemployed people have been without a job for more than one year. For the oldest age group, nearly half of the countries show higher rates than the EU average, which stands at 35 %. Generally, long term unemployment is negatively correlated with the level of education completed and it tends to decrease with higher education. Nevertheless, there are two exceptions - Estonia and Lithuania - which recorded the highest share of long term unemployment among young people who have tertiary education. Looking at the youth unemployment to population ratio instead of the unemployment rate shows a different picture. The European unemployment ratio in 2007 for young men aged was 6.8 % while it was 7.3 % for young people aged Sweden and Greece registered the highest youth unemployment ratio for young people aged and respectively. Lithuania displayed the lowest youth unemployment ratio for young people in both age groups. In some Member States, the difference between the unemployment rate and employment ratio is higher than 15 %. This reveals that the majority of young people are inactive because of education Working while studying, studying while working On average, around one-third of European employed youth aged are students or apprentices, compared to only 16 % of the age group. In some countries this share is much higher: in Denmark and the Netherlands over 65 % of employed youth are students or apprentices While in Finland and Germany more than half of employed youth are students or apprentices. Conversely, the lowest share of students or apprentices among employed young people was observed in Romania (about 5 % for both youth age groups). USEFUL CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS Employers employing one or more employees are defined as persons who work in their own business, professional practice or farm for the purpose of earning a profit, and who employ at least one other person A Self-employed person not employing any employees are defined as persons who work in their own business, professional practice or farm for the purpose of earning a profit, and who employ no other persons. Employees are defined as persons who work for a public or private employer and who receive compensation in the form of wages, salaries, fees, gratuities, payment by results or payment in kind; nonconscript members of the armed forces are also included. Family workers are persons who help another member of the family to run a farm or other business, provided they are not classed as employees. Employees with temporary contracts are those who declare themselves as having a fixed term employment contract or a job which will terminate if certain objective criteria are met, such as completion of an assignment or return of the employee who was temporarily replaced. N 36 EN

178 Full-time/part-time pattern of the main job is declared by the respondent except in the Netherlands, where part-time is determined if the usual hours are fewer than 35 hours and full-time if the usual hours are 35 hours or more, and in Sweden where this criterion is applied to the self-employed. Source: Eurostat Temporary contracts For many young people, having a temporary or part-time job may be seen as a stepping-stone towards permanent employment. However, it also limits a person's possibility to express his or her potential. Temporary contracts therefore limit the financial and personal autonomy of young Europeans. Percentage of people aged that have a temporary job because they could not find permanent job, 2007 The share of young people on a temporary contract decreases with age. At the European level, almost 40 % of employed year-olds work on a temporary contract, with more than 60 % on a temporary contract in Slovenia, Poland and Spain. This is reduced to around 20 % for the age group and down to less than 10 % for employed people age This shows that young people face not only a transition from school to work but also a transition from an unstable to a stable employment situation. With such a situation, there is a risk that a young person becomes "trapped" in unstable employment, moving from one temporary contract to another without being able to get into a permanent job. The use of temporary contracts is increasing. Between 2000 and 2007, there was an increase in the use of such contracts of about 5 %. In Poland, this increase has been even more significant. There are no large gender differences at EU level with respect to temporary youth employment. On average, young women are slightly more likely to be in a temporary contract than young men, although there are of course differences between Member States. N 37 EN

179 At the European level, more than 50 % of low educated young people aged have temporary contracts. This percentage decreased with the level of education and was down to 38.5 % among young people with tertiary education. Among young people aged 25-29, around 25 % was on a temporary contract independent of the level of education. Temporary work may be either voluntary or involuntary. The later comprises persons that could not find a permanent job, enter a contract with a period of training or who are in a probationary period (which is considered as temporary work if the contract finishes automatically at its end). At the European level, the majority of young people in temporary work did not choose it. This is true for all EU Member States except for Slovenia, where about 60 % young people aged in temporary work did not want a permanent job. The proportion of young people choosing temporary work is slightly higher in the age group than among year-olds in all EU Member States, except in the Netherlands, Slovenia, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom. The percentage of persons on a temporary contract who could not find a permanent job increases with age. At the European level, this was the case for around 37 % of young people age 15-24, while it was 65 % for those aged Part-time work Just as more young people are entering the labour market on temporary contracts, they are also overrepresented among employees in part-time jobs. These two conditions are often complementary: A young person might both have a part-time job and be on a temporary contract. On average, 25 % of European young people aged who are employed work part-time mainly because of education purposes. This is much less the case for year olds, of which only half have part-time employment for the same reason. The percentage of young European employees who work part-time has increased from 2000 to 2007 for the age group while remaining more or less stable for the age group. However, there is considerable variation, both across Member States and according to gender. While about 2 % of year old employees in Slovakia were working part-time, the same was the case for more than 20 % in the Netherlands and Denmark. Gender differences are very significant when considering temporary work, with young women on average almost twice as likely as men for working part-time. Only Romania displayed an insignificant gender difference. While education or training were the main reasons for accepting a part-time work for the year olds, reasons for having a part-time work are more balanced among the age group The most frequent reason was to look after children or other family members. Other reasons include own illness or disability or other family or personal reasons. However, in Greece, 69 % of part-time workers aged declared to be in such a job because it was not possible to find full-time employment Young entrepreneurs The proportion of young people running their own business is very low in Europe: about 4 % of young people aged and 9 % of the age group are self-employed. In all EU Member States the percentage of self-employed is higher in the age group than among year olds, and the rate of self-employed persons does not reach 10 % of the employed population for the age group except in Greece, Italy, Cyprus, Poland, Romania and Slovakia. N 38 EN

180 During the period , the share of self-employed young people in Europe slightly decreased. Italy had in 2007 the highest percentage of self-employed young people aged in Europe, with double the EU average. In most EU Member States, men made up the majority of self-employed. There was no significant gender difference in Cyprus. With regard to age, Belgium, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta and Austria showed a higher proportion of self-employment among men aged compared to men in the age group. The opposite trend was the case for women, with the highest self-employment rate in the youngest age category. In most Member States, entrepreneurial mindsets seem to be more widespread among young people with upper secondary school. The exceptions in this regard are Spain, Malta and Romania, where more than 60 % of self-employed youth aged had lower education. Luxembourg recorded the same proportion among highly educated young people aged According to the Factors of Business Success Survey (FOBS), less than 15 % of entrepreneurs are younger than 30 years old, 38 % between 30 and 39 years and 48 % of them are 40 years old or over. This has to be considered with caution since only few EU Member States collect data. The population that was surveyed in this project was enterprises born in 2002, that had survived to 2005, and that were still managed by their founders at the time of the survey. The survey was carried out from June 2005 to January 2006 by the National Statistical Institutes of 13 EU Member States (the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Trance, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Austria, Portugal, Slovenia, Slovakia, Sweden, Bulgaria and Romania), on a voluntary basis. Six out of 10 entrepreneurs did not have any special training. Almost all of those who did go through training did it on their own initiative. The exceptions here are Italy and France: in Italy about half of the entrepreneurs undertook a special training on their own initiative while one fourth of French entrepreneurs did so upon a public authority s request. The same pattern applies for all ages: young entrepreneurs did not get more specific training than their older counterparts. Young entrepreneurs have various educational backgrounds. Three groups of Member States can be distinguished: In the first, a majority of entrepreneurs had an upper secondary education (Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Italy, Austria, Portugal, Slovenia, Slovakia and Sweden). In the second group, the majority had a tertiary education (Estonia, Latvia Lithuania and Luxembourg) while in the third group, consisting only of Romania, a majority of the entrepreneurs had a primary or lower secondary education. Among the most important motivations for starting one's own business in all countries that participated in the survey were a desire for new challenges and being one s own boss. Future earning is also an important aspect when starting up its own business: about 80 % of Czech, Romanian, Slovenian and Slovakian entrepreneurs reported the financial aspect as main motivation. Avoiding unemployment could motivate young people to set up their own business. This was stated as being an important motivation for a majority of young entrepreneurs in all participating countries apart from the Czech Republic, Latvia, Austria, Sweden, Luxembourg and Denmark Focus of activity Participation of young people in the economic sector depends on the structure of each national economy. At the EU level, young people aged are proportionally more numerous in the sectors of wholesale N 39 EN

181 and retail trade. On the other hand, manufacturing shows the highest share of young people aged These sectors were also the main ones employing older people aged Half of young people aged are employed in low skilled or elementary occupations. Nearly 20 % are employed either as legislators, senior officials and manager, professionals or technicians or associates professionals. Of course, youth aged are underrepresented in senior or management positions given their young age and their lack of experience. About 4 out of ten young people aged has skilled non manual positions and more than 25 % are occupied as skilled manual employees. The proportion of young adults working in elementary and low skilled non manual occupations stands at 35 %. N 40 EN

182 KEY FIGURES RELATING TO EMPLOYMENT OF YOUNG PEOPLE 57.5 % of young Europeans aged are considered as economically active (meaning that they are either employed or actively seeking employment) More than one third of young people aged are NEETs (Not in Education, Employment or Training) The unemployment rate of young people aged considered economically active was 15.4 % in 2008, almost three times as high as for the older economically active population Half of young people aged 20 are on the labour market 26 % of unemployed year-olds and 35% of unemployed year-olds have been unemployed for more than 12 months One third of employed year-olds are students or apprentices Half of employed year-olds are in a low skilled or elementary occupation 40% of employed year-olds work on a temporary contract 25 % of employed year-olds have a part-time job 4 % of youth aged are self-employed entrepreneurs, while the same goes for 9% of yearolds 2.3. Young people and social exclusion Unequal access to opportunities Unequal access to opportunities tends to deepen the gap between young people's life prospects. The prospects of young people vary widely, according to their socio-economic background and other variables. A number of youth groups are more exposed to social exclusion and poverty than others. Amongst the factors leading to this situation are early school dropouts, low educational achievements, a migrant or Roma background, mental health problems, a low socioeconomic background, disability, exposure to violence and substance abuse. 7 The problems experienced by such groups of youth can, amongst others, be translated into decreased access to necessary services, poor health, lack of decent housing or homelessness, financial exclusion, reduced participation in the community and further exclusion from the labour market and, consequently, shorter life expectancy. Accordingly, access to education and training, increased opportunities for entering the labour market (including measures to facilitate the transition from school to work), provision of decent housing and quality health care, access to basic services such as transport and to other services such as financial services (e.g. credit), are among the welfare goods facilitating opportunities and supporting integration within society EU indicators, European Commission Staff Working Document, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities Units E2 and E4, N 41 EN

