17.11.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 383/1

Rapporteur:

Ms Madi SHARMA

Co-rapporteur:

Mr Raymond HENCKS

1.1

All dimensions of the transport sector — air, sea, road, rail, inland navigation, space and logistics — are traditionally male-dominated and as a result:

A snap shot of current statistics in the sector, included in Appendix 1, demonstrates the discrimination in the sector. Many of the barriers highlighted are generic to other sectors, but the transport sector is specifically poor in addressing the issues.

1.2

Hence this exploratory opinion, drawn up at the request of the EU Commissioner for Transport, focuses on the opportunities for the transport sector to better include women and generate more economic, social and sustainable growth. This report does not cover women as users of transport; however the EESC believes that an exploratory opinion on the subject could also be drawn up. Despite the failings, the situation can change by implementing gender neutral policies to support competitiveness, innovation, growth and jobs in the context of EU 2020. The new Investment Plan for Europe promoting growth and jobs must mainstream gender equality, by eliminating existing gender impediments and developing a culture of engagement and inclusiveness for both men and women to be equally active in all aspects of transport. Greater recognition of gender is needed for it to become a prominent part of EU transport policy.

1.3

The key recommendations are to:

2.1

Gender engagement in transport is complex and is not covered in depth here. Interest in transport is initiated by education, family, experience, necessity or need for innovation. Participation in the sector is the result of career opportunities offered in education institutions, qualifications, skills or networks. Remaining in the sector can be dependent on human resources development, training, upskilling and diversification, working conditions, salary, working time and work-life balance.

2.2

For women, this includes issues of safety, gender-based violence and sexual harassment from fellow workers or users. Additionally, women can face an interruption of their career through maternity and caring provision. Therefore, re-entering the sector requires flexible working arrangements, retraining and measures to avert loss of seniority/status.

2.3

Nevertheless where working conditions are good, both men and women in the sector find fulfilment, job satisfaction, high standards of training, skills development and opportunities for promotion and inclusion in decision-making. For company owners, this translates into opportunities for innovation, growth and job creation.

2.4

When analysing trends in employment, distinction should be made between mobile and non-mobile personnel in transport. Female transport employees find it more difficult to work away from home and thus in almost all transport professions except aviation, mobile jobs are male-dominated. Traditionally mobile jobs are better remunerated, thus the gender pay gap in transport becomes persistent and harder to address.

2.5

The impact of the economic crisis has also affected female employees. Pre-crisis tendencies showed that the industry opened up to women, efforts were doubled to actively recruit and promote women in transport. Much of this trend at the time was in the development of service land-based professions and investment in technologies which no longer required strength in manual labour. However, these trends were tempered by the crisis, as cost-cutting equally affected the measures needed to accompany workplace gender policies.

3.1

The EESC is pleased to see Commissioner BULC, a woman, with the portfolio for transport. All too often, the gender composition in decision-making bodies is based on pigeon holes rather than on competence. For the EU transport sector to succeed with strong sustainable growth, it must have gender neutrality in its policy- and decision-making process. Women must be equally involved in both, not through positive discrimination but on merit, competence and transparency of appointments.

3.2

A higher participation of women at senior level, including as non-executive directors, has been proven to bring bottom-line benefits to companies (1). Women’s engagement within the decision-making process will assist companies, institutions and associations to innovate and bring new market insights. A gender diverse workforce promotes collaboration, understanding and tolerance and has been proven to drive competitiveness, productivity and corporate social responsibility, ensuring retention of both genders.

3.3

The EESC would thus recommend simple non-bureaucratic procedures of regular auditing and reporting of progress made by transport actors (policymakers, companies, trade unions, transport associations, stakeholders) on gender equality. This should include the education of users in overcoming stereotypes and perceptions. Women and men should be given the same opportunities to influence the creation, design and management of the transport system, where their values are given equal weight. The Commission could consider this both in their own policy dialogue and as a requirement for TEN-T project funding or R&D funding.

4.1

The EU Commission and Member States could better support the industry through data collection and statistical analyses that are gender sensitive and gender disaggregated, highlighting key areas for investment or support.

4.2

The following indicators should be considered:

4.3

Data analysis can be used to examine the employment cycle, where there are obstacles to women’s entry and progression in the sector. Thereafter, industry-specific instruments can be created to address the weaknesses that discriminate against women.

4.4

The European Commission could further consider analysing the following:

5.1

Europe has seen an increase in female participation in the labour market in all sectors in recent decades. The growth continues, and yet the transport sector remains largely unfriendly to working women. Despite a number of initiatives under the European Social Fund and the EQUAL programme, the transport sector remains a segregated industry where men are predominantly concentrated as drivers/pilots, technicians or in occupations involving physical work and a heavy workload, whereas women are predominantly in service-related and administrative jobs.

5.2

In general, restructuring in the transport sector has hit the mainly male dominated transport occupations: rail, ports and inland waterways; while more women are employed in the service activities developed within the emerging supply chains, logistics companies, etc. Today, the implementation of new technologies makes it possible for women and men equally to take up jobs in sectors that have traditionally involved heavy physical work. However, work life balance remains a problem and continues to hamper women’s employment in mobile jobs.

5.3

The general perception that certain jobs, workplaces and working time arrangements are exclusively suitable for men is wide-spread. This has considerable impact on recruitment and retention of the female workforce in occupations where women are under-represented.

5.4

With regard to equal pay, segregation in transport maintains the gender pay gap. Men are concentrated in technical jobs, regarded as more qualified, while women are predominant in administration and customer service. Men work longer hours and account for more full-time jobs in transport, whereas women tend to opt for more flexible work arrangements which have restricted opportunities. In transport, career prospects are better for men than for women. Access to male dominated jobs is still problematic, despite the fact that both men and women have equal access to vocational training. This leads to situations where women are trained in technical professions but cannot get a job to match their level of qualification. All these contribute to deepen the pay gap between women and men in transport.

5.5

A gender sensitive approach for health and safety in transport provides a number of challenges as the majority of jobs with a visible risk for occupational accidents and illnesses are male dominated. This diminishes chances for a gender differentiated approach in health and safety policies/measures. However, varying occupations, tasks, working conditions or hours worked entail different exposure to hazards.

5.6

The European Union transport sector has a high incidence of all forms of violence, where many types of incidents go unreported. Third-party violence is equally problematic in transport as women are predominantly concentrated in those transport professions involving direct contact with the customer and thus tend to be more exposed to aggressive behaviour and attacks from customers. Front desk personnel have to confront growing levels of public frustration caused by congestions, delays or lack of information during delays. In this context more should be done to encourage transport companies to adopt zero-tolerance workplace violence policies.

5.7

The EESC proposes that the revision of the 2011 White Paper Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area include a new initiative — to be added to the list in Annex I — in favour of gender equality in transport professions, namely actions attracting women to employment opportunities in the transport sector with measures to improve employment quality across all modes of transport, working conditions, training and Lifelong Learning (LLL), operational and occupational health and safety and good career opportunities, all of which contribute to a better work-life balance. Women could be better integrated into the transport sector through positive action, which requires at least new sanitary infrastructure, changing rooms and accommodation and a more reasonable assessment of continuous working time, as well as stress, repetitive movements and fatigue related to each transport mode.

5.8

A number of European sectoral social partner initiatives to make transport a better workplace for women show the industry’s awareness of the potential obstacles to be addressed. A study carried out by the rail social partners CER and the ETF on representation and better integration of women in railway professions led to recommendations whose implementation at company level is currently jointly monitored by the two organisations. The same approach is used in urban public transport by UITP and the ETF. In maritime, in 2014, ETF and ECSA developed a comprehensive training toolkit including guidelines, a video and a workbook aiming at tackling harassment on board vessels. In ports and docks, the ETF, ESPO, IDC and FEPORT recently agreed on joint recommendations with 14 action points aimed at promoting and keeping women in employment in ports.

5.9

Many organisations, including the ILO, and social partners, have already created guidelines, training packages, toolkits and codes of practice that can be used or strengthened to increase female participation in the sector. The Commission could include a strong gender dimension within the pillars of a Social, Employment and Training Observatory for Transport, as recommended in the 2011 EESC opinion on How EU policies have impacted on the job opportunities, the training needs and the working conditions of transport workers.

6.1

Entrepreneurs have become more important as providers of employment opportunities and key players, including in the transport sector (2). Today this includes engagement in the green economy, intelligent transport systems ITS, CCTV, real time planning and security.

6.2

Simple, specific policies for women-owned enterprises could bring a return on investment that would increase growth and employment opportunities in the EU. The Commission should consider creating a women’s business ownership office within the European Commission and Member States’ relevant ministries. It should be part of the ministries for economic development in order to provide a clear distinction between economic enterprise activities and gender equality responsibilities.

6.3

Furthermore the appointment of a women’s enterprise director or high-level representative within the European Commission and Member States’ with a cross-departmental role of raising awareness about the economic benefits of encouraging more women to start and grow businesses should be considered. This ‘enterprise director’ could also have responsibility for promoting the industry and the academic paths which lead to increased female entrepreneurship, such as research, science, high-tech engineering, transport engineering and IT development.

7.1

To overcome under-representation of women and to use the talent pool of women in the transport labour market more efficiently and extensively, the EESC recommends the following tools that could be used to build the capacity of women at all levels. This can be done through the development of EU projects within DG Transport, or in collaboration with other established EU projects (partnerships):

7.2

Mentoring: increasing the support mechanisms, providing knowledge and experience, creating networks and giving guidance. This can be provided internally within companies and between employee levels, externally between companies and comparable transport sectors, and through established mentoring programmes without a focus solely on transport. Mentoring networks should contain both male and female participants. Furthermore, these networks can be developed into clusters and be cross-sectoral in order to allow the transfer of knowledge, best practices, skills and opportunities throughout the transport industry.

7.3

Development programs: creating the training that will allow for skills development and professional qualification attainment to increase competences without gender bias, thus ensuring equality of competence levels for recruitment or promotions.

7.4

Education: review the education system and the promotion of the roles in the transport sector to redefine the assumption that the sector is only suitable for males. Identify female role models to promote the opportunities.

7.5

Promote innovation and small business in transport: identify women working in small to medium-sized enterprises to identify new trends, innovation and R&D possibilities. Showcase successes. Best practice: the Women 1st Top 100 Club is a network of the most influential women in hospitality, passenger transport, travel and tourism, who act as ambassadors and role models for the female leaders of tomorrow (http://women1st.co.uk/top-100).

7.6

Supply chain engagement: encourage suppliers to include data on gender in their supply chain. Identify opportunities to consider procurement contracts for female-owned companies. (Best practice: the US-based initiative WEConnect offers tenders and procurement contracts especially for women across all sectors. It is now operational in Europe (http://weconnectinternational.org).

7.7

Corporate social responsibility (CSR): encourage companies to report gender statistics as part of their corporate social responsibility and engage in the promotion of women in the transport sector. Contribute to building an industry’s brand as an ‘industry of choice’ for all.

7.8

Internationalisation: Europe is valued for its knowledge transfer and partnership development. Transport is a global sector with many challenges where Europe can share its experience and innovation capacity, as well as open itself to new markets. A crucial role for women in the sector would be to promote European industry and expertise overseas.

