Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
THE LISBON STRATEGY AS POLICY CO-ORDINATION Does it promote policy learning? Iain Begg European Institute London School of Economics & Political Science LISBON FAULT-LINES Strategic aims not really contested – But shifting priorities undermine consistency – Few demonstrate case for Community level Policy instruments have been inadequate – Problems with incentives & means – Action plan fatigue? Target proliferation? Delivery failings – Large disparities among the Member States THE RECORD SO FAR The growth shortfall: undermines progress Confusion in: – Objectives (too many) – Responsibilities (everyone = no-one) Targets proving to be elusive Policy learning mechanisms: limited impact – Peer review (naming & shaming) but… – Bench-marking: not very visible RATIONALE FOR CO-ORDINATION Spillover effects across economies – Mutually reinforcing policies: common interest – The example of fiscal policy Avoiding undue pressure on monetary policy etc. – Does it apply to Lisbon strategy? How? The vincolo esterno argument – Valuable where vested interests are strong Policy learning and improvement CO-ORDINATION & LEARNING Common policy agenda shared solutions Framework for policy-making Better policy integration Procedures & monitoring – Exchange of experience & good/best practice – Use of targets and benchmarks – Peer review and other forms of scrutiny Transfer/adaptation of successful models TRAJECTORY OF ECONOMY The reform ‘j’-curve Performance With extensive reforms Without major reforms A B Time THE KOK PROPOSALS Above all about governance – Derived from perception of delivery failures Increase ownership and focus – Above all by NRPs Expand support from Community budget – Not much progress – December 2005 outcome Greater weight to naming and shaming – Opposed by Commission THE RELAUNCH Growth and employment as headline goals – Playing-down of social and environmental A new partnership approach – NRPs based on 24 integrated guidelines Same for all Member States Yet big differences in practice – Community problem But what is new in it? No national recommendations…yet RETHINKING GOVERNANCE Methods of economic policy governance – Balance between hard law and open method needs to be reviewed – Finding effective incentives …and sanctions Role(s) of the EU level – Arbitrator, disciplinarian, or just advisor? – Is real budgetary capability needed? Soft rules and weak institutions worst of all ENHANCING LEARNING Ownership should be vital – But limited embedding in national discourse – Communication & advocacy therefore vital Continuing absence of hard incentives – Few sanctions … or rewards – Should be factored into 2008/9 FP review Stability needed in policy framework – Structural reforms never a quick fix (j-curve) – …or easy to sell STRUCTURAL REFORMS The latest in U-shaped curves? Sense of crisis in economy ESTONIA 1992-94 SPAIN Intensity of reforms Political support for reforms ITALY Performance of economy CONCLUDING COMMENTS Member States broadly know what’s needed – But have to overcome inertia & resistance – Key challenge will be implementation Far from clear how co-ordination adds value – Still searching for a rationale on supply-side – The danger of Lisbon becoming too pervasive – Tension between national plans & common IGs Scope for learning not proven HOW TO ACHIEVE REFORM ‘No EU member is going to accept the pain of reform just because Mr Blair makes a good speech in the European Parliament, or because an EU summit passes a stirring resolution. Economic reforms in France or Germany will be carried through by French of German politicians or not at all’ Charlemagne column, The Economist, 9th July 2005