183 Living conditions Children and young people, in particular from disadvantaged backgrounds, face higher risk of social exclusion and poverty. Data shows that living conditions during childhood and young age have a significant impact on further life prospects. 9 There is a vicious circle of intergenerational inheritance following from growing up in a household defined as being at risk of poverty and social exclusion and thus having less access to opportunities. Of the 16 % of Europeans at risk of poverty, 19 million are children (age 0-17). Children are often at greater risk-of-poverty than the rest of the population (19 % in the EU, 2007 figures). This is true in most countries except in Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Cyprus and Slovenia. Child poverty rates range from 10 % in Denmark to 25 % in Italy and Romania. Rate of people at risk-of-poverty in the EU (%), whole population and children, % of total population concerned EU25 DK FI CY DE SI FR NL BE AT SE BG* CZ SK MT EE LU PT IE EL ES UK IT LT RO* HU LV PL Children (0-17) Total Source: SILC (2006) A detailed analysis of the determinants of child poverty (age 0-17) was carried out in 2007 by the Social Protection Committee, leading to a detailed diagnosis of the main causes of child poverty in each country 10. The analysis confirms that child poverty outcomes result from complex interactions between joblessness, in-work poverty (of households) and the impact of social transfers, and that the countries achieving the best outcomes are those performing well on all fronts, notably by combining strategies aimed at facilitating access to employment and enabling services (child care etc.) with income support. Accordingly, the extent to with lone households and large families experience greater risk of poverty depends both on their characteristics (age, education level of parents, etc.), and on the labour market situation of the parents (joblessness, in-work poverty, etc.), which can be influenced by the availability of adequate support through access to enabling services such as childcare, measures of reconciliation of work and family life, and in-work income support. This situation will follow children as they grow older "Child Poverty and Well-being in the EU, current status and way forward", Social Protection Committee, January 2008: EU indicators, European Commission Staff Working Document, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities Units E2 and E4, "Child Poverty and Well-being in the EU, current status and way forward", Social Protection Committee, January 2008 N 42 EN

184 Young people at risk of poverty 20 % of young people aged are regarded as being in risk of poverty (defined as having an income below 60 % of the national median income). One in five young people find themselves in this situation. Young adults face a higher risk of poverty as support from their parental home diminishes and integration to the labour market is still in an early stage. The rate of young people aged at risk of poverty, when looking at their earned income, varies greatly across EU countries, from less than 10 % in Cyprus, Malta and Slovenia to 30 % or more in Denmark and Sweden 11. However, when trying to assess young people's actual living conditions, figures on youth income have to be interpreted with great caution and supplemented with knowledge on other determinants on poverty and social exclusion, as this indicator alone does not accurately reflect the living conditions of young people, covering access to resources and to opportunities. This implies that the earned income of young people on its own does not give an accurately reflect whether a young person is deprived of opportunities, or if their life prospects are under threat. Young people, who have left the parental home, have often limited financial means, but they nevertheless have access to housing and can benefit from their own source of income, through work, student loans or benefits. They might also receive financial support 12 from their family, which means that living on one's own is not always a sign of self-sufficiency. In average, young people left the parental home at a mean age of 25 years. Thus, a majority of young people in Denmark and Finland have left the parental home, unlike most young people in other EU countries where between 66 % and 88 % of year-olds are still living with their parents 13. Among the reasons for this is access to student loans or benefits, or financial support from their family. Moreover young people who have left their parental home often have access to housing, despite very limited income. Young people living with their parents are likely to face a lower risk of being in a risk situation, since they benefit directly from the income of their parents. However, further analysis would be needed to determine, whether they stay with their parents by choice, or because they cannot become self-sufficient through lack of access to employment 14 and housing Social protection and social inclusion 2008: EU indicators, European Commission, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affaires and Equal Opportunities, Units E.2 and E.4, October Financial support from parents is recorded as income in EU-SILC under the inter-household transfer component only insofar as these transfers are regular. Social protection and social inclusion 2008: EU indicators, European Commission, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affaires and Equal Opportunities, Units E.2 and E.4, October The Commission working document accompanying the 2007 Commission Communication 'Promoting young people's full participation in education, employment and society' provides a detailed analysis of the employment situation of young people together with a revival of Member State policies to foster youth employment in the context of the Lisbon Strategy for growth and jobs. See: N 43 EN

185 At risk of poverty rate of age groups and 24-49, % of young people aged earn less than half the average income for the country they live in. 27 % of young people earn less than 60 % (the income level below 60 % of the median income is defined as "at risk of poverty"), and 11 % of young people earn less than 40 % of the average national income (in 2006). KEY FIGURES RELATING TO SOCIAL INCLUSION OF YOUNG PEOPLE 19 million children (age 0-17) are at risk of poverty in the EU 20 % of young people aged are at risk of poverty In average, young people leave the parental home at 25 years of age (mean age) 18 % of young people aged earn less than half the average income for the country they live in N 44 EN

186 3. ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP 3.1. Citizenship and participation Active citizenship: today s choices, the life of tomorrow s community Active citizenship of young people, as the political participation and participation in associational life characterized by tolerance and non violence and the acknowledgement of the rule of law and human rights 15, is a key component of the future of European Union. It is also a political priority at the European level. USEFUL CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS The term citizenship is used to express three different concepts which can be used simultaneously: what a citizen is, i.e. his or her status; what a citizen can or cannot do, i.e. in terms of rights and duties; and which activities a citizen undertakes, i.e. a set of practices that demonstrate his/ her or membership of a society Information: the key to participation? Information of young people is, on the basis of the White Paper on Youth 16, a priority at the European level. It is increasingly seen as key for ensuring their access to social and civic opportunities. According to the 2006 Commission analysis of national reports under the Youth open method of coordination 17, 12 Member States presented comprehensive youth information strategies (Austria, Belgium, Spain, Finland, France, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Slovenia, Slovakia, Netherlands, and Czech Republic). 18 Member States (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Denmark, Spain, Estonia, Greece, Finland, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Latvia, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, and United Kingdom) had also created youth web portals at this time. Data about 20 Member States is currently available in the European Knowledge Centre on Youth Policy (EKCYP) database, and over 2300 information points at national or regional level are registered Youth Participation On the basis of the White Paper on Youth, participation of young people is like information a priority of the EU open method of coordination. Two kinds of participation have been identified by Member States as common objectives for increasing participation of young people: participation in community life and participation in representative democracy Indicators for active citizenship and citizens' education. Research report for the European Commission, DG EAC European Commission White Paper of 21 November 2001 on a new impetus for European youth, COM(2001) 681 Commission Staff Working Document SEC(2006) 1006 N 45 EN

187 Since the publication of the White Paper, a number of Member States have clarified or strengthened the legal rules governing participation by young people. These provisions often refer to the legal recognition of local youth councils or the powers devolved to national youth councils. A number of Member States have made participation by young people a national priority through the adoption of annual or multiannual strategic plans. All EU Member States have representative structures in schools and universities and, increasingly, youth councils and children's or youth parliaments. (Commission Staff Working Document: Analysis of national reports submitted by the Member States concerning participation by and information for young people). The following analysis is mainly based upon Eurobarometer surveys, the Member States' national reports on participation of young people and information available in the EKCYP system. Information on a number of Member States is missing, and it is not possible to identify overall pan-european trends. For the future, improving data definition and collection about the following issues is recommended: membership of trade unions and youth organisations, participation in elections, numbers of young people elected at regional and local level, definition of youth councils and other participatory structures, percentage of young people who are members of youth organisations (some Member States include, for example, membership of sports clubs), or categorisation of different types of financial support. Nevertheless, a first picture of the developments in youth participation can be given A decline in traditional membership of organisations Membership in organisations, associations and clubs does not seem to be very appealing to young people in the European Union: Only 22 % of young people answered "yes" to the question: "are you member of an organisation?" There is a clear division between the northern Member States, where young people are more often members of clubs and associations, and the southern Member States, where such membership is less extensive. Previous surveys in 1997 and 2001 indicate that membership of sports clubs is very popular. This is confirmed in the reporting from 2007: almost half of young persons (49 %) are members of a sports club. Far behind follows memberships in youth organisations and cultural associations (8 %), trade unions and hobby clubs (7 %), political parties and religious associations (5 %). Human rights movements and consumer organisations have the smallest number of young memberships. But young people still participate in a lot of activities. Recreational groups and religious organisations and were the most popular engagements for European youth in % of the young men (aged between 16 and 29) interviewed took part in recreational activities through dedicated groups or organisations, and 18.9 % of young women interviewed did so during the last 12 months. Religion is still a common way of being active in society, with a 20.1 % of young women practicing this option and 16 % of young men. Only few young people (less than 4 %) participated in activities of political parties or trade unions during N 46 EN

188 Some examples of trade unions membership among young people Country Percentage (estimate) Finland 10 Germany 3.7 Greece 2.3 Romania 0.05 Slovakia 3.9 Slovenia 6.04 United Kingdom 10 % of people aged 16-24, and 24 % of people aged Source: European Knowledge Centre on Youth Policy (EKCYP) Percentage of the population aged that participated in the last 12 months in activities of, by sex, EU-25, 2006 Men aged have been more active than women in the last 12 months in getting involved in political parties, trade unions, professional associations and recreational groups. Women participated more in church activities and other religious organisations and charitable activities. There is no substantial difference between the participation rate of young people (16 29) and the overall population. N 47 EN

189 Percentage of the population of age group that participated in the last 12 months in activities of, EU-25, Interest in participative democracy When asked which political actions are most important to ensure that their voice is heard by policy makers, 30 % of young Europeans list participating in debates as the most important activity. Joining a political party comes second (16 %) and taking part in a demonstration third (13 %). Signing a petition, being a member of or supporting a non-governmental organization (NGO), or joining a trade union is equally recognized as an effective way of political activism by 11 % of European youth (Eurobarometer 2007 survey on Youth). More than one in four young people signed a petition during the last year, and almost the same number presented his or her view in an online discussion forum. One in five young Europeans took part in a public demonstration. The highest level of overall political involvement among young persons was recorded in Denmark, Finland and Sweden, and the lowest in Latvia, Bulgaria, Estonia, Hungary and Malta. Young men tend to be more active, in particular when presenting their view in an online forum or taking part in a public demonstration. Young Europeans living in a metropolitan or urban area are more likely to be involved than those from rural areas Legal framework for participation structures The above mentioned 2006 Commission synthesis report analysed which actions had been implemented by Member States to support the participation structures. This report shows that the legal framework for youth participation has been improved. Some Member States have adopted legislation, others have strategic action plans or agreed obligations for the consultation of young people. This may be an act that requires each local authority to recognise/establish one or more youth councils (Belgium), a policy concept (the Czech Republic), a budget for participation (Denmark), a local youth act (Finland), a social code (Germany), a national action plan, a youth law or an act (Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia), or acts that regulate agreements between non-governmental organisations and the Government (Luxembourg) or which require young people to be consulted (United N 48 EN