17.11.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 383/8

Rapporteur:

Mr Bernardo HERNÁNDEZ BATALLER

1.1.

Marketing communication is an important tool enabling companies to publicise their products and services in a transparent manner, ensuring that the internal market operates smoothly and offers a high degree of consumer protection. Some messages, however, are not reliable or contain inaccuracies, making environmental, social or ethical and health-related claims that are damaging to businesses that comply with all the rules and to consumers.

1.2.

The environmental and social performance of products and services is currently measured and communicated using a range of channels and formats, under different initiatives, in differing formats and based on a variety of methodologies for assessment. The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) believes it is important that the Commission put forward European methodologies for measuring and communicating the overall environmental impact of products and services. An inventory of official labels should also be compiled, specifying their meaning and the bodies accredited for awarding, validating and differentiating them. In any case, consumers have the right to have clear and precise information on a product’s origin.

1.3.

The EESC hopes that, with a view to extending Directive 2005/29/EC, the Commission will revise the guidelines facilitating consumers’ and businesses’ access to reliable and transparent information and will clarify the use of environmental, ethical and health-related claims in marketing communications.

1.4.

In the field of administrative cooperation, each Member State’s consumer authorities should carry out a ‘sweep’ of environmental, social, ethical and health-related claims, to be able to assess the situation today on the basis of real data.

1.5.

The EU should equip itself with a coherent, comprehensive and consistent legal framework for regulating online marketing communications, which shows due regard for the right to personal privacy and for the protection of other public policy objectives.

1.6.

The European Commission and the Member States, within the scope of their respective powers, should develop initiatives for surveillance, monitoring and sanctions in relation to existing self-regulation and co-regulation schemes in this area that cover environmental, social and health-related claims. It should be ensured, in particular, that national and European self-regulatory bodies in the field of advertising meet the standards set out in the Community provisions and recommendations, especially with the aim of securing a high degree of consumer protection. Consumer organisations should also be informed when codes of conduct are drawn up, so that they can be involved in the drafting process.

2.1.

There are a good many businesses in Europe that provide the consumer with comprehensive, accurate and transparent information on the essential characteristics of goods and services placed on the market. Nevertheless, the improper use of environmental, social and health-related claims is harming businesses that play by the rules, as well as consumers that purchase goods and services.

2.2.

The right to information enables the workings of the internal market to be more transparent and redresses the obvious imbalances in the supplier/consumer relationship.

2.3.

The consumer has the right to obtain comprehensive, accurate and transparent information on the essential characteristics of goods and services placed on the market.

2.4.

Information is therefore a crucial factor in consumers’ and users’ purchasing decisions, both when acquiring a product on the basis of preferences and choices and when rejecting those that do not meet their needs and wishes to the same extent. In turn, technological developments make it increasingly easy for companies to cater to the demands of different consumer segments individually, making use of loyalty schemes, by customising their products. A clear example of this is ‘one-to-one’ marketing.

2.5.

In a social market economy model such as the one set out in the Treaty, the EU cannot be said to have a comprehensive legal framework governing marketing communications because it is unnecessarily complex, patchy, inconsistent and sometimes incoherent, being primarily based on:

2.6.

The Commission has published a number of communications, has opened a public debate and is working on, among other things, what is known as the environmental footprint of products, in order to guarantee reliable and accurate information on products’ environmental impact throughout their life cycle.

2.7.

Although technological advances have given consumers greater access to information, the EU’s regulation of online marketing communication is currently spread across a number of texts (the directives on electronic commerce, consumer protection, protection of privacy in commercial communication, unfair commercial practices, etc.). The EESC believes that in the future, a proposal should be made to build on the strategy that has been adopted. In the short term, however, there should be consolidation to draw the provisions in force together in a single recast text and to avoid contradictions in the messages sent out using this channel of communication.

2.8.

Furthermore, a framework for cooperation between the Commission and the Member States already exists, in Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 on consumer protection cooperation, which should explore these areas further, in order to assess any infringements that may be committed.

2.9.

Where existing remedies are concerned, these vary widely from one Member State to another because, while some provide the courts directly with effective means of ensuring compliance with the rules, others have developed various self-regulation and co-regulation initiatives for advertising, through codes of conduct and through out-of-court dispute settlement bodies that complement legislation and existing administrative and judicial enforcement mechanisms.

2.10.

There are also other variables that complicate the matter further, including:

2.11.

Finally, a number of promotional techniques, such as branded content, emotional marketing and storytelling, product placement or so-called neuro-marketing applications, while helping suppliers to achieve their business targets more effectively, hamper rational the public’s decisions in relation to their purchasing decisions, uses and consumption, based on a real assessment of actual profits of goods and services and the appropriateness of their pricing. Among other things, because they often eliminate the traditional distinction between advertising and non-advertising content, cheating recipients of the message of their right to know the nature and commercial purpose that might exist behind a message that appears merely to be providing information, and are therefore likely to mislead more vulnerable consumers, such as young people, the elderly and people with disabilities.

2.12.

In short, the EESC supports the existence of higher-quality products and services that are ethically produced, or which are distinguished by their better environmental and/or social performance, and the existence of environmental, social and health-related claims focusing this opinion on claims and marketing communications that are false, inaccurate or lead to confusion.

3.1.

The impact of marketing communications based on questionable, inaccurate or hard-to-verify claims that lead to errors and confusion is diverse and of varying severity, but is always of significant detriment to consumers, to businesses that observe the rules and by extension, to the workings of an ethical and transparent market in goods and services.

3.2.

The implications include the following:

3.3.

The information must meet consumers’ real needs and expectations and should therefore be assessed to see whether it reflects, to a sufficient degree, the purpose, content, presentation, context, and identification of the advertising message, the basic requirements for which are the following: reliability, topicality, impartiality, accuracy, relevance, succinctness, comprehensibility, clarity, readability and ease of access. The EESC maintains that a product’s label should state the product’s origin, because this increases the level of protection and prevents consumers from being misled or confused, thus serving to make their choices easier.

4.1.

Environmental claims focus mainly on the impact on the environment of the products’ composition or use, often related to climate change and pollutant emissions. But this may also extend to other areas, such as the rational use of natural resources, deforestation, species diversity, or energy efficiency and, ultimately, to the environmental footprint of company activity and the consumption of products on our environment.

4.2.

Using such claims as a mere formality or for the sake of appearances but in a way that has no bearing on the reality of the product or its manufacture creates a phenomenon known as ‘greenwashing’, which can be defined as the selective promotion of environmentally-positive information through advertising, giving consumers a distorted impression of the facts, in which these ‘green’ aspects are over-emphasised. The Commission also defines this practice in its guidance on implementing Directive 2005/29/EC (7).

4.3.

From the environmental point of view, information on a brand’s impact (either positive or negative) creates a certain image in consumers’ minds. In turn, this image influences aspects such as purchasing decisions or political opinions. By punishing ‘bad’ behaviour and rewarding ‘good’ behaviour, in the form of purchasing decisions, the system achieves a certain dynamic equilibrium.

4.4.

The most commonly-used greenwashing techniques are the following:

4.5.

The criteria used should ensure that the consumer receives accurate information and should prohibit the misuse of environmental claims in marketing communications.

4.6.

One measure to make the workings of the market more transparent might be to introduce harmonised European methodologies, such as the so-called ‘environmental footprint’, making it possible to establish the environmental traceability of products and organisations. These methods should be based on commonly-used international standards, such as ISO 14201, on environmental labels and declarations — self-declared environmental claims, or the International Chamber of Commerce Code.

5.1.

In the same way that claims abound in the environmental sphere, there is also a kind of ‘greenwashing’ that applies to the ‘ethical and social qualities’ of companies and products. The aim here is to transform the acquisition of a product into an opportunity for charitable or inclusive action which is social in nature insofar as it would implicitly benefit groups or communities that have specific needs or vulnerabilities.

5.2.

It is currently common to see brands associated with socially minded projects, using a type of campaign based on promoting sales. These are known as ‘charity promotions’ or sales promotion campaigns linked to social action, which have achieved a degree of success as a result of the economic crisis. When such actions use inaccurate claims just to make sales, they can confuse the consumer and cause him or her to make purchasing mistakes, and are therefore particularly harmful.

5.3.

Such measures focus on campaigns entailing solidarity, humanitarian aid or social support for certain communities or population groups, or even support for short-term causes arising from emergency situations, or from a structural issue involving discrimination, segregation, inequality, etc.

5.4.

Other cases of social washing or social greenwashing, occur when a company is portrayed as being socially responsible without there being sufficient evidence of this, or where a promotional and social quality is given an exaggerated role in the company’s core business.

5.5.

Social or ethical claims are sometimes combined with others of an environmental nature, but also extend, in line with current trends, to other aspects such as employment, promoting local life, public participation and any other area that triggers consumers’ desire to make associated purchases.

5.6.

Account should also be taken in this regard of the hidden behaviour of pseudo ‘ethical, social and environmental affairs consultants’, who confuse consumers and cause them to make purchasing mistakes, because they operate on the market as traders or brokers, abusing the good faith and credulity of consumers, and who seek to profit from marketing goods or services on the basis of fallacious arguments.

5.7.

Financial operations that use ethical, social or environmental arguments in seeking to market financial products and instruments, while failing to meet the solvency requirements and supervisory checks that are mandatory for financial institutions, are particularly detrimental to the workings of the internal market. The European Banking Authority has recently adopted an opinion putting forward a number of measures to reduce risks and to establish requirements for advertising and recommendations to protect participants from potential conflicts of interest.

5.8.

‘Social washing’, or the use of inaccurate information in order to present a socially committed image, should be prevented.

6.1.

The recent wave of consumer concern about healthy lifestyles and the expansion of technology into the production of food, cosmetics and other health-related products have also triggered the use of health-related claims in areas ranging from food and nutrition, benefits for beauty and weight-loss, to enhanced physical and cognitive functions.

6.2.

Alongside environmental claims, the upsurge of consumer concerns about healthy eating also provides an opportunity to make claims relating to organic farming, or to the presence or absence of food ingredients such as vitamins, omega-3 fatty acids, sugars, salt or alcohol and even transgenic substances.

6.3.

The progressive ageing of the population and increased life expectancy represent fertile ground for even greater use to be made of unlawful claims.

6.4.

Similarly, so-called ‘healthy marketing’, which makes use of such claims to provide added value to boost marketing campaigns, has been done for food supplements or herbal products but also for mass-consumption goods, also contains misuse of alleged health benefits, garbed in pseudo-scientific arguments.

7.1.

It should be noted that the options of voluntary labelling and the design of logos and pictograms creates rather vague associations in the cognitive and emotional processes that lead consumers to make a purchasing decision. Statements or pictures must not be used to clearly and firmly claim anything unless it can be proved beyond doubt. Specific steps should be taken to check claims.

7.2.

However, verifying claims must be carried out in accordance with the type of media used, since each one has its own specific features. To summarise, claims can be made, in schematic form, using the following (among others):

7.3.

It is permissible to ask that information containing unprovable claims and serving commercial purposes not be used or that it be corrected.

