From the beginning the successor of the Lisbon-strategy was eyed with suspicion and criticised by many European actors. thenewfederalist.eu therefore decided to provide its readers with some critical views on the EU-strategy which promises to boost “smart, sustainable and inclusive growth”.
The first article of the thematic series “Requirements for Europe2020 – an overview” by Dr. Eva Högl offers a critical summary of the new strategy. The author provides a detailed outline of different problems and also engages in the discussion about constructive approaches to overcome these.
Can the Europe 2020 strategy really live up to its great ambitions?
In the second article “Is Europe2020 the right consequence after the failure of the Lisbon Strategy?”, first published on Treffpunkt Europa on 19 June 2010 and written by Reinhard Bütikofer MEP (Greens spokesperson of the Europe 2010 Working Group’), points out problematic aspects of the new concept. His article focuses especially on the question of how and to what extent the other European institutions (European Council and European Parliament) have to be involved in the decision making process and the implementation of the strategy in order to ensure the success of EU2020.
Can the Europe 2020 strategy really live up to its great ambitions to foster sustainable economic growth in the European Union or will it create a similar disappointment as the Lisbon-strategy? The two articles of our series elaborate on this question and offer food for thoughts to critically re-think this subject.
Therefore, we encourage you to read the two contributions and by commenting and/or liking the articles have your say on the topic!
Suggested Further Reading:
Europe 2020: A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth
1. On 26 August 2010 at 15:52, by Cédric
Replying to: Editorial: EU2020
There is very little to be said on the EU2020 strategy.
I very much appreciate the idea that we should try to make the process of this new strategy more democratic than before, by involving “the European Parliament, the national governments and parliaments, trade unions, organisations, companies and the civil society”, or whoever we think about. Although I don’t think that involving everybody everywhere is precisely the definition of democracy.
But what is the sense of trying to make something useless democratic? The EU2020 strategy is a useless technocratic blabla, a logorrheic, abstract, and consensual juice. There are plenty of other useless technocratic blablas in Europe that would also require to be made deomcratic. But before doing so, we should try to democratise important technocratic decisions, or lacks of decision, that concern concrete problems.
2. On 27 August 2010 at 09:45, by convicted European
Replying to: Editorial: EU2020
Cher Cédric,
I beg to differ;-) I think there are several things to say about the EU2020 strategy, both critical and some positive things as well. On the one hand and as a federalist I agree with you that we might want to focus on improving the decision-making process as such, in order to avoid “useless technocratic blabla” as you call it, and empower the EU to have more teeth and weight behind its decisions and enforce it first and foremost within its Member States. But on the other we should recognise the political reality in which the EU2020 strategy for example will have an influence on the functioning of the EU in the coming 10 years in terms of policy focus and also budgetary implications. For this reason, for example, the European Youth Forum (YFJ) and its members are closely following the youth agenda within the EU2020 strategy and despite not always liking the process making sure that within it the voice of young people is properly heard and respected. JEF tried to be heard as well by participating in the EU2020 strategy consultation and you can read about JEF’s views and comments on it here: http://bit.ly/d0aKaX
And a last point, I believe that giving the possibility to everyone interested in and/or concerned by an issue to get involved in a decision-making process, at least by having a chance to express his/her views, as the basis of a well-functioning democracy.
Your convicted European,
Peter
3. On 27 August 2010 at 10:52, by Cédric
Replying to: Editorial: EU2020
Dear Peter,
You’re right. But my conception of a well-functioning participatory democracy is that it cannot work if there are no concrete proposals on the table. The EU2020 document was a good joke, and it really didn’t make us feel like contributing. I find it worrying that EU institutions tend to produce ever more strategic and technocratic blablas, and I suspect that it’s a way for them to avoid debate.
But what will follow will certainly be more concrete.
Follow the comments:
|