190 Kingdom). There may also be mechanisms or legislation encouraging the self-organisation of young people by regulating the process for the establishment and structuring of youth representation (Bulgaria). In at least six Member States the existence of school councils is a requirement by law. In Sweden, a national campaign called School elections 2006 ('Skolval 2006') was carried out in schools all across the country a few days before the ordinary national, regional and local parliamentary elections. In most Member States, activities are aimed towards all young people, but with special emphasis on certain groups. The types of groups differ per Member State, but often include immigrants/ethnic minorities, women, homosexuals, disabled, unemployed or young drug addicts Youth councils The definition, structure and form of youth councils differ between Member States. Almost two thirds of the Member States have local youth councils. Data from EKCYP indicate that every municipality in Greece and the Flemish part of Belgium has a youth council. In the United Kingdom, there are more than 400 local youth councils although there is no uniform structure for them. Sweden has around 50 local youth councils, but here the organisation differs per municipality; a number of Swedish municipalities have mechanism for a regular dialogue with young people. Finland has 20 youth councils which are elected by local authorities and operate within municipal structures. In addition, Finland has 180 youth councils elected by young people themselves (there are 400 municipalities). Germany and Italy and the Netherlands report a considerable number of local youth councils (200, 471 and 124 respectively). In new Member States, local youth councils are being formed; Estonia reported 4 in 2005 which increased to 20 in 2007, in Slovenia 39 youth councils were established after 2000, and in Romania there are 28. For Slovakia and the Czech Republic, the possibility exists to create youth councils; while in Lithuania 46 out of 60 municipalities already have a youth council. At the regional level, 15 Member States report having regional youth councils, although some have only one. In several countries, the regional youth councils cover most regions: in Germany all "Länder" have a council, Estonia has councils at the county government level while the Slovak Republic has one in each region (8 in total). Greece has prefectural youth councils; Lithuania has 25 regional councils and the Czech Republic 12. In Denmark all city or district councils have a youth council, and Austria and the Flemish part of Belgium both have 5 regional councils. The Netherlands, Romania and Bulgaria have to regional youth councils each. In the United Kingdom, the regional youth councils are the same as the regional youth parliaments. Almost all Member States have a national youth council. In most cases, it is an umbrella organisation of which other youth organisations are members (between 25 and 100 members). National Youth Councils, besides Europeans or International youth NGOs, are normally members of the European Youth Forum Youth parliaments 7 Member States reported having youth parliaments at the local level. The structures vary, however, and so does the number of youth parliaments. Germany has the highest number ( ) followed by the Czech Republic (around 300) and Austria (more than 100). Estonia and Bulgaria report on several local parliaments or councils, and Sweden has a few. Finland has no official structures, but reports on internetbased parliamentary forums for children. At the regional level, although 6 Member States report some activity, the number of initiatives is, in most cases, limited (some initiatives in Austria (2), Finland (1), Italy (4), Slovenia (2) and the Netherlands). N 49 EN

191 The UK parliament has a network of regional contacts, and the Czech Republic reports of 15 regional youth parliaments. At the national level, 13 Member States reported having a youth parliament although the way they are organised differ considerably. In many countries, the youth parliament is organised annually, as a one day event or on a project basis. In Estonia, the youth parliament is a body with member organisations. In Latvia the National Youth Parliament was established in In the Netherlands, a youth government (Jugendkabinet) was established in The UK has a youth parliament with 300 elected members, in Wales there is a Youth Assembly, Scotland has a Youth Parliament and there is a Youth Forum for Northern Ireland Other participatory structures The most common participatory structures are school and student councils, pupil and scholar parliaments, and information and consultancy services for young people. Other examples are open forums, such as consultation hours, and project related forms of participation such as playgrounds and youth centres (Austria), advisory bodies of youth boards and youth clubs (Cyprus). There are also youth organisations and adult organisations endorsing children s rights (Czech Republic), opinion organisations of youngsters (Finland) and interactive websites. The structures within ministries and other public authorities for the participation of young people seem to be more numerous and better developed in some countries (such as Finland, Sweden, and Denmark), in comparison to others (such as Hungary, Greece, UK, Austria, Lithuania and Slovenia) Youth interest in politics If we consider the results of the European Social Survey, young people aged and seem to show a low interest in politics. A majority of young people declare that they are hardly or not interested in politics, whilst only 6 % declare that they are very interested. Among older generations, the percentage of those very interested in politics is more than twice as high. The interest in politics increases with age: 36 % of people aged 30 and over declared to be quite interested in politics, whereas 26 % and 30 %, respectively, of people aged and years old gave the same answer. Apart from the generational gap, interest in politics also shows gender differences. Young men respond more often than young women that they are interested in politics. Almost 40 % of young males declared that they are quite or very interested in politics, while a little less than 30 % of females showed such interest. Overall, European youth is seemingly still distant from politics. 62 % of young men and 70 % of young women declare that they are hardly interested or not interested at all in politics. Some examples of membership of political parties among young people aged COUNTRY PERCENTAGE Czech Republic 1.2 (2005) Finland 2 (2006) Estonia 4 (2007) N 50 EN

192 Germany 2.8 (2007) Romania 0.32 (2007) Slovak Republic 9.95 (2006) Sweden 4 (2006) Source: European Knowledge Centre on Youth Policy (EKCYP) N 51 EN

193 To contradict the findings in the European Social Survey in 2006, a Eurobarometer survey on youth from 2007 indicated that young Europeans are indeed interested in politics. A majority of respondents say that they are very interested or interested in politics and current affairs: 82 % of them are interested in politics in their own country, 73 % claim to be interested at a city or regional level, and 66 % say they are interested in politics and current affairs in the EU. In the Eurobarometer survey, young Greeks have the highest level of interest in politics and current affairs, while young people in Romania, Belgium and the Czech Republic have the lowest level of interest in politics in general. Older and highly educated young persons, and those who live in a metropolitan area, are the most interested in politics at all levels. These findings, which may seem contradictory, could suggest that while young people may be less interested in traditional party politics, they are indeed engaged in current public and political affairs or topics that have a direct impact on their daily lives or on their future in the longer term (for example on climate change). THE CIVICWEB PROJECT: YOUNG PEOPLE, THE INTERNET AND CIVIC PARTICIPATION 18 Does the Internet contribute to civic engagement and participation among young people? The CIVICWEB analyses the Internet as a potentially powerful tool for non-formal learning, affecting the development of social capital, and civic, political, social and economic participation among young people (aged 15-25). It focuses specifically on the range of civic sites now emerging on the web, created by many different organisations, interest groups and individuals, ranging from small-scale, local initiatives to national and international projects. An online survey among young internet users in the seven participating countries (partly "recruited" at the MTV website) reveals that young people are mainly interested in lifestyle and entertainment issues on the internet. Civic participation is only relevant for some 10 % of respondents, with social justice, spiritual and environmental issues being most "popular". Political issues are the least popular item, but interest in civic and political websites appears to be stronger among older young respondents, in particular those not living with their parents, youth that identify as religious, and among girls and young women. Gender appears to be a quite significant socio-economic variable, but surprisingly education level does not constitute a main feature. Participation in offline and online activities turns out to be strongly correlated; demonstrating that online and offline are complementary to each other, rather than substitutive. Websites by specialist groups (based on identity or locality) and aimed at a very specific audience (and often produced by members of that specific group) support a sense of belonging and community and are more 'used'. Regarding the production of civic websites for young people, the internet is mostly regarded as a cheap method of disseminating information and making contact with young people. However, for a website to be 18 The CIVICWEB project was funded under the 6th framework programme of the European Union (Citizens and governance programme) and involved research partners from seven countries (UK, Sweden, The Netherlands, Hungary, Spain, Slovenia and Turkey), running from September August 2009 Info: N 52 EN

194 known, a lot of thought needs to be given to marketing and publicity. Most civic website producers have neither the time nor the money to adequately publicise their sites and hence the core of users remain relatively small. They mostly function with a combination of one or two part time paid employees and several voluntary staff. There is a fairly high turnover of volunteer staff at many of the civic websites surveyed and sometimes this leads to the website not being updated for months or even to its closure. Static websites composed of visual images and written text are still the norm, though some funders of sites appear to think that complex and more expensive sites are automatically 'better'. But offering interactivity does not automatically mean that young people participate. Forums and interactive applications have to be carefully encouraged, motivated and managed. Interaction with the public sphere from young people s perspective appears to be most successful when it is both peer-to-peer and enables opportunities for reciprocal engagement with those in power though reciprocity is rarely the case. Dealing with controversial issues of social justice (sexuality, gender, etc.) can provoke strong and negative responses from some members of the public Participation by young people in the mechanisms of representative democracy The age at which people are eligible to vote is 18 for national elections 19, with the exception of Austria, where the age was lowered from 18 to 16 in In Italy, the age at which people are eligible to vote is also 18, except for elections to the Senate, for which the minimum age is 25. In most Member States, the age at which people are eligible to stand for election is 18 as well. However, there are variations from 18 to 40, especially for candidates standing for election as president or in senate (candidates must be over 40 years for Italian and Czech Senates for instance). Percentage of young people aged who voted in recent elections, some countries Compulsory vote European Parliament elections (2004) National elections Regional elections Austria NO 40 % 78 % Between % (according to the federal states) Belgium Flanders YES 100 % 100 % 100 % Finland NO 26 % 56 % 40 % Luxembourg YES 100 % Malta NO 24 % 24 % Romania NO N/A 65.8 % Slovak Republic NO 9.7 % 44.9 % 19 The voting age for local elections in some Federal States of Germany has been lowered to 16 in the 1990s. N 53 EN

195 Sweden NO 26.5% of % 69.9 % United Kingdom 31.6% of NO 45 % of % of % of % of Source: European Knowledge Centre on Youth Policy (EKCYP) These results are in line with the results of the Eurobarometer 2007: asked if they have voted in an election or referendum in the last three years, 62 % of young Europeans state that they did vote, 13 % that they did not vote, while less than one in four was not yet eligible to vote. The largest percentages of young persons who did not vote in an election or a referendum in the past three years is found in Latvia, the United Kingdom and Portugal, and the smallest percentages in Belgium (where voting is compulsory) followed by Sweden and Italy. Almost all Member States have launched campaigns to encourage young people to vote (Commission staff working document: Analysis of national reports submitted by the Member States concerning participation by and information for young people (SEC (2006) 1006). Asked which measures would help to be more active as a citizen in the society, 19 % answered "if the voting age would be lower". The post European elections 2004 Flash Eurobarometer survey (162) shows that at European level, the propensity to abstain from voting is higher when the voter is young (or a manual worker). More than two-thirds of voters between 18 and 24 (67%, compared to 54.3%) on the average) did not go to the polls. Conversely, a minority of people over 55 chose to abstain (41%). People between 25 and 39 were overrepresented (together with women, people who studied for a long time and employees) among "oneday abstentionists", people who decide the very day of the election not to vote. They are thus a group which can most easily be mobilised, all the more as young people also tend to feel not being sufficiently informed about elections. The European Parliament Eurobarometer (EB Standard 70) survey from autumn 2008 points out that the age group of the year olds failed to answer the question about the date of the next European elections more frequently than any other age group. The same European Parliament's survey shows that when asked about elements relative to the sense of European citizenship, young people between 15 and 24 years clearly distinguish themselves from their elders regarding the following three areas: 24% of young people (EU average: 18%) think that a European identity card in addition to a national identity card would strengthen the sense of European Citizenship. 21% support being able to vote in all elections organised in the Member State where one resides as opposed to the 19% of older respondents and 21% support a European civic education course for children from primary school age as opposed to 18% of older respondents Promoting participation through the European Union Promoting participation is one of the priorities of the EU Strategy for Youth: Investing and Empowering ( ). The main objective of this priority is to ensure the full participation of young people in society through encouraging youth participation in non-governmental youth organisations, civic life and in representative democracy. Promoting the participation of non-organised young people is stressed as important. N 54 EN