7.4.

The EESC therefore calls on the European Commission and the Member States to take the appropriate steps, in keeping with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004, in the form of administrative cooperation and in particular promoting joint activities, to eradicate the fraudulent use of inaccurate ethical, environmental or health claims, working closely with European Consumer Centres, which play a crucial role in such situations.

17.11.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 383/14

Rapporteur:

Bernardo HERNÁNDEZ BATALLER

1.1

Sport helps meet the EU’s strategic objectives, brings to the fore key educational and cultural values and is a conduit of integration, since it is open to all members of the public, regardless of their gender, ethnic origin, religion, age, nationality, social situation or sexual orientation. Sport is a tool to tackle intolerance, xenophobia and racism.

1.2

Sporting activities allow all people to channel their hopes in a constructive way, enriching them with the values that sport entails such as hard work, solidarity and cohesion. Such activities also bring physical and mental well-being while helping to alleviate social problems by providing positive values. In this regard, the debate should also focus on establishing a body of minimum universal standards which promote the integrity of the practice of sport by children and young people in all sporting disciplines.

1.3

Volunteering has a key role to play in the development of grass-roots sport and in clubs, affording it considerable value from a social, economic and democratic point of view. Volunteering and active citizenship through sport, including winter sports, should therefore be promoted.

1.4

The principle of good governance and sound management should ensure integrity in sporting competitions. In sport, autonomy is a condition for sporting organisations which must act in accordance with the principles of transparency, accountability and democracy. In light of this, all stakeholders must be appropriately represented in the decision-making process. In order to consolidate this general prevention framework, and as demonstrated by a recent comprehensive study (1), trust must be built up between national authorities and sporting institutions with a view to facilitating the necessary exchange of information between national judicial authorities and international sports institutions.

1.5

As regards innovation, the EESC urges the Commission and Member States to disseminate information and to exchange among themselves, in a European context, information on positive experiences and best practices relating to ways to create and support strategic partnerships between the main stakeholders from different sectors, aimed at strengthening the role of sport as a driver of innovation and economic growth. In this respect, it is very important to know how to reap the benefits that organising major sporting events can and should bring to the regions and cities in which they are held. The Committee believes that the Commission must pay attention to the new initiatives and methodologies emerging at international level which are aimed at helping regions and cities put into practice sports projects that promote sustainable economic and social development.

1.6

With an eye to the development of the sports sector, steps should be taken to foster the use of EU funding instruments at different levels.

1.7

At European level, efforts should be made to promote social cohesion, measures to include disadvantaged groups in sporting activities and social integration, including that of prisoners, so that they may find in sport a tool for reintegration into society, since it brings emotional well-being and provides a source of stability through the values of hard work, solidarity and ultimately ‘fair play’. These can help eradicate social exclusion and discrimination.

1.8

The EU has an important role to play in tackling inequality with a view to removing the barriers that prevent people with disabilities from taking part in sport, promoting their participation in competitions and eradicating any form of social prejudice in this regard. A positive step would therefore be for the Commission to propose to the Council of Ministers that it draw up a ‘European Code of Good Practices on Sport and Social Inclusion’ with a view to fostering and promoting more extensively the practice of sport among people with disabilities.

1.9

Special attention should be devoted by the EU and Member States to promoting sport and physical exercise amongst older people. In an increasingly ageing Europe, it is of paramount importance that targeted initiatives and funding are deployed to this effect.

2.1

Within the framework of the integration process, the Lisbon Treaty provides for certain values which are common to the EU and its Member States. These higher values are human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.

The Lisbon Treaty gives the EU authority to promote the European aspects of sport (Article 165 TFEU). The various dimensions of sport (social, economic and cultural) must be examined from the point of view of how they tie in with the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU, entailing a clear commitment to act on the part of the institutions and the Member States, which must promote policies, standards and measures to develop the European aspects of sport, while at the same time applying the subsidiarity principle.

2.2

The aim of this own-initiative opinion is to promote the potential of European values and the values of sport, including winter sports, to all citizens and social organisations, and to promote the EU sport policy, given that until now judicial decisions on the subject have been only sporadic, usually related to the exercise of economic freedoms.

2.3

Even in ancient times, classical Greek philosophy distinguished between the activities of the body and the mind and the Olympic spirit was the fruition of these ideas, with ethics and the promotion of peace playing a key role.

Sport has an important part to play in meeting the European and worldwide goals of the Europe 2020 strategy, given the significant contribution this sector can make to smart, sustainable and inclusive growth.

3.1

In order to safeguard the social function of sport, Member States must have in place suitable infrastructure to facilitate the practice of sport, with the respective regions of each country having an appropriate, sufficient and balanced basic network of sporting facilities and equipment.

3.2

Volunteering continues to be the cornerstone of sport in Europe, since it is volunteers who enable sporting ideals to develop and spread, together with charitable sports associations. In this regard, a strong emphasis should be placed on the role of schools in championing Olympic values, as they foster peace and harmony in sport, preserving a system of coexistence and integration in a democratic and pluralist society as well as the human values which are identified with sport and play a role in eradicating violence, racism, intolerance and xenophobia in this area.

3.2.1

The application of the principles of good governance is essential for sports organisations. These must be guided by the principles of transparency, responsibility and democracy and must duly represent all stakeholders in the decision-making process, including the fans who generally promote the principles of fair play. Consideration should be given to the possibility of imposing stricter transparency requirements when activities are funded with public money.

3.2.2

The EESC believes that consideration should be given to taking coordinated action against undesirable phenomena such as match fixing, doping and violence not only on the basis of the EU’s competences set out in Articles 6 and 165 TFEU, but also those relating to the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice and any others which might be necessary in order to adopt supranational measures that could even act as a genuine deterrent.

3.2.3

These measures should aim to ensure a high level of safety and could, for example, include measures geared towards ensuring cooperation and coordination between police (Europol) and judicial (Eurojust) authorities and other competent authorities, which must include sporting federations.

3.3

Promoting physical activity and the practice of sport is a key factor in protecting public health in a modern society. It should be pointed out that sport promotes a healthy lifestyle and improves quality of life, so that people take full advantage of the opportunities it affords, thereby reducing spending on healthcare.

3.4

The institutional measures taken by the EU in the area of sport have received a significant boost thanks to the public debate surrounding the ‘European dimension of sport’, the inclusion of sport in the Erasmus+ programme and the strategic actions on gender equality in sport, among other things. The priorities of this programme are discussed every year and, for this reason, the EESC calls for the next evaluation to take account of the observations of this opinion.

3.4.1

This institutional action will have to be strengthened by taking the steps needed to make use of the added value and positive aspects of indigenous, traditional and more locally-based sports as proof of the EU’s cultural and historical diversity. This diversity should be fostered and promoted.

3.4.2

On the basis of the abovementioned Erasmus+ programme, the Commission should provide a clear assessment of the impact of including sports in that programme, especially as regards meeting the objectives on new skills and jobs and young people.

3.5

In order to ensure that sport contributes to the consolidation and development of European values, it is essential to adopt and execute measures of a coordinating, complementary or supporting nature which are designed to protect these European values, especially those geared to protecting human dignity, as well as some aspects of the education of people whose proper integration is essential if democracy and the rule of law are to function smoothly. This approach could be enhanced through the ‘fair play’ message channelled by sport, which conveys to society a large number of European values.

The European dimension of sport is no less important in helping to meet some of the benchmarks for equality between men and women. An important step would be to create and use educational materials to train sports leaders and parents in order to contribute to the elimination of gender stereotypes and the promotion of gender equality in sport, and to encourage an ever greater balance in the representation of both sexes on management boards and sports committees. In this connection, the development of a best practices charter for the development of young people and protection in sport is viewed as a major step (2).

3.6

Playing sport, individually and collectively, can be a legitimate source of job creation, wealth and well-being. Making proper use of sport has a very important role to play nowadays if we are to tackle youth unemployment and social exclusion. Special mention should be made of the situation of athletes who begin a second career after having retired from high-level competitive sport and who need to prepare in a specific way for this stage in their lives (dual career). Equivalence and recognition of diplomas and qualifications in sport are needed for the proper development of these young people. The latter point is important in order to put an end to the shadow economy which may exist in this sector and to move towards legalisation in future.

3.6.1

It would be a good idea to decide how European funding mechanisms can be used to encourage people to play sport as a way of promoting social integration and youth employment, gender equality, innovation, creation of networks of organisations which champion social reintegration and meeting other goals of public interest.

As a way of tackling social exclusion and a means of reintegration, sport is an appropriate means of moving closer to values which boost personal and social development, with an impact on people’s health and education. At European level, efforts should be made to promote social cohesion and social integration, including that of prisoners, who may find in sport a tool for reintegration into society, since it brings emotional well-being and provides a source of cohesion and stability through the values of hard work, solidarity and ultimately ‘fair play’.

3.6.2

A network of organisations should be created to advocate social cohesion and social reintegration through sport, especially those which are played most widely, in such a way that there is an exchange of best practices based on the European values enshrined in the Treaties, with a European congress of innovative practices for social reintegration through sport, championships organised at European Union level and the publication and dissemination of these networks’ results.

3.7

One of the EU’s institutional tasks associated with tackling inequality is to remove the barriers preventing people with disabilities from taking part in sport, promoting their participation in competitions and eradicating any form of social prejudice in this regard.

A positive step would be for the Commission to propose to the Council of Ministers that it draw up a ‘European Code of Good Practices on Sport and Social Inclusion’.

3.7.1

The integration of people with disabilities should be promoted through sporting events with a view to improving quality of life and developing the social habits of people with disabilities and their families. For this reason, sport is not just a healthy habit, it also improves and enhances the mobility of these people and allows them to develop their decision-making abilities, friendships and team-working skills.

3.7.2

In order to promote Paralympic or high-level sport for people with disabilities and thus raise the level of public awareness, the public authorities must roll out a communication strategy with an eye to the Paralympic Games and other high-level international events, making use of key media and professionals and resulting in high-quality television coverage of the Paralympic Games, a significant amount of airtime and the use of primetime television slots.

3.7.3

The provisions adapting each national legislative framework to the international Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities pursue the same goals and provide for ‘accessibility and design for all’ as tools which must be used to change and create environments which allow full public participation.

3.7.4

Since the lack of training of the various stakeholders is one of the barriers systematically identified when seeking to develop programmes to promote the inclusion of older people and people with disabilities in sporting activities, it is recommended that the necessary material be provided to meet the training needs of primary and secondary school physical education teachers and sports coaches to develop sporting activities in an inclusive environment.

3.8

The apparently irreversible process of the ageing of European society, accompanied by a constant increase of life expectancy, makes it indispensable to develop targeted initiatives and programmes to promote sport and physical exercise amongst older people. This is an area which, in most countries, has been overlooked and requires special attention, both at EU and Member State level.

4.1

Sport has an economic dimension based on professional sport and sport as a business, which affect the internal market. Another specific dimension of sport is voluntary work and its social, educational and cultural functions, which make a significant contribution to positive values such as sportsmanship, respect and social inclusion.