196 The European Union concretely supports projects aimed at enhancing participation of young people through the Youth in Action Programme ( ). "Participation of young people" is one of the four permanent priorities of the Programme. More than projects supported through the programme in 2007 (75 % of the projects granted) were described by the promoters as targeting this particular priority. The Youth in Action Programme, which succeeded the previous EU YOUTH Programme ( ), includes two actions of particular relevance to participation: Action 1.3 Youth Democracy Projects/ A Youth Democracy Project is developed by a European partnership, allowing the pooling of ideas, experiences and methodologies from projects or activities at local, regional, national or European level towards improving young people s participation. Action 5.1 Meetings of young people and those responsible for youth policy/ This sub-action supports cooperation, seminars and structured dialogue between young people who are active in youth work and youth organisations and who address issues related to youth policy. In 2007, which was the first year of implementation of the new Programme, the participation in these two actions was the following: more than young people participated in 54 projects under sub-action 1.3; more than young people participated in 41 projects under sub-action 5.1. Provisional figures for 2008 suggest a further increase in the interest for these actions. Beyond the Youth in Action Programme, Representations of the European Commission in member States have supported a wide range of actions with the aim of improving participation and active citizenship of young people. Activities include simulations of EU institutions, debating activities, competitions and workshops with youth organisations on selected topics. Moreover, among the "Plan D/Debate Europe" projects supported by the European Commission (DG Communication) following the call for proposals in 2007/2008, 26 projects specifically addressed the promotion of active participation of through democratic debate. Activities that were funded include online consultations, polls, group debates and mock parliaments. Activities were generally organised by non-governmental youth organisations, local authorities, universities and schools.similar activities will also be carried out in Trust in institutions Confidence in institutions may be considered a prerequisite to becoming active citizens. As pointed out by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 20, trust in political institutions refers to the extent to which individuals have a high degree of confidence in the institutions (government and parliament) and public administration of the country where they live. The European Social Survey has asked people how much they personally trust each of the institutions that were mentioned to them 21. Results show that Europeans have a lack of trust of towards their national OECD, Society at glance European Social Survey, (ESS2 and ESS 3) N 55 EN

197 political institutions. Less than 40 % of young people aged between 16 and 29 have trust in (or are neutral towards) politicians and political parties. On this issue, there is not great difference between agegroups. While older generations tend to trust (or be neutral towards) politicians slightly more than young people, young people tend to be more positive toward political parties. The percentage of people (independent of age) that distrust their country parliament is slightly over 50 %. However, the distrust of politicians in general is even higher than for the institution of the parliament. Trust (or neutral feeling) in police and in the legal system is higher in the total population. 75 % of people aged 30 and over trust the police, while for the age group under 30, the percentage is 70. Furthermore, 60 % of the total population trust the legal system of their country. People, and especially the young generation, tend to be more positive towards international institutions. Young people aged between 16 and 29 have more trust in the United Nations than older people: more than 70 % of youth trust the UN (with rates of more than 75 % in the Nordic countries) whereas they have only 66 % of trust from the older generation. It is commonly know that the European Union suffers from what can be labelled a democratic deficit, and is working to overcome this problem. Trust in the European Parliament, which is the only directly elected body of the European Union, is nevertheless above 50 %. 63 % of the population younger than 30 trust the European Parliament while 52 % in the population aged 30 and over trusted the same institution. However, in nearly half the countries for which data is available, more than one third of young people below 30 responded that they mistrust the European Parliament. Such mistrust reaches more than 40 % in Germany, Austria and the United Kingdom and is also the case for those aged between 25 and 29 years in Latvia, Hungary and Poland. The distrust of the European Parliament is lower in other countries, especially in Belgium, Denmark and Estonia, where less than one fourth of all respondents below 30 expressed such suspicion Voluntary activities The historical context of voluntary activities among young people differs throughout Europe. While there is a long and continuous tradition of volunteering in Western Europe, Central and Eastern European countries has had to re-develop frameworks for voluntary activities and service after the fall of communism. This must be taken into account when analysing the current state of play and recent developments in the field of volunteering. Partly because of this reason, the availability of data varies considerably among countries and must be assessed in a historical and cultural context. In some countries, systems for data collection on volunteering are not well developed, and understandings of terms/concepts related to voluntary service may vary considerably. USEFUL CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS Voluntary activities are all kinds of voluntary engagement. They are characterised by the following aspects: open to all, unpaid, undertaken by own free will, educational (non-formal learning aspect) and added social value. Voluntary service is part of voluntary activities and is characterised by the following additional aspects: fixed period; clear objectives, content, tasks, structure and framework; appropriate support and legal and social protection. N 56 EN

198 Civic service is a voluntary service managed by the State or on behalf of the State, e.g. in the social field or in civil protection. Civilian service is an alternative to compulsory military service in some countries, but not voluntary. In this report, volunteering is mainly analysed through assessing national reports on the implementation of European common objectives agreed by Member States under the Open Method of Coordination plus data from the European Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy (EKCYP) and Eurobarometer surveys. Available statistics concerning the rate of participation of young people in volunteering activities are insufficient. Most national governments do not systematically collect relevant data on volunteering for young people, and there is much room for improvement. According to the 2007 Commission analysis of national reports under the Youth open method of coordination 22, nine countries had either a youth volunteering strategy in place or in preparation (Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, United Kingdom). All countries that have a strategy, also have a volunteering law. Six countries had a voluntary service in place (Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, and Luxembourg). In 13 countries, specific measures had been taken to enhance the volunteering activities of young people with fewer activities (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom). France, Luxembourg, Belgium and the UK have made volunteering a political priority of their governments (at the time of the 2007 national reports). Cyprus, Greece and Italy have strengthened cooperation with schools; Spain has traditionally a good cooperation with Universities on volunteering. Finland has sought to develop a tripartite dialogue model for volunteering including decision makers, youth workers and researchers. Austria (Volunteer's Pass), Belgium, Finland (Finland), France (Passport of Commitment), Germany, Poland and Slovakia are among the countries which have developed the explicit recognition of individual skills and competence acquired through volunteering at national and European (Youthpass) level. At the the European Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy (EKCYP) information about the following 16 EU Member States is currently available (reporting 2007): Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, The Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Sweden, United Kingdom Older generations are more active in voluntary activities Available data suggest that young people participate less in voluntary activities than that of other age groups, even when corrected for national differences. Types of volunteering include informal and unpaid assistance, caring for other adults and other social activities in clubs, as well as political or community organisations. There are huge differences across countries, as far as voluntary activities go. Older people are most likely to be involved in these activities in the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark, whereas participation levels are lowest in the Southern and Central European countries taking part in the SHARE Survey (Survey on Health and Retirement in Europe, which does not cover all Member States 23 ) Commission Staff Working Document SEC(2007) 1084 The SHARE Survey has been funded through successive EU Research Framework Programmes. SHARE is a multidisciplinary and cross-national panel database of micro-data on health, socio-economic status and social and family networks of more than 30,000 individuals aged 50 or over. Eleven countries have contributed data to the 2004 SHARE baseline study. More countries are joining in later surveys, thus establishing a longitudinal dataset and research infrastructure. Info: N 57 EN

199 A Eurobarometer survey carried out in September 2008 revealed that almost three quarters of Europeans would consider participating in community work or volunteering after retirement Youth and voluntary activities: more advocacy than practise In a Eurobarometer on youth in January 2007, only 2 % of people aged between 15 and 30 report that they regularly participate in voluntary or community work during their leisure time. In the same survey, however, 16 % declare to be engaged (regularly or occasionally) in voluntary activities and 74 % of respondents think that "more available programmes encouraging voluntary work" will help young people become more active citizens in society. In the country questionnaires that Member States were asked to submit on volunteering under EKCYP 24, respondents were asked to "tick off" which of a total of 17 different kinds of volunteering activities exist in their countries (such as Community peacekeeping, social assistance, environment, education, humanitarian aid, etc.). All categories of volunteering have been selected for Germany and United Kingdom, as well as for the Flemish Community of Belgium. Sweden also has most types of voluntary activity. Portugal has 11 out of the 17 categories of volunteering with the largest number of young people participating in the environmental and sports categories, while in Italy, data indicate that six types of volunteering opportunities are present, with the most popular being welfare, followed by education and culture. Voluntary activities of young people have gained importance at national and European level in recent years. There is a large variety of voluntary activities throughout EU, whether they are organised by civil society or by public authorities. Different realities of volunteering across Member States Some examples The United Kingdom launched a national youth volunteering programme called 'vinvolved', accompanied by millions worth of grants to support a major expansion in volunteering for young people between the ages of 16 and 25. This completes the funding allocated to youth volunteering in this country. These support local, regional and national volunteering organisations in their respective territories. In addition, a number of organisations support youth volunteering specifically and a range of organisations offer full-time volunteering opportunities. There is also a network of more than 400 volunteer centres throughout the UK. In this country, there is a wide range of ways to accredit young people s learning and achievements in non-formal settings, which can include volunteering. The Awards Network has mapped these awards and their components against a nine level National Qualification Framework. In Germany, the national Child and Youth Plan provides a framework to support the development of an effective infrastructure for voluntary activities. This appears to be well funded and supports organisations in the field of child and youth services and welfare at the federal level. Pilot programmes and specific projects are also funded. Local and regional levels also have specific child and youth plans, under which youth volunteering activity is funded; primarily through 680 local youth welfare offices. The two main civic service programmes that receive support through a mixture of host organisation, state, federal and third party funds are: the Voluntary Social Year and the Voluntary Ecological Year In 2008 a new civic service focusing on developing countries has been launched, with funding to provide 24 European Knowledge Centre on Youth Policy N 58 EN

200 places for about volunteers per year. A range of non-public organisations also support voluntary activity (e.g. churches, lottery and private foundations). The range of actors in Germany includes government and non-governmental bodies and, also in terms of networks, there is a broad range: e.g. the Association of Voluntary Social Welfare Services, the Association of Volunteering Agencies and the Federal Network for Civil Engagement. There are also a number of information centres providing information on specific civil services, in the fields of the environment, sports and culture. There are numerous forms of recognition and accreditation for young people, including the In-Card, which is a certificate for volunteers who are active in a voluntary organisation. They must have attended a special qualification training and be at least 16, and the card gives them discounts on access to community services or cultural events. Over cards are issued each month. Some Federal States have their own method of certifying qualifications, and for international volunteers there is an International Certificate. In Portugal, some 238 youth associations are reported as active in the field of volunteering, together with 207 NGOs, 69 youth groups, 37 student associations, one university, 719 associations and other private entities, and 128 other bodies. Some 324 public service organisations at national and regional level are reported to be active in volunteering activity. This suggests a wide range of actors and activity, but may also indicate a degree of fragmentation. Certificates can be gained by volunteers for their work. In Italy, some organisations are reported as active in voluntary activities. All those operating within the National Civic Service are registered on a database. A sub-group of 12 of these, which constitutes the Conferenza Nazionale degli Enti per il Servizio Civile, is described as playing the most important role in the youth and voluntary fields. This includes CARITAS and WWF. Certificates can be gained by volunteers for their work. Sweden also has a long tradition and history of volunteering, in particular in terms of leisure and sports associations. Participation rates for the population as a whole are relatively high 50 % take part in some form of voluntary work. Amongst young people (between the ages 16 and 29), participation rates are 39 % for men and 43 % for women. The government supports activity primarily through financial support to NGOs. In addition, youth organisations can apply for financial support from municipalities. There are about 250 organisations which send or receive volunteers within approximately 25 programmes. Although the development of programmes and activities generally takes place within youth NGOs, the Government has taken the initiative in several specific areas, e.g. in the development of methods for the recognition of non-formal learning. The Government is working on methods for recognising non-formal and informal learning in a number of areas and have developed a special authority, the Swedish National Commission on Validation, to look into this issue Obstacles Certain groups of young people tend to participate in volunteering much more than others. There are a number of barriers to participation; financial conditions, geographical location, health status and so on. These barriers are particularly important for people with fewer opportunities. Unfortunately, there is insufficient data to conduct a deeper analysis of these differences in volunteering. The national reports from Member States also indicate that competing demands and increasing pressure on how young people should spend their time, in particular from the systems of formal education, can also discourage young people from becoming involved in volunteering. In some countries, a lack of clear legal and financial status for volunteer organisations and projects also constitutes serious obstacles. N 59 EN

201 Others barriers include negative peer pressure and a lack of access to appropriate information. Legal and insurance issues also have an impact, alongside more practical issues such as lack of transport and childcare Initiating voluntary projects at the European level Apart from the common objective on volunteering, which was included in the Open Method of Coordination in 2002, the European Union has since 1996 offered concrete support to voluntary activities. The European Voluntary Service (EVS) is an integrated part of the Youth in Action Programme ( ) and receives a substantial share of the programme budget (at least 23 % according to the decision which established the programme). In 2007, almost young people participated in some individual or group EVS projects. 62 % of former volunteers under the European Voluntary Service consider that this experience has changed for the better their career possibilities. The Council of Ministers adopted in November 2008 a recommendation on the promotion of volunteering of young people across Europe 25. KEY FIGURES RELATING TO ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP OF YOUNG PEOPLE Over 2300 national and regional information points are reported in 20 Member States 22 % of young people in the EU declare that they are members of an organisation 49 % of young people declare that they are members of a sport club 4 % of young people declare having participated in activities of political parties or trade unions Less than 40 % of young people aged between 16 and 29 have trust in (or are neutral towards) politicians and political parties 63 % of the population younger than 30 trust the European Parliament 16 % of people aged are occasional or regular volunteers Three out of four young people consider volunteering activities as an incentive for their greater participation in society. 25 Council Recommendation of 20 November 2008 on the mobility of young volunteers across the European Union (2008/C 319/03) N 60 EN

202 4. LIFESTYLES 4.1. Family life General trends Many countries are concerned about their low birth rates while the social reality of family life has changed profoundly over recent decades. First marriage rates, by sex and age class, expressed per 1000 persons (2003) Women Men BE BG CZ DK DE LV LT LU HU MT NL PL PT RO SI SK SE IS NO CH Note : EE, IE, EL, ES, FR, IT, CY, AT, FI, UK data not available Source: Eurostat, Demographic statistics People are less likely to enter into a first marriage, and, in 2003, did so more than two years later than in 1990: the average age at first marriage rose from 24.8 years to 27.4 years for women and from 27.5 to 29.8 years for men. The average age to enter into a first marriage is 27,3years. Furthermore, a significant number of marriages are now between partners of different nationalities: between 12 % and 15 % in Germany and France, around 20 % in Belgium and Austria and between 25 % and 30 % in Estonia, Luxembourg and Cyprus. Divorce rates have increased since the 1970s, more than doubling in some countries, unmarried cohabitation has become commonplace, and a large proportion of children are born outside marriage: in most Member States between 25 % and 50 % of all children. In spite of this 'de-institutionalisation' of family life, most children still live in couple households, married or cohabiting. Single-parent households, most of them headed by mothers, accounted for 14 % of households with children. N 61 EN

203 Leaving the parental home One event that contributes to lead young people toward independence is when they leave the parental home. Transition from parental to own household has a strong relation to fertility rates: as a rule, when young people leave home later they have fewer children and later in life. In 2005, 66 % of young women and 78 % of men aged in the EU were still living with their parents (Eurostat). According to the data from the EU Labour Force Survey (2007), the mean age at which young people leave parental home differ among Member States. Mean age of young people leaving home, by gender (2007) BE BG CZ DE EE EL ES FR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL A T PL PT RO SI SK FI UK Males Females Note: DK, IE, SE data not available Source: Eurostat, Labour Force Survey The mean age is 25 years. For men, it varies from 23 in Finland to 31.5 in Bulgaria, Slovenia and Slovakia. Women leave on average earlier, varying from 22 in Finland to nearly 30 in Slovakia. Highest gaps by gender are registered in Bulgaria and Romania, respectively 3.8 and 3.2 years, while the majority of Member States register gaps between one and two years. On average, transition from parental home takes place later in Southern and Central Europe than in other EU countries (often after age 26 for women and 28 for men). These results are confirmed when considering the median age - i.e. age at which half of young people have left their home: the value varies from 21 years of age in Finland to age 31 in Slovakia. Women leave in average earlier, varying from 20 to just over 28, again in Finland and in Slovakia. N 62 EN

204 Median age of young people leaving home by gender (2007) BE BG CZ DE EE EL ES FR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL A T PL PT RO SI SK FI UK Males Females Note: DK, IE, SE data not available Source: Eurostat, Labour Force Survey Reasons for staying at home longer than before A Eurobarometer survey conducted in 2007 on a sample of EU citizens aged allow to better understand reasons of delaying the leaving of the parental home According to this survey, a majority of young Europeans give financial reasons when asked what they believe are the reasons for this delay: 44 % believe that young adults cannot afford to move out, and 28 % think that there is a lack of affordable housing. Furthermore, 16 % of respondents tend to blame selfishness, agreeing with the statement that young people today want all the comfort of living at home without having to bear the responsibilities. Respondents in the 12 new Member States are more likely to mention the first two reasons when explaining why young adults remain at their parents homes. In the EU15, however, respondents agree more often with the statement that they want all the comfort without having to bear all the responsibilities. An analysis of the answers at the national level shows that in 16 out of 27 countries, a lack of financial resources is given as the primary explanation as to why young adults continue to live with their parents. Young Greeks, Hungarians and Portuguese tend to put forward this assumption more frequently than others (61 %, 64 % and 62 %, respectively). In 10 other Member States, the shortage of affordable housing is selected as the most significant reason. This is particularly notable in Lithuania, where more than one in two young adults (54 %) supports this statement, and in Spain (48 %). N 63 EN

205 Household composition According to an EU-SILC survey (EU Survey on Income and Living Conditions) from ,5 % of young people (15-29) in EU live in the same household as their partner. For women, three out of ten young women (15-29) and near two in ten young men live in the same household as their partner. In two Member States, the Netherlands and Sweden, more than 40 % of women live with their partners, while the maximum concerning men is reached in Sweden with 30 %. In these cases and generally everywhere in Northern Europe most of unions before the age of 30 are not established on a legal basis. Meanwhile, in Greece, Italy, Poland, Cyprus, Slovakia, Malta and Lithuania this share does not exceed 5 % of women, representing less than 20 % of those living in couple in the same household. The situation among young men is similar, showing a slightly higher frequency of persons not living as a couple (parental house, alone, collective accommodations, etc) or cohabiting. In 2005, on average, the head of the household in nearly 10 % of families in the European Union was younger than 30 years old. In Spain and Italy, however, this share was less than one third of the EU average. There is a declining trend in recent years, where the figure dropped by 1.6 percentage points within six years (9.6 in 1999 versus 8 % in 2005). In terms of size of the household, the EU value in 2005 is not far from 1.5 adult equivalents 26. The size of the household is significantly larger than the EU average in Latvia, Portugal, Romania and Bulgaria. Young women living in consensual union, with or without legal basis, % of year olds in % On a legal basis Without legal basis 45% 40% 35% 4 30% 25% 20% % 10% 5% % EU25 BE CZ DK EE IE EL ES FR IT CY LV LT HU MT NL AT PL PT SI SK FI SE UK IS NO Note : BG, DE, IE; LV, RO data not available Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC 26 The household average size is expressed as adult equivalent computed using the modified OECD equivalence scale. This scale gives a weight of 1.0 to the first adult, 0.5 to the second and each subsequent person aged 14 and over, and 0.3 to each child aged less than 14 in the household. N 64 EN

206 Young men living in consensual union, with or without legal basis, % of year olds in % On a legal basis Without legal basis 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% % 5% 0% EU25 BE CZ DK EE IE EL ES FR IT CY LV LT HU MT NL AT PL PT SI SK FI SE UK IS NO Marital status of young people It clearly appears that young people's behaviour towards marriage differ considerably among Member States both with regard to intensity and age. As a general trend, more young people marry in Central Europe while marriages in Scandinavia happen without hurry. In all EU Member States, more young women than men are married. The reason for this is that women marry approximately 2-3 years sooner than men. In all Member States the majority of marriages occur when the woman is younger than 30, except for in Sweden (44 %) and Denmark (49 %). In Lithuania and Poland almost 90 out of 100 brides are younger than 30. In terms of wedding frequency per country for the age cohort 25-29, the proportion of young married women in Romania is three times higher than for Sweden (60 % and 20 % respectively). Among men, the extreme values at the same age can be found in Lithuania and Sweden (42 % and 11 %). For both sexes the proportion of young married is higher in Central Europe and the Baltic States. Among young people aged 25-29, the divorce rate is marginal. Only in a few countries does the divorce rate reach as high as 5 %. N 65 EN

207 Proportion of young population by marital status, sex and age class (2006) - Eurostat % F M F+M Total Total Total BE Married Divorced Singles CZ Married Divorced Singles DE Married Divorced Singles LV Married Divorced Singles LT Married Divorced Singles HU Married Divorced Singles NL Married Divorced Singles RO Married Divorced Singles SI Married Divorced Singles SK Married Divorced Singles FI Married Divorced Singles SE Married Divorced Singles IS Married Divorced Singles LI Married Divorced Singles CH Married Divorced Singles N 66 EN