Therefore, a distinction must be made between sporting and commercial interests, and the EESC believes that sport should be protected from excessive economic influence so that the principles and values of sport prevail.

4.1.1

The unique and essential characteristics of sport should be given specific consideration when applying EU legislation in cases where the EU may play a more effective role than the Member States and with due consideration for the subsidiarity principle.

4.2

With regard to the economic dimension of sport, account must be taken of the special ties between these activities and fundamental rights.

4.2.1

Therefore, in order ensure appropriate protection against infringements of intellectual property rights and, in particular, against digital piracy, which put the business of sport at risk, consideration should be given to adopting measures based on the principle of proportionality. In any case, the fundamental rights of citizens to receive information must prevail. The aim here is to ensure, at the very least, that the public has the right to obtain and receive news, that major sporting events are broadcast and that journalists have the right to inform.

4.2.2

It would be a good idea to adopt directives in other areas such as competition policy — specifically State aid — in order to clarify what kinds of aid are considered to be a legitimate means of meeting sport’s social, cultural and educational objectives.

4.2.3

Online sports betting in unregulated markets, especially illegal betting, currently represents one of the main threats to sport; its negative effects are comparable to those of doping and spectator violence and may lead to manipulation of the uncertain nature of sporting competitions. With regard to other aspects, such as betting and gambling, there is a need to adopt public-interest measures to prevent gambling addiction and protect minors, especially against online gambling.

4.2.4

Sport has an in-built and inherent incentive to push those who practise sport towards constant improvement in performance and excellence, meaning that the sports sector is characterised by constant innovation that has made sports technology a major sector within the ‘applied sciences’, including textile technology, human motion mechanics, new materials, sensors, actuators and human-oriented design in particular. The building and running of sports facilities and participation and attendance at sports events are becoming an important part of the experience economy, of which the development of sport tourism is also an example.

4.2.5

Other themes related economically to sport, such as the free movement of people and services, sponsorship deals, regulating the activities of players’ agents, sports insurance and health, educational programmes for sportsmen and women and professional qualifications relating to sport, should be examined and, where appropriate, measures relating to these areas should be proposed or adopted by the Commission.

4.2.6

With regard to professional training for younger trainers, the rules in the different EU Member States must be improved, given that the work of a trainer is comparable to that of a teacher and that, in some cases (e.g. preparation for sporting competitions), the trainer spends more time with the young sportsperson than a teacher does with their pupils. Training for trainers must take place in a formal framework and be certified by a teaching diploma issued by the State.

4.2.7

The EESC calls for European sporting federations to play a role in defending the values and principles set out in this opinion, in the hope that their work in all areas is underpinned by these values and principles, at the very least the activities associated with the award of public prizes and recognition.

17.11.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 383/19

Rapporteur:

Pierre-Jean COULON

1.1

The EESC calls for EU climate and energy objectives to lead to a greater share of renewables in the energy mix. The Committee has consistently supported renewable energies: a sustainable system composed mostly of renewables is the only long-term solution for the future of our energy. It notes the importance of supplementing the energy system in a number of ways.

1.2

Due to their intermittent nature, renewable energies and their development pose a real challenge in terms of storage. Storage is a strategic issue for the European Union, in order to permanently guarantee the security of the EU’s supply and the viability of the energy market, both technically and in terms of cost. This explains why the issue is high on the European agenda, and why it is a priority area, particularly for the Energy Union launched in 2015.

1.3

In a previous opinion, the EESC highlighted the issue of storage, describing it as ‘a challenge, an opportunity and an absolute necessity.’ It underlines the importance of a successful energy transition in the European Union and it calls for all resources to be harnessed in order to achieve tangible, large-scale results in this area.

1.4

The EESC acknowledges that different storage solutions exist and that technologies are at different stages of technological and industrial development.

1.5

The EESC points out that — alongside its advantages — energy storage can have significant financial, as well as environmental and health costs. For this reason, it calls for impact assessments to be carried out systematically, not merely to assess the competitiveness of technologies, but also to evaluate their impact on health and the environment. The EESC also considers it important to assess the effect that these technologies have on the creation of activities and jobs.

1.6

The EESC advocates stepping up investment and research and development work in the area of storage. In addition, it calls for better European synergy in this area, in order to reduce energy transition costs, guarantee the security of supply and render the European economy competitive. The EESC supports the need for greater harmonisation of Member States’ energy storage regulations.

1.7

The EESC also calls for a Europe-wide public dialogue on energy (the European Energy Dialogue) to allow the whole of civil society to take ownership of the energy transition and to influence future decisions on energy storage technologies.

1.8

The EESC highlights the importance of gas in the energy mix and its significance in terms of energy security for the citizens. It calls for storage to be encouraged in this sector, so that all of the Member States, together, will have reserves available.

2.1

Energy supply and management are major political and socioeconomic priorities, as well as key factors in ensuring a successful energy transition and tackling climate challenges. Although energy demand is falling within the EU (energy consumption has been decreasing since 2006 and we now consume roughly the same amount of energy as during the early 1990s), the growing trend towards intermittent renewable energies has increased energy storage needs. Storage will play an essential role in a number of sectors (compensating for fluctuations, electric cars, defence, etc.) and it will be a strategic concern for Europe and its industry. It should be noted that the issue of storing renewable energy is also one of the main arguments presented by opponents to this type of energy.

2.2

While the majority of primary energy sources (gas, oil or coal) can be stored easily, questions still remain regarding the size, cost and location of strategic storage facilities. The other major primary energy source, renewable energies, varies when it comes to storage. Hydropower can very often be accumulated by storing water in lakes and reservoirs. While biomass can also be stored relatively easily, solar and wind energy — normally used to generate electricity — can at present only be stored using complex, expensive intermediary processes.

3.1

The European Commission has analysed the scenarios for decarbonising the energy system and in 2011 it published an Energy Roadmap 2050, which sets out various scenarios for 2050. To achieve the decarbonisation objectives set, the electricity sector would rely on a large share of renewables — between 59 and 85 % — most of which would come from variable renewable power generation. In a subsequent communication in 2014 — A policy framework for climate and energy in the period from 2020 to 2030 — the path to decarbonisation is confirmed, indicating an RES share of almost 45 % of power generation in 2030. This is in line with the targets agreed by EU leaders on 23 October 2014 as part of the 2030 policy framework. The significant share of variable RES in the electricity system would require tens or hundreds of GW of storage capacity in the electricity grid, even when other flexibility measures are employed.

3.2

Moreover, the European Commission has made storing electricity one of its priorities and has reiterated the essential role of storage. Accordingly, in its 2013 working document on energy storage (http://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/energy_storage.pdf), the Commission calls for better coordination between this and other key EU policies such as climate policy. Energy storage should be incorporated into, and supported by, all relevant existing and future EU energy and climate measures and legislation, including strategies on energy infrastructure. In addition, in its Communication on the Energy Union of 25 February 2015, it points out that ‘The European Union is committed to becoming the world leader in renewable energy, the global hub for developing the next generation of technically advanced and competitive renewable energies. The EU has also set an EU target of at least 27 % for the share of renewable energy consumed in the EU in 2030.’ The Commission plans to drive forward a new research and development (R) strategy, stating that: ‘if Europe (…) is to be the world number one in renewable energies, it must lead on the next generation of renewable technologies, as well as storage solutions.’

3.3

Similarly, the conclusions from the most recent Madrid Forum indicate that ‘the Forum has confirmed the strategic role that gas storage plays in ensuring a secure supply to the EU.’ The EESC also highlights the importance of encouraging the development of gas storage.

4.1

Electricity storage solutions can be divided into four main categories, as depending on energy needs and constraints, energy can be stored in different forms (e.g. electricity, gas, hydrogen, heat, cold) near to production sites, on grids or near to where it will be used:

4.2

The most common form of electricity storage worldwide is pumped hydroelectric storage, such as uninterruptible power supplies (UPS). Electricity network operators, manufacturers and managers of tertiary buildings have shown a renewed interest in these systems. PSPs enable: the integration of intermittent renewable energies, particularly wind and solar energy; advanced capacity and the ability to stagger the demand for power; economic arbitration (recharging when demand and prices are low, reselling when demand and prices are high, with ‘social’ adjustment measures) and the staggering of investment in the electricity networks. However, it is unlikely that possible storage capacities will be sufficient to compensate for long periods without wind or sun in the event of large-scale expansion of these types of renewable energies.

4.3

The storage market has also seen the emergence of five new sectors which could become more widespread over the course of the next decade:

4.4

It should be noted that the role of hydrogen looks promising (although its cost, and security and transport issues, diminish its potential considerably). Hydrogen is an energy vector which does not emit greenhouse gases if produced using a decarbonised source. It also has many (mainly industrial) uses, such as local electricity production (supplying isolated sites, emergency generators), energy storage (support for the network, using renewable energies) or cogeneration. It is also used in land transport (individual vehicles, public transport, heavy goods vehicles, etc.), air transport (main or auxiliary aircraft propulsion), marine or water transport (submarines, main or auxiliary propulsion), refineries and the petrochemical industry (for green hydrogen), and has other uses, in particular portable appliances (external chargers or integrated batteries). This is all currently under development.

Techniques for producing hydrogen from electrolysis and fuel cells are now very flexible and widely available, although they remain inefficient — which increases the demand for wind turbines or solar panels even further and therefore overcapacity in this area. Hydrogen is an essential energy vector in systems which make use of the flexibility between different energy networks (e.g. the Hybrid Power Plant in Berlin). Where necessary, hydrogen (‘methanised’ hydrogen) can be produced from renewable electricity to be injected into gas networks, or stored for distribution as fuel or chemical agent. It can even be re-injected as electricity. Methanised hydrogen — which has by far the greatest energy storage potential, can be transported safely and can be stored (for long periods) in current gas infrastructure (geological storage, etc.) — can also be used to form long-chain hydrocarbons (which have multiple applications: from aviation fuel to other products such as plastics, which are currently only made using fossil fuels). Moreover, the carbon ideally present in a circular economy (CO2 etc.), will be reused and will not accumulate in the atmosphere. This therefore constitutes a move from greenhouse gas production to energy production. Interest in these solutions will be further increased by the potential to make use of the heat generated by the exothermic processes of hydrogen production and producing electricity from hydrogen. Hydrogen is thus one of the rare energy vectors to enable economic, societal and environmental arbitration between the electricity market and other energies.

4.5

Another compelling example is the storage of electricity produced by solar panels during the day in a battery. The problem with solar panels installed on the roofs of houses is that they produce electricity when the house is empty. In the evening, when the occupants return, the sun has often long set and the panels no longer produce energy.

4.6

A solution seems to have been discovered and developed by a German company. The company linked components with a computer programme and an application for smartphones. Using their mobile phones, users can check the level of charge reached by the battery storing the electricity produced by the solar panels during the day. The financial calculations are enlightening: normally, household solar panels produce between 25 % and 35 % of a family’s energy requirements. With this solution, they regularly exceed 70 %. Based on current prices, a return will be made on the investment in around 8 years, and the batteries are guaranteed for 20 years.

4.7

This is also an incentive for the household production and consumption or ‘prosumer’ model that the EESC has supported in many of its opinions.