208 Becoming a parent Another frequent key event in a young person's life in the transitional phase towards adulthood is the experience of becoming parent. This is a landmark event in the life of millions of young persons in the EU. Again there are large differences between countries. Total fertility rate TFR < BE : : 1.62 : : : : : BG : : CZ DK DE : : : EE IE EL : : ES FR : : IT CY : LV : : LT : LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK FI : : SE UK : : : IS LI : : NO CH HR : : MK : : TR : : : : : : Note : IT 2005 Source: Eurostat, Demographic statistics The fertility trends over the last decades in Europe are well known, there has been a sharp decline in the total fertility rate far below the replacement level of 2.1 children per woman and an increase in the mean age of mothers at first births. Even an additional reduction of mortality risk among young people and an increase of immigration can no longer compensate for this effect. The main results have been structural changes in the proportion of young in the total population. There are different hypotheses for explaining this trend, the most frequent being delayed age of departure from parental home, increased birth control, postponed start of employment, unstable employment conditions and economic hardship. Some of these potential links will be examined in the following paragraphs. After this long period of decreasing fertility across Europe, recent figures (from 2000 to 2006) suggest that the average number of children per woman is increasing in several Member States, in particular Sweden (+0.30), Czech Republic (+0.18), Estonia (+0.16) and Spain (+0.15). Despite the recent new trend, even the highest national fertility levels recorded in EU (France at 2.0 and Ireland at 1.9), are still under the full replacement level if one does not take into account migration flows. N 67 EN

209 Looking at time series starting in 1980, one gets a better picture of the diversity in the fertility levels in Europe. The highest levels in 1980 were observed in Ireland (3.23 children per woman) and Romania (2.40). Current values for these countries have fallen by more than 40 % from 1980 to The lowest fertility rates, (below 1.4) are registered mainly in Central and Southern Europe, with the lowest rates registered in Slovakia (1.24) and Poland (1.27). Mean age of women at first child (1995, 2005) BE 27.3 : BG CZ DK DE EE IE 27.3 : EL ES FR : 28.5 IT 28.0 : CY : 27.5 LV : 25.0 LT LU HU NL AT PL PT RO SI SK : 25.7 FI SE UK IS NO CH HR : 26.5 MK : 25.2 Note : UK 1996, 2006 Source: Eurostat, Demographic statistics Looking at the age of the mother at the first childbirth gives further evidence of delayed parenthood. Without exception, this age has increased in all EU Member States during the period The mean age of the mothers at the first childbirth in EU is around 27 years. Changes are bigger in the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovenia, with an average postponement of birth of first child by about 3 years. In absolute terms, however, the mother's mean age at first birth is even more delayed in the United Kingdom (30 years old) together with Spain, Germany and Luxembourg, where age of mothers at first birth is between 29 and 30. Italy and Spain have low fertility rates overall, but especially among young women. Ireland is the only country characterised by a fertility rate above Europe s average particularly due to high fertility rates of women over 30. N 68 EN

210 More babies born outside marriage Proportion of births outside marriage by country (1996, 2006) BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL 3 5 ES FR : 50 IT 8 19 CY 1 6 LV LT LU HU MT 3 22 NL AT PL PT RO SI SK FI SE UK HR 7 11 MK 8 13 IS LI NO CH 7 15 Note: BE: 2007 Source: Eurostat, Demographic statistics Over the last decade, the trend in the EU has been that more and more babies are born outside of marriage (37 % in 2006). Differences between Member States have grown stronger from 1996 to In some Member States, the number of babies born outside of marriage has more than doubled during this period. This is the case in Belgium, Spain, Italy, Cyprus, Lithuania, Malta and the Netherlands. In Estonia and Sweden, around 6 children of 10 are born outside marriage, while in Cyprus or Greece this proportion is close to one on twenty and less or equal to one on four in Italy, Poland and Malta. In the youngest age group registered (15-19 year olds), the number of births outside marriage exceeds 90 % of newborns in Denmark, Ireland and UK, while it is down to 33 % in Greece and less than 15 % in Cyprus. Regarding this age group, it is important to keep in mind that few persons are married and few births are registered. For the age group 25-29, more than 50 % of children are born outside marriage in Sweden, Estonia and Denmark. On the opposite side of the spectrum are Greece and Cyprus, with less than 4 %. N 69 EN

211 Births outside marriage by age group, % (decreasing order) % IS EE SE NO IE UK DK FR BG SI LV FI AT ES HU NL PT DE CZ LU RO LT SK MT PL IT LI CH MK HR EL CY Note : BE data not available Source: Eurostat, Demographic statistics Results of the KASS project: Kinship and Social Security 27 Patterns of Kinship and Family relations across Europe The KASS project measured, through original ethnographic research, the extent of mutual assistance between relatives of various generations, and the factors which influence it. It considered the role of kinship ties in practical and social life in terms of three implicit contracts: (1) The contract between successive generations is a source of practical, emotional and financial support both on a regular basis and as an insurance for times of crisis such as illness, unemployment, divorce and bereavement. Support from the grand-parental generation for their own children s parenting can greatly assist the reconciliation of parenting and employment, and people in middle and later-middle age are an important source of care for the dependent elderly. (2) The contract between reproductive partners (and each other s family of origin) includes the division of productive, child-rearing and domestic labour, as well as the ways in which the partners support each other s social identities. (3) The contract with the community as a whole goes beyond the formal obligations and rights resulting from legal citizenship. It also includes the obligations and pleasures of participating in social and ritual life, in its own right or as a representative of one s family. The research has identified two broad ways in which the three contracts are combined in contemporary Europe, demonstrating and confirming a northwest-southeast and urban-rural contrasts in kinship patterns 27 The KASS project was funded under the 6th Framework Programme of the European Union (Citizens and Governance Programme) and involved 19 research partners from eight European countries (Sweden, Italy, France, Germany, Austria, Croatia, Poland and Russia) representing different family/welfare regimes, running from May 2004 April N 70 EN

212 across Europe. While most of the nineteen communities studied fall somewhere between these two patterns, they do so in a systematic way, since the different aspects of the models vary together: In one combination, typical of northern and western Europe, the contract between the individual and society as a whole is direct, the conception of society is geographically quite wide, and family life is centred on the reproductive couple. Co-residence of different adult generations is rare and intergenerational ties are relatively down-played though, nevertheless, substantial amounts of help flow from parents to adult children. This pattern is better adapted to modern capitalism, in which most families do not own and transmit their own productive capital, and in which each person ideally enters the labour market in his or her own right, irrespective of family ties. In the other combination, typical of southern and eastern Europe, intergenerational ties are emphasised, and the link between reproductive partners is correspondingly down-played. This pattern is adapted to family-based production (most notably in agriculture) in which the moral debt of the younger generation for the inheritance of the family capital underpins the relatively high status of members of the older generation. Features of this model are highly distinct gender roles, a conception of social identity in which the individual relates to the community at large as a member of an extended family, and a community that is geographically concentrated enough for each individual s family background to be generally known. Intergenerational co-residence (or close residence) is common, and allows for extensive flows of help in both directions. Throughout these regimes ties with kin are more reliable practically than ties with friends and neighbours. Old people usually have a rather low position in the welfare priorities of families themselves, because they generally favour provision for the young. State support (in particular pensions) is therefore vital. Moreover, state support for the elderly enables the latter to be net givers to their descendants in the family. Because old people are likely to pass some of the resulting income to younger family members, there will be additional knock-on benefits to younger family members, which will themselves entail reciprocal help to the old people. The overall effect is thus likely to include some strengthening of family relationships (i.e. a crowding in effect). KEY FIGURES RELATING TO LIFESTYLES OF YOUNG PEOPLE Mean age to enter into a first marriage: 27,3years Mean age to leave parental home: 25 years 24,5 % of young people (15-29) live in the same household as their partner Mean age of mothers at the first childbirth: around 27 years 37 % babies born outside marriage 4.2. Youth and Health Much of the data serving as background information for young people and health relates to the age groups and Available data on youth and health are mostly linked to international programmes and policies against diseases, unhealthy lifestyles or for reducing mortality rates - particular at the European level. N 71 EN

213 USEFUL CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS The crude death rate describes mortality in relation to the total population. Expressed in per 100,000 inhabitants, it is calculated as the number of deaths recorded in the population for a given period divided by population in the same period and then multiplied by 100,000. The population structure strongly influences this indicator for broad age classes. In a relatively old' population, there will be more deaths than in a young' one because mortality is higher in higher age groups. A transport accident is any accident involving a device designed primarily for, or being used at the time primarily for, conveying persons or goods from one place to another. A traffic accident is any vehicle accident occurring on the public highway [i.e. originating on, terminating on, or involving a vehicle partially on the highway]. A vehicle accident is assumed to have occurred on the public highway unless another place is specified, except in the case of accidents involving only off-road motor vehicles, which are classified as non-traffic accidents unless the contrary is stated. Intentional self-harm implies purposely self-inflicted poisoning or injury and suicide (attempted). It also includes intentional self-poisoning by drugs and alcohol, intentional self-poisoning by and exposure to organic solvents and halogenated hydrocarbons and their vapours, intentional self-poisoning by and exposure to other gases and vapours, intentional self-poisoning by and exposure to pesticides, intentional self-poisoning by and exposure to other and unspecified chemicals and noxious substances, by hanging, strangulation and suffocation, by drowning and submersion, intentional self-harm by handgun discharge, intentional self-harm by rifle, shotgun and larger firearm discharge, by other and unspecified firearm discharge, by explosive material, by smoke, fire and flames, by steam, hot vapours and hot objects, harm by sharp object, by blunt object, by jumping from a high place, by jumping or lying before moving object, by crashing of motor vehicle, by other specified means and by unspecified means. Suicide is the act of deliberately killing oneself. Risk factors for suicide include mental disorder (such as depression, personality disorder, alcohol dependence, or schizophrenia), and some physical illnesses, such as neurological disorders, cancer, and HIV infection. There are effective strategies and interventions for the prevention of suicide. Drug dependence as a cause of death comprises the following items: mental and behavioural disorders due to use of opioids, cannabinoids, sedatives, hypnotics, cocaine, hallucinogens, volatile solvents, multiple drug use and other psychoactive substances or stimulants, including caffeine. This category also includes situations when two or more psychoactive substances are known to be involved, but it is impossible to assess which substance is contributing most to the disorders. It is also used when the exact identity of some or even all the psychoactive substances being used is uncertain or unknown, since many multiple drug users themselves often do not know the details of what they are taking. Source: WHO Classification of death causes N 72 EN