4.8

Although various solutions may therefore already exist, it seems that the potential for additional equipment is still limited. Moreover, significant barriers persist to the development of new, more flexible technologies, such as lithium-ion batteries or ‘power-to-gas’. The main drawback of these solutions is their cost and their economic competitiveness — which remain far removed from market conditions — along with the considerable size of the batteries. In its forecast, the French Environment and Energy Management Agency (Ademe) (Energy Storage Systems/Strategic Roadmap, 2011) does not envisage a boom in the stationary storage systems industry until 2030. Consultancy firm McKinsey (Battery Technology Charges Ahead, McKinsey, 2012) believes that although the price of energy storage is predicted to fall in the coming years, the scale and speed of this decline is still debatable. In its view, the cost of a lithium-ion battery could fall from USD 600/kWh to USD 200/kWh in 2020 and to USD 160/kWh in 2025.

5.1

The EESC points out that the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, along with generally dwindling fossil fuels (although new deposits have been found in recent years), has led to a growth in renewable energies, something which the EESC has supported in several opinions (TEN/564 and TEN/508). In the light of the upsurge in renewable energies, the EESC has also underlined the importance of supplementing the energy system in a number of ways, namely: extensions to transport networks, storage facilities and reserve capacity. The development of renewable energies in large quantities is a strategic issue because, while it will reduce imports (which is both an economic and ethical benefit), it requires large-scale storage facilities (which enable energy to be stored not only from day to day, but also from season to season).

5.2

The EESC therefore acknowledges that storage is the key issue facing an energy transition which includes a large proportion of intermittent renewable energies. It reiterates the need to create and increase storage capacity. It stresses that energy storage is an essential condition for reaching the EU’s overarching energy objectives, which the EESC supports, namely:

5.3

The EESC recognises that storing energy can have significant financial costs, as well as environmental and health costs. For example, certain underground gas storage projects counteract efforts to preserve water resources. The EESC therefore calls for improvements to be made to all technologies. The EESC believes that mass storage can be an important means of utilising the complementary nature of renewable energies. Given the short-, medium- and long-term variations in solar energy, wind power could be used as a substitute. The Committee highlights that this will lead to the creation of a network of interconnections between different electricity sources — a network that will build on smart grids. These smart grids use computer technologies which optimise energy production, distribution and consumption. The EESC supports the development of this technology as it makes it possible to manage energy demand, while stressing the importance of basing it on impact assessments carried out on the subject, respecting the freedom of each consumer. It would be even more useful to carry out a general assessment of all instruments — for example, the M/441 Mandate or the German BSI Protection Profile, which allows the secure transfer and distribution of data — to ensure the integration of Smart Homes, etc. Such an assessment could help to find specific applications which meet the future needs of Smart Cities, such as planning in accordance with weather forecasts.

5.4

The EESC highlights the importance of a European regulatory framework for energy storage, in order to be able to quantify the benefits of ‘greening’ electricity and gas networks.

5.5

Furthermore, the EESC points out that the storage market for electricity networks is growing rapidly, and has significant potential to generate economic activity and jobs, which should compensate for job losses in other energy sectors. Future investments by network operators and energy companies are motivated by the need to integrate a growing share of intermittent energy sources. In Europe, market development is underpinned by the construction of pumped-storage power plants, the renovation of existing PSP plants and the conversion of hydroelectric dams into this type of plant. Barriers to the efficiency of PSPs should therefore be reduced immediately. In order to secure the economic and environmental benefits of this technology, the necessary measures must be adopted to allow these kinds of plants to be built and operated.

6.1

The EESC notes that so far, the EU has focused spending on deploying technology rather than on R&D (Energy, a networked Europe report by Michel Derdevet, 23 February 2015). Public spending on R&D in Europe (in all sectors) is set at similar levels in real terms to the 1980s (in contrast, American and Japanese expenditure has risen), while renewable energies are booming. The SET plan (The strategic technology plan for energy), set up in 2007, failed to raise suitable funding. The various pressures on the European energy system, due to the need to integrate renewable energies and to secure Europe’s energy supply and economic competitiveness, mean that renewed European cooperation in the field of energy R&D is needed. Storage is one of the key elements of the main smart grid projects launched in 2012 and 2013, as well as a major R&D concern as regards addressing the challenges faced by tomorrow’s energy networks.

6.2

Energy storage technologies are at different stages of technological and industrial development. The EESC calls for more research and development, and for improved synergies at European level, especially since most R&D projects in Europe and worldwide are concerned with similar challenges and opportunities. The EESC has, in several opinions, expressed its regret that research activities are not geared to the issues at hand and called for them to be stepped up at European level. The Member States should also be encouraged to contribute proportionally to this effort. The EU must boost coordination and investment quickly, given the crucial role of R&D in overcoming the final technical obstacles and (through industrial storage solutions) reducing investment costs, which remain far too high. This will also enable renewable energies to be better integrated and energy transition costs to be reduced. Moreover, it will limit the impact that certain forms of energy have on health, allow the development of training and jobs in the sector, guarantee the security of the energy system and ensure the development of innovative sectors which are competitive on the international stage. Finally it will enable the European economy to be competitive.

17.11.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 383/24

Rapporteur:

Ms RONDINELLI

1.1

In the context of growing urbanisation, the EU and its Member States see cities as ‘laboratories for a more dynamic, digital Europe’ in which to test out measures that can generate growth with employment and social development.

1.2

The sustainability of cities will be the result of a smart mix of more mature and innovative technologies, integrated (European, national and local-level) platforms, modern infrastructure, energy efficiency, more efficient services redesigned to reflect the needs of the public and users, and the integration of smart electricity networks, the internet, and sensor technology.

1.3

Such advanced cities, acting as innovation laboratories and rolled out on a large scale, would contribute to the industrial and socioeconomic ‘renaissance’ of the EU, setting in motion a genuine industrial, financial and social revolution.

1.4

The EESC therefore considers that smart cities can become drivers for development of a new European industrial policy that can influence the development of specific productive sectors, extending the benefits of the digital economy onto a large scale. In his speech to the EESC’s plenary session on 22 April 2015, European Commission Vice-President Maroš ŠEFČOVIČ stated, inter alia, that smart cities were a development priority for the EU and pointed out that city mayors were enthusiastic about investing in the communities of the future.

1.5

To achieve this, it is essential to converge towards a development model that is more advanced and effective than those applied to date, which have been characterised by extremely fragmented action. For this reason, the EESC is proposing that the other European institutions and the national governments couple the concept of ‘smartness’ with a sustainable, integrated development model that can be applied to a city, island, subnational entity or industrial district and that features the coexistence and simultaneous integration of six enabling pillars:

1.6

The coexistence of these six pillars should be considered a standard and indispensable component of a strategic smart city project. Equally important is that this model be applied in a policy context that ensures the highest standards of network security, IT systems, applications and devices, which form the basis of digital service ecosystems.

1.7

In order to translate this proposal into practical measures, while civil society involvement is indispensable, the EESC also considers it essential that the EU and its Member States coordinate their policy measures and furnish them with the appropriate level of public financial resources while opening them up structurally to public-private partnership.

1.8

More specifically, in order to introduce fully sustainable innovations designed to improve people’s quality of life and wellbeing, the EESC considers that investment in smart cities should be supported by making more of synergies between existing European, national and regional public funds and by harnessing the opportunities provided by the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI).

1.9

To make this a reality, the EESC advocates that:

1.10

The EESC believes that it would be worthwhile promoting a European project platform on the basis of these new instruments, with the features required by the EFSI that would be conducive to the emergence and integration of Member State smart city projects, and that would support the financing of projects by building in available public and potential private resources and the forms of guarantee available under the EFSI.

1.11

The EESC deems it essential to promote a smart cities common market, by means not least of a harmonised regulatory framework that includes:

1.12

For the EESC, the involvement and participation of civil society organisations and consultation between the social partners are essential, not only when it comes to drawing up the strategic plans and projects connected with the implementation of the sustainable and integrated smart city development model, but also to ensure that such plans translate into economic and social benefits for the public and into better living and working conditions.

2.1

The growth of urbanisation globally (under Millennium Development Goal No 11, the UN is implementing the United smart cities project aimed at helping all of the world’s cities become sustainable, inclusive, safe and resilient to disasters), and at European level (1) is linked increasingly to the spread of smart cities (European Union — regional policy; Cities of tomorrow, October 2011), because this is where most individuals and businesses will choose to focus their economic, personal and social interests (72 % of the EU’s population (359 million) now live in cities and by 2020 this proportion will be 80 % (Commission data)). However, in Europe, where there are widespread smaller urban centres and where industry has traditionally favoured business chains and networks, the shift towards this new model will also have to be catered for and facilitated over very wide areas and business districts.

2.2

Increased awareness of these issues on the part of national and local policymakers is demonstrated by the increasing numbers of bilateral partnerships between European Smart cities and municipalities from other continents still to evolve towards sustainability. Such agreements are designed to replicate successful positive experiences or share and capitalise on good practice. The Chinese government, for instance, chose 12 cities to sign cooperation agreements on sustainable urban development (http://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/12_cities.pdf) with what are considered to be some of the EU’s smartest cities. There has also been a proliferation of projects and initiatives on smart city development promoted on the initiative of governments and/or the public (such as the Malaga Charter, 7 February 2011 (http://www.catmed.eu/pag/en/11/la-charte-de-malaga)), or by associations, organisations or European networks, such as Eurocities (http://www.eurocities.eu) and the Covenant of Mayors (http://www.covenantofmayors.eu).

2.3

The Europe 2020 strategy promotes smart cities across Europe through investment in ICT infrastructure to boost human capital, and in solutions that exploit the opportunities arising from new technologies and digitisation so as to: improve sustainability and quality of life and work for individuals and businesses; increase the efficiency and accessibility of services; and reduce poverty, unemployment, social exclusion, pollution and environmental damage.

2.4

With the Venice Declaration for a more Digital Union (http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/digital-venice-2014), national governments reiterated their aim to promote the transition of their economies onto a digital footing, in the belief that digital technologies may become the cornerstone of a new industrial policy model, in which information and communication technologies are an essential input for any type of production of goods and services, along with easy access to financial instruments and energy sources.

2.5

In this context, cities are seen by Member States as ‘laboratories for a more dynamic, digital Europe’ as they are potential drivers for these changes. Smart cities are test beds for the EU for measures that can generate growth with employment, because it is there that digital technologies can be combined with innovative infrastructure and new services.

2.6

Making cities ‘smart’ will impact on technology innovation, intelligent transport and energy efficiency, and on the day-to-day life of individuals, workers and businesses thanks to many changes, related, for instance to teleworking, e-democracy and greater transparency, and will allow more active participation in the decision-making process.

2.7

At the conference held by the EESC on 10 November 2014 on Smart Cities — towards a European economic revival through civic innovation (http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en.events-and-activities-smart-cities-civic-innovation), policymakers, city leaders and civil society representatives discussed how smart cities can be used as tools to guide the development of a new industrial policy in Europe and support growth and employment; through which means civil society players can contribute to shaping strategies; and which policy tools to implement to encourage the emergence of investment in smart cities throughout the EU.