214 Young people expect to live longer Economic development and the improvement of health systems across Europe have led to a continuous increase in life expectancy at birth. As a result, life expectancy in the EU is higher that in most countries in the world: Female (80.7 years) usually lives longer than men (74 years) in the European Union (Source: Eurostat -2006). With an average life expectancy of 81,1 and 81 years, Spain and Sweden are the countries where one can expect to live longest in the EU-27, followed by France(80,9), Cyprus (80,6), Austria (80,1) and Nederland (80). In some of the new Member States the life expectancy rate is significantly lower than the average, with Latvia and Lithuania with the shortest life expectancy at 71 years. Women generally live longer than men in the European Union, with an average life expectancy of 80.7 years, as compared to 74 years for men Young Europeans perceive themselves as healthy Many physical and physiological changes occur during adolescence. These changes have an impact on the body and on how young people perceive themselves. The relationship between body image and selfesteem is well established; It is usually stronger in girls. Gender differences are also apparent in the ways in which young men and women assess their bodies. Europeans tend to self perceive their own health more negatively with age except in Ireland, the Netherlands and UK where more people say there feel in very good health when they are aged than those aged On the average, people aged defined themselves as in good or fair health. Most young people also report a high level of mental well-being. Differences across countries are difficult to analyse since the perception of one s health is closely linked to socio-cultural factors. In 2006, close to 90 % of young Greeks aged between 15 and 24 considered themselves to be in very good health while when the same question is asked to young people in Portugal and Latvia, the percentage remains below 10 %. Cyprus and Slovakia had the highest scores of respondents replying that they were in very bad health, with 2 %. Nevertheless, some two million young people in the European Region of the World Health Organization (WHO) suffer from mental disorders ranging from depression, conduct disorders, anxiety disorders or eating disorders to schizophrenia. One fifth of children and adolescents suffer from developmental, emotional or behavioural problems, and one in eight have a mental disorder Young people and their weight Excessive weight has a negative impact on a person's health both in the short term as well as in the long term. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has classified obesity as a major public health concern and a global epidemic due to its high and increasing prevalence and challenge to long-term health. There is also a rising concern for young people s underweight, often due to dieting and other weight control methods. Often, weight problems are a symptom of negative physical and psychological self-images of young people. There seem to be in particular two factors that have had an impact on young people's increasing body weight. First, eating habits have changed. Causes of changing eating habits among young people can be 28 Consensus Paper "Mental Health in Youth and Education" (2008) N 73 EN

215 of a social, cultural and family-connected nature, but it may also be that young people are more influenced by their peers, new popular lifestyles and/or an ever expanding number of new products. More meals, often unhealthy take-away dishes or fast foods, are being consumed outside the home or the school than ever before. Young people are influenced by a still growing and often aggressive advertising market. Secondly, young people's increasing body weight is also caused by a growing inactivity among youth. A culture of inactivity among groups of young people developed in the last century as a result of the development and availability of new technology: the massive expansion and availability of private cars has reduced the physical activity levels among youth. The same goes for television sets and the number of TV-channels in an average private home as well as the personal computer and electronic games of all kinds. In addition, the number of hours that an average young person spends doing school homework has increased, which further limits the time available to active leisure-time pursuits. In almost two thirds of EU Member States, the overweight population counts for more than one third of the population aged Countries with the highest scores are Germany (42.7 %), Malta (47.8 %) and the United Kingdom (53.1 %) 29. A large number of young people aged are also concerned: around 17 % of them are in a situation of overweight or obesity. In Malta, 33.9 % of young people are reported to be overweight or obese, while in the UK it is 31 %, in Germany 26.5 % and in Ireland 25.8 %. The lowest levels of overweight young people aged are registered in Latvia (10 %), Slovakia (10.3 %) and France (10.6 %). The share of young people aged 24-34, who show overweight or obesity is double compared to the age (34%). A gender analysis shows that men are more overweight than women: there are more than 50 % of men aged who are overweight or obese in Germany, Greece, Hungary, Malta, Austria, Slovakia, Finland and the United Kingdom, while the percentage of women never gets above 50 % of the population. Around 9% of young people aged are in a situation of underweight. The share of people being underweight is lower among year-olds (less than 5 %). The highest level of underweight young people is in the United Kingdom (16.8 %), followed by France (15.9 %), Austria (14.5 %), Slovakia (13.9 %) and Latvia (13.6 %). The percentage of women in the underweight category is much higher for young women than for young men except in Austria (3.5 % more men) and in the UK (about equal numbers). Globally speaking, nearly one third of young Europeans aged are affected by weight troubles overall, but the numbers differ greatly by country Majority of young people die due to external factors Causes of death are different according to the each age group. A majority of people over 45 years die because of cancer, circulatory or respiratory diseases, whereas young people fall victim to external factors, such as transport accidents, accidental falls, intentional self-harm and assault. 29 Data from Germany and UK are based on measured height and weight, while in other countries the height and weight were self-reported; UK data cover only England. N 74 EN

216 Causes of death of young people: number of cases by main external factors, by sex and age group, 2006 Women Men Causes of death Suicide and intentional harm Transport Accidents Accidental Poisoning AIDS (HIV disease) Homicide, assault Drug dependence, toxicomania EU-27 number of cases (all ages) Source: Eurostat-Health-Causes of death In 2006, more than young men aged died as a result of transport accidents in the EU. Intentional self harm (and suicide) was the second most common cause of death for young people aged between 15 and 29. In 2006, more than young people committed suicide in the EU, 82 % of whom were young men. Drug consumption and addiction were also a significant cause of death: in the EU, young people aged died because of accidental poisoning and 866 died because of drug dependence. Homicide and assault also accounted for a substantial share of fatalities (1 024 deaths), especially among young men aged between 20 and Death due to transport accidents Traffic crashes are a major external cause of death in young people and the single greatest killer of 15 to 24 year olds in OECD countries. 21.1% of people killed in road accidents in 2005 in the 18 European countries were aged and the majority of them were drivers (4 279 persons), whereas only 484 were pedestrians. Drivers year old have risk factors 2 to 3 times higher than more experienced drivers. They pose a greater risk to themselves and to others: in young driver crashes, for each young driver killed, about 1.3 others also die (e.g. passengers and other road users). Source: CARE Database / EC- Date of query: December N 75 EN

217 Proportion of young people in population and in traffic fatalities in the EU, 2006 Source: CARE Database / EC Date of query: September 2008 Source of population data: EUROSTAT In 2006, more than young men aged died as a result of transport accidents in the EU. Amongst young people, males account for the majority of the overall fatalities (88,5 fatality rate in 2005). In 2006, Lithuania and Greece recorded the highest transport accident death rates for young men aged 20-24, followed by Estonia and Slovenia. All these countries registered crude death rates well above the EU average. The countries with the lowest death rates were the Netherlands, Finland and Sweden. The number of fatalities linked to transport accidents generally tends to decrease with age, except in Cyprus and Hungary, where transport fatalities among men aged were more frequent than among men aged Transport accidents are often linked to other risky behaviours of young people such as drunkenness and drug abuse Death due to suicide At EU level, the crude death rate by suicide among the male population aged stood at 15 per inhabitants. The Baltic States and Finland registered the highest male suicide and self-inflicted injury rates for people aged between 20 and 29. es among young people. Women tend to be less affected by suicide and intentional self harm, with crude death rates generally lower than 6 per inhabitants, but the incidence of non-fatal self-harm, which is estimated to be times more common than that of actual suicide, is common also among female adolescents. N 76 EN

218 Death due to drugs Within the European Union, deaths related to drug dependence remained on average below 2 per inhabitants in The highest death rates were found in Austria, Ireland and the United Kingdom. In , drug-inflicted deaths accounted for 3.5 % of all deaths of Europeans aged Opium-based products were found in around 70 % of them (2008 EMCDDA annual report) Death due to AIDS/HIV Number of deaths caused by AIDS, by age group TOTAL Y15_19 Y20_24 Y25_29 EU Share of young people diagnosed with HIV, by age group, 2006 % of HIV cases among on % of HIV cases broken down by age (15-19,20-24,25-29) the total of HIV case (all known ages) EU-27 : Source : Eurostat-Population Source : Eurostat-Population Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) affects all generations. Governments have taken action in order to combat and avoid its spreading. In spite of education and information campaigns, however, Europe still sees a considerable number of new HIV infections every year. HIV/AIDS is still considered a serious health concern across the EU. In 2006, 27.7 % of newly-diagnosed HIV cases inside the Union concerned young people aged between 15 and 29. Within this age group, young people accounted for 60.3 % of new cases, while for the age group and the rates were 32.8 % and 6.9 %, respectively. This is however not the case in Bulgaria and Estonia, where the largest share was identified among year olds. In the age group 15-29, some discrepancies were registered between country patterns and the EU average of This age group comprised of more than 70 % of newly-diagnosed HIV cases in Estonia in 2006, while the numbers are 50 % in Bulgaria, Cyprus, Latvia, Romania and Slovakia. The lowest shares of newly-diagnosed HIV cases were found in Denmark (20 %) and France (22 %). The most common modes of HIV transmission include heterosexual sex, men who have sex with men (MSM) and injection drug users (IDU). In the EU, 54 % of newly diagnosed cases in 2006 within the age range involved heterosexual relations, followed by MSM (35 %) and IDU (10 %). However, this varies from one country to another: in Germany, Greece, Hungary, Slovenia and Slovakia, MSM was the most common mode of transmission, while in Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland and Portugal IDU accounted for the majority of EN 77 EN

219 transmission cases. Other modes of transmission, such as blood transfusions, accounted for 4 % of newly diagnosed cases in Belgium and 6 % of cases in Romania. The European Centre for the Epidemiological Monitoring of AIDS EuroHIV (HIV/AIDS Surveillance in Europe) coordinates the surveillance of HIV/AIDS in the WHO European Region (5 countries). Its mission is to understand, improve and share European HIV/AIDS surveillance data in order to better inform disease prevention, control and care. Its objectives include making international comparisons, assessing trends, characterising affected populations and predicting disease burden and evaluating surveillance methods Youth attitudes toward smoking WHO has identified tobacco smoking as the leading cause of premature illness and death in developed countries, responsible for more than 14 % of all deaths in the WHO European Region in 2005 (WHO Europe Heath report 2005). Although the vast majority of smoking related deaths occur among middle aged and elderly people, smoking behaviours are undeniably acquired well before. Young daily smokers may acquire the habit and become addicted before reaching adulthood, making them less able to quit and more likely to suffer from tobacco-related health complications. The longer the onset of smoking is delayed, the less likely a person is to become addicted. According to estimates, half of all new male adolescent smokers will not kick the habit for at least 16 years, while young women will not give up for at least 20 years (WHO Europe Health Report 2005). The total proportion of smokers increases with age and there are, generally speaking, more daily smokers between the age of 25 and 34 than between the ages of 15 and 24. However this was not the case in Ireland and Hungary, where young smokers outnumbered their older counterparts. Sweden registered rather positive figures regarding young smokers, followed by Slovakia: in both countries, less than 20 % of the population aged between 15 and 34 are daily smokers, but this proportion increases when considering the age group. In contrast, Bulgaria counted the highest shares of smokers (31 % for the population aged and half of the population aged 25-34, followed by Estonia, where two-thirds of men aged are regular smokers. Ireland is the only country where the share of smokers decreases with age. Considering the distribution of smokers by gender, it can be said that in Europe men are more likely to be smokers. Only in Sweden and the United Kingdom the share of female smokers aged was higher than that of their male counterparts, although this no longer holds true for older generations (except for Sweden) Youth attitudes towards drinking Aside from being influenced by various social factors, adolescents also engage in drinking alcohol on the basis of their personal beliefs and goals, as well as their family or social environment. Alcohol may also facilitate interaction and making new friends, increase perceived popularity or influence young people s image among their peers. As a general pattern, Europeans have their first spell of drunkenness between the ages of 13 or 14 in all countries for which data are available. As a rule, girls tend to have their first hangover at a marginally later age than boys. On average, the earliest episodes of drunkenness EN 78 EN

220 were registered in Austria, while in Mediterranean countries, such as Greece, Spain, Italy and Portugal the starting age was slightly higher. In most countries considered, more than 80 % of young Europeans aged years have consumed alcohol over the past 12 months, with Denmark and the Czech Republic registering the highest shares (95 %). This was followed by Lithuania (94 %), Germany, Austria (93 %), Greece and the United Kingdom (91 %). Conversely, the lowest shares of youths having consumed alcohol over the past 12 months were found in Portugal (74 %) and Sweden (77 %). In around half of the countries for which data are available, more than 50 % of young Europeans aged have been drunk at least once in the past 12 months. Denmark accounted the highest rates of drunkenness among youths (82 %), followed by Ireland (72 %). In contrast, only 25 % of young people in Cyprus and 29 % in France admitted to having been drunk in the past 12 months. First episode of drunkenness Girls Boys BE CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES FR IT LV LT HU MT NL AT PL PT SI FI SE UK NO CH Source WHO: Young people s health in context EUROPEAN SCHOOL SURVEY ON ALCOHOL AND OTHER DRUGS (ESPAD) In the 1980s, the group of experts in epidemiology of drug problems of the Pompidou Group at the Council of Europe commissioned a team of investigators to develop a standardised school survey questionnaire. The purpose was to produce a standard survey instrument which would allow different countries to compare alcohol and drug use in student populations in different countries. A main goal of the ESPAD project is to collect comparable data on alcohol, tobacco and drug use among students aged between 15 and 1 in as many European countries as possible through a survey. The survey is carried out every four years The most important goal in the long run is to monitor trends in alcohol and drug habits among students in Europe and to compare trends between countries and between groups of countries. Since EN 79 EN

221 1994, ESPAD has issued four international reports on alcohol and other drug use among students. The most recent report dates from March Youth attitudes towards drugs Cannabis is the most popular drug among young people aged The highest levels of use are generally being reported among years old (EMCDA 2008). Estimates suggest that around 23 million European adults have used cannabis in the last year producing an average figure of about 7 % among all 15 to 64 year olds while among young adults age the European average is calculated at 13 % (ranging from 2-20 % between countries). Based on data for 13 countries that participated a second field trial on the frequency of cannabis use, it is roughly estimated that over 1 % of European adults (15-64 years) are using cannabis daily or almost daily (about 4 million). Most of them (about 3 million) are aged between 15 and 34 years, meaning roughly 2 to 2.5 % of all young adults. In countries such as the Czech Republic, Spain, France, Italy and the United Kingdom, more than 16 % of young persons admit to use it. Cocaine remains the second most used substance after cannabis, although its use is not uniform across Europe (national figures range from 0.4 % to 7.7 %). For young adults, among those cocaine use is concentrated, it is estimated that 7.5 million have used it at least once (ranging from 0.7 % to 12.7 % between countries). It is estimated that 4 million have used it in the past year (1.2 % on average). Variation between countries is again considerable. In 2005, cocaine consumption was quite high in Spain (5 %) and the United Kingdom (5 %), but well behind the consumption of cannabis. Among young adults (15-34 years), lifetime prevalence of ecstasy use ranges at national level from 0.5 % to 14.6 % while between 0.4 % and 7.7 % of this age group reported using the drug in the last year. On average, it is estimated that 7.5 million young Europeans (5.6 %) have tried ecstasy, with around 2.5 million (1.8 %) having used the drug in the last year. Consumption remained high in the Czech Republic and the United Kingdom. Among young adults (15-35 year olds), lifetime prevalence of amphetamine use varies between countries, from 0.2 % to 16.5 %, with a European average of about 5 %. Bulgaria and Mediterranean countries such as Greece, Cyprus and Malta accounted for the lowest levels of drug consumption in Europe. EN 80 EN

222 The reasons why young people try drugs are shown in the table below. Lack of will power Social or economic problems Loneliness Problems at school/work Recreation Expected effects of drugs Problems at home Thrill seeking Peer Pressure Curiosity Source: Eurobarometer, n 158 Young people and drugs - Why do young Europeans experiment with drugs? EUROPEAN MONITORING CENTER FOR DRUGS AND DRUG ADDICTION (EMCDDA) Just over a decade ago, Europe s capacity for monitoring its drug problem was extremely limited. National approaches to the topic varied greatly and there was a lack of reliable and comparable information at European level concerning drugs, drug addiction and their consequences. In other words, it was impossible to talk with confidence about patterns and trends in drug use across the EU. The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) was founded to change that. Inaugurated in Lisbon in 1995, the EMCDDA is the hub of drug-related information in the European Union. It exists to provide the EU and its Member States with a factual overview of European drug problems and a common information framework to support the drugs debate. Today it offers policy-makers the scientific evidence base they need for drawing up drug laws and strategies and helps professionals and researchers pinpoint best practice and new areas for analysis. In 2004, according to the Eurobarometer survey, more than 60 % of young people think that curiosity remains the chief reason for trying drugs, a little more than 45 % invoke peer pressure and nearly 40 % thrill seeking. Less than one third of respondents consider that young people try drugs on account of problems at home. Problems at school or work were also invoked by less than one fifth of respondents as a reason to experiment with drugs. Loneliness, together with social or economic problems, were given as a reason for trying drugs by around 15 % of young Europeans. EN 81 EN

223 According to Eurobarometer 2004, young Europeans aged between 15 and 24, getting hold of drugs does not seem to be difficult. This acquisition mainly concerns places where people go out in the evening. In 2004, 79 % of young respondents tended to agree that it is easy to get drugs at parties, compared with 76 % in pubs or clubs, 63 % near their home and 57 % in or near school. As stated by European youths in the Eurobarometer survey, parties and clubs seem to the most convenient place to purchase drugs. For 92 % of young Spanish interviewed, parties are the easiest place for getting drugs. In Belgium, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands and Portugal young people consider drugs are more readily available in pubs and clubs. In Ireland, 78 % of respondents feel that they have easy access to drugs close to where they live. This contrasts with Finland and Sweden, where buying drugs near the home is not deemed to be easy. According to respondents, drug dealing also seems to be rife in schools and colleges, especially in France, Spain, Greece and Portugal. KEY FIGURES REGARDING HEALTH Life expectancy of young people is 80;7 years for girls, 74 years for boys. Around 2 million young people have mental health problems 17 % of young people aged are overweight 9% of young people aged are underweight 60% of deaths in young people aged are due to external causes young people aged died by transport accident 7341 young people aged died by suicide 2246 young people aged died by drug abuse 1024 young people aged died by homicide or assault 467 young people aged died due to AIDS/HIV 24 % of young people aged smoke daily First spell of drunkenness is between 13 and % of young people aged use cannabis EN 82 EN

224 4.3. Young people and leisure time Free time decreases with age Broadly speaking, leisure time is a period when young people choose what they want to do with people they want to be with. Young people s leisure time is sometimes associated with potential risky behaviours (drinking, smoking or violence, etc.) but also constitutes opportunities to play, relax and learn through informal learning and development (i.e. out of the academic framework). As confirmed by research conducted by the United Nations leisure time is important in helping young people achieve a broad range of positive outcomes, both social, emotional, vocational, physical, cognitive and civic development and engagement. These positive outcomes may have an impact on both personal and community development. When people get older, the percentage of free time decreases while there is a progressive shift from study to working time. Indeed, in nearly all countries for which data is available, young people aged between 15 and 19 year enjoy free time during more than 20 % of their total time. This share decreases by at least 24 % in all countries when considering people aged between 30 and 49. Some differences across countries exist. In Bulgaria, France and the United Kingdom, the youngest people (aged between 15 and 19) have less than 20 % of their total time free whereas in Germany, more than one quarter of a normal day is made of free time activities. Young people are not very concerned with household work. The percentage of time devoted to household work among those aged 30 and 49 is more than double that of the youngest age category. Watching TV is quite popular in all age ranges (people spend from 5 % to 10 % of their time in front of the TV) Leisure time activities among year olds The following figures are derived from a Eurobarometer survey on young people and leisure time. What young people do during their leisure time will depend on different factors such as their own interests and imagination, the kind of facilities available in their neighbourhood and their available budget. EN 83 EN

225 Activities during leisure time Go for a walk, a bike ride, sport Meet friends, go dancing, go out to drink, to eat Read Use the Internet, play video games Watch TV Listen to music Go to the cinema, theatre or concerts Help out in the house Go shopping Play an instrument Do some work for money Participating in voluntary or community work OTHER Source: FLASH EB 202 January 2007 GALLUP Q3. What do you regularly do during your leisure time? Base: all respondents % of Mentioned Practicing sport (either going for a walk, a bike ride or any other sports) and going out to meet friends, to dance, to drink or eat are the main activities young Europeans do during their leisure time. 45 % of them declared that they practice sports and 40 % declared that they go out with friends. Reading is still a common entertainment for one fourth of young Europeans. Using the Internet, playing video games and watching TV interest one fifth of them. Listening to music and going to the cinema and the theatre are also popular leisure activities for more than 15 % of young people. Helping out in the house (10 %) and going shopping (7 %) are less popular among young European youth. Less than 5 % of young Europeans declare that they do some work for money or to play an instrument whereas participation in voluntary or community work is mentioned by only 2 % of people aged between 15 and 30 (see chapter on volunteering). Young Europeans tend to participate more in artistic activities than their elders. Photography and films are the preferred activities of young Europeans interviewed aged 15-24, followed by dancing and singing. A rather large percentage of young people (23 %) also enjoy writing, singing and playing an instrument, which is more than the older generations. Acting, on the other hand, is not a very popular activity (less than 10 % of youth surveyed has practiced it in the last 12 months). Leisure time is also the time for young people to get together and take part in activities such as going to the cinema, live performances and live sports. Although the access to films at home has increased through Internet, DVDs and video equipment, young people are still enjoying to go out to watch movies on a large screen: at European level, more than 82 % of youth aged between 16 and 24 went to the cinema at least once a year. For the age group this was reduced to 58 % and down to nearly 39 % among people aged 30 and over. EN 84 EN