2.8

The EESC believes that in order for smart cities to become drivers for development of a new European industrial policy (2), three measures need to be targeted:

2.8.1

defining a more advanced and effective smart city development model that can overcome the current fragmentation and promote a single vision for projects, going well beyond integrating ICTs, mobility and energy efficiency. There is a particular need to target initiatives that may take various forms at local level and that are underpinned by the pursuit of a simultaneous impact on GDP, growth, employment and productivity (quantitative economic indicators), and on people’s quality of life and physical and mental well-being (qualitative economic indicators);

2.8.2

encouraging investment in smart cities by pursuing a public-private partnership approach that gives priority to making the most of the many European funds available and generating synergies between them and the workings of the EFSI (Proposal for a regulation amending Regulations (EU) No 1291/2013 and (EU) No 1316/2013, COM(2015) 10 final), with the aim of adopting a development model at European level that is distinguished by the capacity to generate social, environmental, production and employment returns simultaneously (the European Commission predicts growth of 2,8 million jobs by 2018 (StartUp Europe, EESC conference, 10 November 2014)), and securing the prospect of private co-investors recovering their capital;

2.8.3

stepping up the inclusion and role of civil society and the social partners in the process of strategically designing smart cities, and in their implementation and subsequent monitoring, which is essential when it comes to improving the quality of life and work of individuals and businesses.

3.1

The European Parliament study (3) shows how current strategies or initiatives aim to make cities smarter in at least one of the following areas: governance of public participation, public relations, quality of life, mobility, the economy and the environment. The implication is that it is possible to envisage a smart city project where only one of these features is present. The study goes on to identify three key smart city component types: technological, human and institutional.

3.2

In the Committee’s view, it is essential to develop a new sustainable, productive and inclusive smart city model, no longer seen as an ‘information technology’, ‘environmental improvement’ or ‘energy efficiency’ project, but as part of a new European industrial policy in which growth, which generates employment and social development, constitutes the dividend of the digital transformation of our economies.

3.3

Creating this model entails not only a more integrated approach to smart city projects, but also:

3.4

Accordingly, the EESC, conscious that it is possible to apply a smart strategy to a city, island, subnational entity or industrial district, is proposing that the European institutions and national governments identify a smart city development model, as part of programmes that feature the coexistence and simultaneous integration of six enabling pillars. (In Italy, this model, which grew out of the proposal drawn up by the Amerigo association (for Italian alumni of US international cultural exchange programs) and by Enam (the European network of American alumni associations), is serving as a basis for the definition of a smart city strategy by the Ministry of Economic Development, in the context of the Juncker plan.)

3.5

The coexistence of these elements can maximise the impact of projects in terms of economic and employment growth, quality of life, simplified relations between and with administrations, energy saving for the public and private sectors, while generating competitiveness and knowledge spillover effects on the business sector.

3.6

These smart cities will be synonymous with high-quality public services, a better quality of life and work for individuals and businesses, new job opportunities brought about by a more innovative business ecosystem, and greater environmental sustainability. These results can be achieved with a lower level of non-repayable public funding thanks to the involvement of private funding, strategic planning of systems of services that can generate ‘new revenue flows’ and the creation of networks of large industrial groups and small and medium-sized businesses.

3.7

Against this backdrop of enormous opportunities, the EESC considers it essential to address the issue of the security of networks, IT systems, applications and devices, which form the basis of digital service ecosystems. For cities to shift to a smart model, the information on which services are based, which is by definition very sensitive, must be collected and processed with confidentiality, integrity and real-time availability.

3.8

It is also imperative that Member States open a debate at European level regarding security standards, to cover widespread services and devices within the internet of Everything, to prevent them being interrupted, corrupted or even diverted, causing serious damage to people, public health, and the protection of privacy and business, and ultimately to the public image of all initiatives aimed at achieving smart cities.

4.1

Integrating the six enabling pillars would make smart cities an ideal tool for fostering a new type of investment that in addition to having a positive social impact in terms of externalities, brings in a profitability mechanism to make investment fully economically and financially sustainable.

4.2

A European smart cities investment plan would multiply the impact of initiatives if the following three factors were in place: a policy promoting the scalability of the solutions, which in turn depends on the degree of standardisation of the components; promotion of a smart cities common market, to counter the fragmentation and diversification of measures from country to country, and pinpoint common tools to respond to any serious issues that may arise; and a unified financial approach.

4.3

The scalability of solutions, i.e. expanding or replicating existing solutions, is currently linked mainly to trial micro-infrastructure and intelligent traffic systems, and depends on the involvement of major technology providers and cooperation between cities. Other trial initiatives, although very important in terms of the quality of the solutions proposed or the capacity for grass-roots involvement of individuals or businesses, are so specific in nature that their potential for replication is limited.

4.4

The EESC believes that scalability of solutions at European level is pivotal when it comes to attracting sufficient private investment to bring into partnership with public investment, thus making this smart cities policy conducive to increasing employment, GDP, productivity and quality of life.

4.5

More specifically, the EESC believes that:

4.6

Combining these measures could lead to the creation of a smart cities common market, which would make the EU the first global platform for testing the development model described above, which could have a significant impact on:

5.1

There is no specific fund at European or Member State level dedicated to smart cities, but rather a host of ways to access funding under specific programmes. (In addition to the programmes of individual Member States, which are based on the combination of national resources and the Structural Funds (ERDF, ESF, EAFRD), there are European funds that can cover particular aspects of a smart city, such as Horizon 2020, the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and the COSME, Urban and LIFE programmes.) Given that under the current regulatory framework the grouping of resources within a single fund cannot be envisaged, the EESC considers it essential that the institutions involved step up their coordination, that they do more to harness the potential synergies between their policies, and that institutions, cities and public and private stakeholders use unambiguous and uniform means of communication.

5.2

As regards the need to establish a meaningful development model of integrated measures, the EESC considers that this objective risks not being fully pursued due to the fragmented nature of the expertise and resources of both the European Commission (with smart cities policy spanning six directorates-general), and the Member States, where the division of powers and responsibilities between central, regional and local administrations is not always clear.

5.3

The EESC therefore recommends that the Commission set up a single European centre of expertise on smart city policy and resources, involving the directorates-general concerned, the Member States, the Committee of the Regions and the EESC, whose tasks would be to:

5.4

The single European centre of expertise for smart cities should work in tandem with the EFSI. On this note, the EESC would once again (4) stress that the EFSI should provide backing for strategic infrastructural projects that offer economic and social value added, so that they can contribute to those of the EU’s political objectives (5) that are designed to complete the single market in the transport, telecommunications, digital infrastructure, energy, urban and rural development, social development, environment and natural resource sectors.

5.5

Projects such as these, which are essential for making cities smart, can strengthen Europe’s scientific and technological foundations and facilitate the benefits for society, by making better use of the economic and industrial potential of strategies relating to innovation, research and technological development.

5.6

Leaning on integration between the single European centre of expertise for smart cities and the EFSI, and on the opportunity that the latter provides to establish platforms for projects and financing at European, national or sectoral level, the EESC recommends forming a European project platform for smart cities, in order to promote a uniform approach to their financing, through the integration of available public and potential private resources and the activation of the appropriate public forms of risk mitigation. This platform should promote the identification, pooling and financing of projects that involve several Member States that conform to the smart city model that the EESC proposes the Commission adopt.

5.7

To encourage the emergence of these types of projects, the EESC would recommend that one-stop shops be set up in all Member States, giving smart cities access to finance and technical support, with the aim of:

5.8

A new European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) is to be set up alongside the EFSI to accompany Member States in adopting the most appropriate measures to facilitate the establishment of a project pipeline and implement all the tools necessary to provide for the financing of projects. The EESC would like to see it set up a special ‘smart cities’ section, equipped with the skills and competences best suited to ensuring that all project-related aspects are taken into account.

6.1

The EESC points out that the preconditions for adopting and implementing the integrated smart city development model are the affirmation at institutional level of a long-term vision, the full involvement of the interest groups concerned by the changes under way (the public, civil society organisations and both sides of industry), and efficient and innovative governance of the processes involved in developing smart cities.

6.2

The European, national and local institutions involved in the strategic planning of measures to promote smart cities will be called upon to adopt a long-term strategic vision for these programmes. The integrated development model could serve as a means of blending the needs of all the interest groups involved, guaranteeing maximum inclusiveness while also ensuring that initiatives are economically and financially sustainable.

6.3

Cities will act as smart strategic planners and supervisors and should base the task of carrying out the planned measures on a fruitful, structured and ongoing dialogue between the various business, financial, industrial, social and voluntary-sector players, with set timescales and the possibility of adapting to changes and developments.

6.4

Cities will only progress towards a smart mindset if the process is based on an ongoing dialogue with civil society, which can result in the full involvement of groups that represent collective, private or general interests in the needs assessment phase, in the translation of those needs into specific requirements, and in the monitoring of the effectiveness of measures taken to meet them. This kind of civic participation should be fostered at European, national and local levels.

6.5

To this end, the EESC proposes that:

17.11.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 383/34

Rapporteur:

Emmanuelle BUTAUD-STUBBS

Co-rapporteur:

Panagiotis GKOFAS

1.1.

Given the importance of SMEs for the European economy, the EESC considers it essential, particularly in light of the implications for employment and professional codes of conduct, to have an impact assessment detailing by sector and by Member State the likely consequences that the entry into force of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) would have, under current negotiating terms, on European SMEs.

1.2.

The two studies conducted by DG Trade on SMEs, one on challenges and opportunities for exporting SMEs in general (1) and one more recent study published in April 2015 specifically on SMEs and the TTIP (2), are useful but do not cover all aspects. They are relevant in the way they present certain difficulties relating to the internationalisation of SMEs and the trade and regulatory barriers they face, but they do not provide an exact, evidence-based and detailed assessment, by sector and Member State, of the impact that the TTIP could have on exporting and non-exporting companies integrated into the various value chains.

1.3.

The EESC therefore calls on the European Commission to carry out a new impact assessment on SMEs or very small enterprises (VSEs), micro-enterprises and liberal professions, regardless of whether or not they intend to export, in order to gauge the potential impact of an integrated transatlantic market in their sectors of activity (agriculture and agri-food, tourism, crafts, the hotel industry, catering, manufacturing and services, etc.). It is crucial to be able to anticipate how these businesses will be affected by the opening of a more integrated transatlantic market. Will the TTIP bring about a change in their business models, production methods, regulatory framework, service delivery or strategies in terms of investment and jobs once this new area of competition is in place?

1.4.

The EESC would like to use the opportunity provided by the negotiations with the US to better monitor SME support policies on each side of the Atlantic through an evidence-based approach (e.g. benchmarking public procurement and SMEs, access to finance and to capital market conditions, disaster management, access to market information/requirements and Small Business Standards). This comparison will doubtless identify appropriate new measures for supporting SMEs and thereby strengthen the practical implementation of the European Small Business Act (SBA). The Committee is currently drawing up an opinion on the subject (INT/755) which follows up on previous opinions on the same subject. It considers that the time has now come for the European institutions to heed the call by European and national SME organisations for a legally binding SBA and more closely coordinated industrial and trade policies. The network of ‘SME envoys’ also needs to be turned into a more effective real authority responsible for coordinating, monitoring and enforcing SME policy in the internal market, advocating the emerging needs of and appropriate solutions for SMEs.

1.4.1.

The SME category in the EU is itself highly varied, with a high percentage of very small enterprises with fewer than nine employees. Moreover, the distribution of SMEs by size also varies widely among the Member States. The same is true for regulated and non-regulated liberal professions. Given the strong presence of micro-enterprises in trade, manufacturing and craft industries, the EESC recommends that the European Commission in coordination with the authorities of the Member States most concerned (including public/private research institutes and universities), organise local awareness-raising and information campaigns and training seminars in order to ensure better understanding of the various chapters of the TTIP and the sectors covered, the opportunities involved and the ‘points to watch’.

1.4.2.

In the EU the liberal professions — regulated and non-regulated — represent a system of sensitive services in the interest of clients and society in general that have been granted a specific role.

1.5.

The EESC is pleased that there is a chapter on SMEs in the negotiations but would like to improve the content, and has therefore drawn up proposals set out in the section on specific comments. The current content proposed by the European Commission needs to be fleshed out in several areas, including ways in which SMEs may be represented in the future SME committee and the remit of this committee.

1.6.

The EESC asks the European Commission’s SMEs envoy to ensure that small and micro-enterprises and the liberal professions are represented in the negotiation process, with at least one specific seat on the TTIP Advisory Board, in order to overcome information gaps, to guarantee necessary multi-sector expertise and to be compliant with basic transparency on information/data of common interest. It would also recommend that SMEs’ economic, professional and sectoral organisations be assisted when providing SMEs and micro-enterprises with support and guidance in cooperation with interested science and research bodies, and that financing measures be established where necessary. The EESC calls for the mutual recognition of qualifications and certifications for all stages of government activity and a level playing field at all levels of public procurement (including federal states, regions and municipalities).

2.2.1.

Due to their size, SMEs are often disproportionately affected by high customs duties and burdensome regulatory requirements in transatlantic trade because, with a small amount of trade in terms of volume and value, they need more resources and competences than bigger firms to overcome trade barriers. For these reasons, they will benefit from the tariff and non-tariff liberalisation measures provided for in the transatlantic agreement. In its opinion on Transatlantic trade relations and the EESC’s views on an enhanced cooperation and eventual EU-USA FTA, the EESC has already listed the opportunities and the points that need to be watched in all the areas covered by the negotiations (5).

2.2.2.

One of the chief advantages that the TTIP is expected to deliver for SMEs is the outcome of regulatory cooperation, which could lead to the harmonisation and approximation of certain rules and the mutual recognition of inspection or certification. However, the EESC would here like to point out that both parties have pledged not to use the TTIP to lower existing technical standards. Therefore, an analysis of the value added delivered by the EU Small Business Standard experience, supported by the Commission in partnership with the most representative SME organisations, could be very promising. Regulatory cooperation must be transparent and comply with the regulatory autonomy of the Member States and of the EU while maintaining their ability to adopt measures which they deem appropriate in areas such as protection of health, consumers, workers or the environment.

—

direct exports to a foreign country,

—

exports with the support of foreign independent professionals,

—

creation of subsidiaries in the foreign countries,

—

establishment in the third country in order to produce and sell in the export country.

—

export intensity of the industry in which SMEs are engaged,

—

size of the domestic market.

—

barriers to access to export finance,

—

lack of up-to-date information and data on requirements related to products/services,

—

insufficient knowledge of the market for their products or services (market studies),

—

difficulty in identifying and getting in touch with potential clients,

—

staff who do not have adequate training in dealing with international development or establishing contacts with investors or importers,

—

lack of incentives and support from the public authorities and too much red tape surrounding public support policies,

—

cultural and language barriers,

—

inconsistent regulations and systems for harmonising and recognising qualifications and licences.

—

the widely varying levels of liability and the possibility of taking out insurance at market costs,

—

export costs (excluding customs duties) arising from the cost of transport, the duration and complexity of customs formalities and the need to have or to pay a customs agent and, particularly in the US, to take out insurance to cover the cost of any liability claims,

—

difficulties in accessing export credit,

—

taxes and customs duties, which are still a major barrier for some sectors, such as tobacco, textiles and clothing,

—

the complexity of rules of origin and the cost of certificates of origin,

—

compliance with the different technical or sanitary and phytosanitary rules and certification and inspections relating to these rules,

—

technical and sanitary regulations required only in certain American states or rules which differ between states,

—

different qualification requirements and restrictions on activity in individual states and local regulatory areas;

—

the protection of intellectual property rights, particularly non-compliance with denominations of origin and different sets of rules on trademarks and patents;

—

the cost of legal protection and market surveillance for European companies holding geographical indications;

—

public procurement restrictions arising from the ‘Buy American Act’ and the frequent changes aimed at extending its scope,

—

the complex procedures for obtaining visas, residence, work permits and for starting economic activity in the United States,

—

restrictions or licences required at federal level or at the level of federal states in the case of some service providers.

2.7.1.

In view of the obstacles that they encounter and their limited resources, SMEs — particularly small and micro-enterprises — primarily need mentoring services and tailored advice, including in the area of employee training (personalised follow-up or coaching, tutoring or mentoring, etc.) generally provided by their professional and sectoral bodies. Steps must be taken to ensure that these bodies have the logistical resources needed to be able to inform and advise businesses and provide them with tailored support, partly through the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF).

2.7.2.

In addition to the mentoring services and advice tailored to each SME on the basis of its specific characteristics and needs, businesses must be able to access the resources needed to cover their tangible and intangible investments. To this end, alongside the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF), the EESC recommends that the COSME programme’s financial instruments, particularly venture capital and guarantee systems, be readily accessible to SMEs including those willing to invest in the US markets.

2.7.3.

The EU should review the insurance available for exports of goods and services and develop options that are market-compatible.

3.1.1.

The professions — regulated and non-regulated — are a special kind of SME that exists in various shapes and to varying degrees in all the EU Member States. These SMEs offer goods and services based on specific expertise; they are highly trusted by their customers and must meet particular standards of independence. Not only are they important economic partners, they also play a role in the European social model.

—

all information should be provided in the 24 official EU languages,

—

the software tool should be as simple as possible and user friendly,

—

the operation of the database should be tested by a panel of EU SMEs in order to be sure that the tool answers their needs,

—

the database should also include a human interface with a team able to answer questions on the US and EU sides.

3.7.1.

It is important that the TTIP is not seen as a tool for dismantling preferential treatment for SMEs given in public procurement contracts at local and regional level. Such preferences should be maintained by the TTIP, provided they apply without distinction to European and American SMEs.

3.7.2.

In addition, it is crucial that the ‘Think Small First’ principle is applied in the negotiation process and in regulatory cooperation, so that the priorities and real-life situations of small and micro-enterprises are taken into account from the very beginning of the legislative process and their specific interests safeguarded. The EESC therefore asks that small and micro-enterprises be specifically represented on the TTIP Advisory Board.

3.7.3.

As regards regulatory cooperation, it must be possible to offer tailored support to help SMEs, particularly small and micro-enterprises, achieve regulatory compliance.

3.7.4.

It should be stressed that a large number of the companies likely to invest in or export to the transatlantic market are companies that innovate and need rigorous, clear rules on the protection of intellectual property, both in the US and in the EU.

3.7.5.

As regards the agri-food sector, special attention needs to be paid to companies that base their production and related processes on ethical, cultural and environmental considerations. It is crucial to continue to foster trade in such products as they contribute to sustainable development. It is also necessary to ensure proper protection of geographical indications, as these provide consumers with a guarantee both of a product’s origin and of its method of production. The EU has for years been pursuing a quality policy for its products: this is one of the main factors in giving EU producers a competitive edge, makes a significant contribution to preserving its cultural and gastronomic tradition, and upholds rural development together with policies to support the market and producers’ incomes.

3.7.6.

In a separate opinion, the EESC will be taking stock of the Small Business Act (SBA) in the US and the EU in order to have a clear understanding of the benefits that the US SBA offers American SMEs in terms of access to public procurement or financing, for example. It will thus be possible, at the appropriate juncture, to propose improvements to and more efficient working methods for the European SBA, with a view to making it more favourable for European SMEs and more binding.

17.11.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 383/44

Rapporteur:

Ms An LE NOUAIL MARLIÈRE

1.1

The EESC recommends that the UfM member States and the EU validate the SDGs agreed, by ratifying the relevant international conventions.

1.2

The EESC recommends that the UfM member States and the EU effectively protect the public investment needed to achieve the SDGs.

1.3

The EESC recommends that the UfM member States and the EU organise implementation by involving civil society and the regions at local level, as close as possible to the people.

1.4

The Committee takes note of the conclusions of the Foreign Affairs and International Relations Council held on 26 May 2015 and of the European Commission’s 2015 annual report on the commitments given by the EU and the Member States on public development aid and the results that have been achieved.

1.5

It regrets, however, that the EU has given itself until 2030 to reach the target of 0,7 % of GDP (1).

1.6

The Committee supports the EU’s intention to strengthen the non-financial aspects (such as ratifying international legal instruments and combating financial crime).

1.7

It urges the Commission to adopt a coherent stance that takes account of both bilateral, plurilateral and multilateral trade interests and the sustainable development goals, in order to maintain the credibility of the goals and of European aid.

1.8

The Committee recommends extending both the dialogue between the social partners and the European institutions on vocational training and lifelong learning, in which it was duly invited to participate and which it helped set up (2), and the action programmes in this area.

1.9

The Committee calls for these recommendations to be included in the EU’s programme and in its neighbourhood policy: coherence between policies on trade, external affairs, development, financing and the protection of democracy and human rights, in line with the commitments given to civil society by the Commission Vice-President Federica MOGHERINI on 28 May 2015 (3).

2.1

A major item on the European and world agenda for the coming years will be the debate on the post-2015 sustainable development goals (SDGs). The Euro-Mediterranean region displays some specific common characteristics requiring consideration of how to build sustainable development goals into European neighbourhood policy and into policies covering the southern Mediterranean countries. The problems of food security, poverty and social exclusion, limited access to water, the particular situation of the region’s countries in democratic and economic transition and the need to restore peace and security, call for an EESC opinion that can offer guidelines for the effective application and monitoring of the post-2015 agenda in the Mediterranean.

2.2

By helping to identify the real challenges and by putting forward proposals for the Euromed region, together with civil society, the EESC can offer useful advice to the governments of this sorely-battered region and to the European institutions.

2.3

In this opinion, the European Economic and Social Committee also wishes to build on the work it has done on the sustainable development goals in general and on those concerning this geographical region, the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, in particular.

2.4

The UN Secretary General submitted a report summarising the contributions made by the open working group tasked with looking at universal post-2015 sustainable development goals, based on the adoption of the governments’ declaration entitled ‘The future we want’ after the Rio+ 20 Conference, and which established the decision to make the Millennium goals, which are specific to the developing countries, common but differentiated goals applicable to everyone in the world, in countries that are industrialised or emerging, developing or least-developed. Extensive consultations have taken place at different regional and sub-regional levels, and the main organised civil society groups represented at the United Nations have had the opportunity to take part in these and assert their interest. Seventeen goals and 169 targets have been adopted concerning the ‘means of implementation and the global partnership for sustainable development’.

2.5

Two major events that are inextricably linked to the post-2015 sustainable development goals will take place in 2015: an international conference in Addis Ababa on financing for development, in July 2015, and the 21st Conference of the Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change in Paris, in late 2015.

2.6

This post-2015 sustainable development agenda seeks to establish a framework for the United Nations’ future work on the ground, with a new focus on equality, social inclusion and decent work, while safeguarding sustainable sources of income for people who work, the environment, and the pace of renewal of biological and natural resources. However, this agenda takes as its starting point that the economic model governing our societies is not sustainable. This means that world leaders will have to demonstrate considerable boldness. The current economic, social and environmental and ultimately political situation is completely untenable in many parts of the world, and this holds particularly true for the Euro-Mediterranean region. To achieve the SDGs, many people maintain that, at the very least, the economic and financial principles that are currently driving economies need to be adjusted, in order to change the status quo.

2.7

In southern Europe, countries are experiencing social and economic situations that are no longer accepted by the population and which make it impossible to address environmental and climate imperatives that would give Europeans the chance to construct a different type of environmental, economic and social area. Young people, despite the investment in their education by the national or European system, do not have a framework of opportunities enabling them to flourish and contribute to the EU’s economic, social and environmental competitiveness.

2.8

Few jobs have been created since 2008; in fact, many jobs have been lost and the job-creation rate has not kept pace with demographic trends or with the arrival on the market of graduates, resulting in the rejection of austerity policies with no end in sight. Public policies and services in the fields of education, health, transport and housing have suffered as a result of austerity guidelines, whereas achieving the sustainable development goals requires these services to be strengthened. The number of people who are homeless or who live in sub-standard housing is continuing to rise in the EU-28 and most of the jobs created are excessively flexible, insecure and offer no real future. The number of unpaid or poorly-paid trainees is rocketing, we are witnessing a radicalisation of European society, intolerance, hostility to others and a failure to understand, the generation gap is widening, and individualism and survival are creating a gulf between the professional political classes and frustrated citizens.

2.9

On the southern shores of the Mediterranean, we have seen the rejection of dictatorships that had appropriated economic gains, freedom of expression and equality. Many countries have changed their method of transition, shifting from the hoped-for example of national consensus for democracy to authoritarian takeover by an all-powerful military class. At the same time, radicalised groups have taken the opportunity to engage in armed occupation or to remould themselves into criminal regimes. Part of Africa now lives under this permanent threat, and the Near and Middle East are experiencing both huge population displacements and new political and military set-ups. In short, civilian populations have no time to catch their breath.

2.10

In these circumstances, it is unlikely that any sustainable development goal can be credible as a way of restoring peace, improving material well-being and building up the region’s economy. It is not possible to sustainably attract investment to, or for such investment to remain and flourish in, regions that are democratically, socially and environmentally unstable. Furthermore, the fact that economic development has for many decades benefited only a minority of families and individuals or dictators has undermined those institutions that are able to operate fairly, transparently and democratically.

3.1

Facts show that the Euro-Mediterranean Region is vulnerable to environmental disasters, both land-based and at sea. According to a report (2013), the Mediterranean coastal environment provides the livelihood for at least 150 million people. The same report quotes the UNEP as identifying 13 gas plants, 55 refineries, 180 power stations, 750 yacht harbours, 286 commercial ports, 112 airports, and 238 desalination plants, along the Mediterranean coasts, with most of which being potential sources of environmental emergencies. The report states also that establishing adequate measures to mitigate the impact in case of natural or man-made disasters is a top priority for the whole region (4).

4.1

In his speech of 28 May, Commissioner Johannes HAHN stressed the need to create 5 million new jobs every year to employ a growing work force and to ensure social inclusion. He also pointed out that, in order to achieve this target, the region would have to ensure economic growth of more than 6 %.

4.2

The promotion of decent jobs (objective 8) must be the key, as poor-quality work (precarious, low-paid jobs, without sustainable and universal social protection) is one of the roots of poverty. Renewed focus should therefore be placed on the quality of growth, healthy and secure employment and working conditions and social protection for workers and their families as an essential means of combating poverty and exclusion.

5.1

In order for the private sector’s contribution to commercial partnerships for industrial development to be productive and effective, it must go hand in hand with a decent work agenda that is more uncompromising on ensuring decent working conditions than has been the case so far. The jobs created must, more than ever before, be high in quality and well paid, respect human health and the environment, and be covered by effective social protection (5). This is particularly important for the MENA region, where youth unemployment is among the highest in the world and in continuous rise, and therefore there is a significant proportion of young people in active age in NEETS ‘Not in employment, education, training’. Guaranteeing minimum income security to people in the informal sector is essential for social and political stability and conflict prevention, as it reduces radicalism and extremism, thereby contributing to political stability and security (6). Initial education and ongoing training, equality, the participation of young people and women in the labour market, people’s desire to be respected, the right of expression, decent pay, safety, protection of the environment and public health, early childhood education and intergenerational solidarity are aspirations common to both sides of the Mediterranean. Governments must be able to guarantee these aspirations without the threat of supranational arbitration that unilaterally protects private interests, for all the importance that we might want to accord to international trade in financing universal objectives (7).

6.1

The multilateral negotiations at the WTO focus on trade as an instrument for implementing virtuous sustainable development. A number of current negotiation processes however, demonstrate a lack of consistency between certain free trade goals and the achievement of the sustainable development goals. These include agreements on services that plan to liberalise or privatise many public services that are accessible to most people and necessary to achieve goals; agreements on environmental goods, technology transfers, industrial property rights; agreements on the new information technologies, on the extractive and mining industries and on bodies for settling disputes between multinational companies and States. There are many areas in which laudable aims have their credibility undermined by the negotiations between corporate and State powers.

6.2

Trade Policy should allow developing countries policy space — including the ability to focus on impacts on unemployment, vulnerable people, gender equality and sustainable development — rather than promoting liberalisation as an end in itself. For this, we recommend a comprehensive review of all trade agreements and investment treaties to identify all areas where they may limit developing countries’ ability to prevent and manage crises, regulate capital flows, protect the right to livelihoods and decent jobs, enforce fair taxation, deliver essential public services and ensure sustainable development.

6.3

Governments should undertake mandatory human rights impact assessments of multilateral, plurilateral and bilateral trade and investment agreements, focusing especially on the rights to development, and the specific rights to food, health and a livelihood, taking into account the impact on marginalised groups. This would include implementing the draft resolution, passed in the Human Rights Council in Geneva in June 2014, to establish a working group to prepare an instrument imposing international human rights’ legal obligations on transnational corporations.

6.4

For a set period, in which the world could be deemed to be recovering from the financial crises of 2008 (financial) and 2011 (democracy), investments in employment and the environment and relating to the post-2015 development goals should be removed from public deficit calculations, should be seen as universal, lasting and sustainable investments in the common interest, should receive zero-rate financing and should be inaccessible to hedge funds.

6.5

Combating tax evasion and tax avoidance and illicit financial flows for laundering money derived from illegal activities, including undeclared work, the trafficking of migrants or the export of non-recovered waste, should make it possible to free up the additional resources needed to achieve the SDGs (8).

6.6

Lastly, it should be borne in mind that the existing international legal instruments are also means of implementation and that, if certain conventions — such as the fundamental ILO labour conventions, the UN Convention of 18 December 1979 on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, Convention C189 on the protection of domestic workers, and Convention C184 on Safety and Health in Agriculture, the International Covenant of Economic Social and Cultural Rights, and its Optional Protocol, to name but a few — were ratified and transposed into the positive law of the UfM member States, they would constitute preferred non-financial means of implementation that would in themselves guarantee the legal (de jure) protection of individuals that is essential if a number of sustainable development goals are to be achieved in practice (de facto):

Sustainable Development Goals (9)

6.7

On 28 May 2015, the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee, together with the European Commission, co-organised a Euromed Civil Society Forum, which heard statements from Commissioner Johannes HAHN and Commission Vice-President Federica MOGHERINI, as well as the President of the European Parliament.

6.8

At this forum for discussing the EU’s new Neighbourhood Policy guidelines, Commissioner HAHN highlighted the different funds that have been directly allocated to the humanitarian crisis in Syria and neighbouring countries — EUR 52 million under the Neighbourhood Civil Society Facility — and spoke of the work that had been carried out, to which EUR 40 million allocated under the EU Regional Trust Fund must be added.

6.9

Lastly, reference should be made to the European Agenda on Migration, which was published by the Commission 2 weeks after the Heads of State Summit and which puts forward a tangible plan for sharing the burden of measures aimed at resettling and hosting refugees, in keeping with Article 78(3) TFEU (11).

17.11.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 383/49

Rapporteur:

Ivan VOLEŠ

1.1.

The EESC requests that the new development agenda have a global dimension and aim to improve people’s quality of life. It must be based on respect for human rights, prevention and peaceful resolution of conflicts, good governance, reducing social inequalities, strengthening the role of women and the involvement of all those who feel responsible for the development of this world and maintaining it for future generations.

1.2.

The EESC supports adoption of the proposed sustainable development goals and requests that all available financial resources be drawn on and used transparently and effectively to achieve a balanced integration of the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development. A battle must be waged to prevent the squandering of resources on hostilities and their illegal transfer and flight into the grey economy.

1.3.

The EESC asks that support for social dialogue be included among the development priorities, since it is an important instrument for taking account even-handedly of the interests of the social partners that enables social stability to be maintained, which is essential for achieving sustainable development goals (SDGs).

1.4.

Official Development Assistance (ODA) must be directed to the least developed countries and countries in vulnerable situations. The EU should reaffirm its commitment to providing total ODA of 0,7 % of GNP and 0,15-0,20 % to the least developed countries. This commitment must be linked to the requirement for the proper and effective use of all funding sources for development assistance in line with the principles agreed in Monterrey, Doha and Busan.

1.5.

ODA should be assessed not just in terms of financial volume, but also in terms of its quality and its contribution to achieving sustainable development goals. New indicators to assess its effectiveness need to be developed.

1.6.

To make budget support to developing countries more efficient, the EESC recommends building on experience in implementing the EU’s cohesion policy and its instruments, such as Structural and Cohesion Funds, so that development resources would be used directly for achieving SDGs.

1.7.

Making better use of domestic resources, both public and private, which will increase in importance, will require major fiscal reforms, establishment of tax governance, integration of the informal sector into the legal economy and a resolute fight to tackle and prevent corruption. Concluding an international agreement on the fight against tax evasion, tax havens and illegal financial flows and improving cooperation with the OECD and the UN Tax Committee would help in this aim.

1.8.

The EESC supports the involvement of the private sector in implementing projects that are — at least in part — commercially unviable through public-private partnerships (PPPs) and funding these through ‘blending’. The prerequisite for successful implementation is an ex ante assessment of the sustainability of compliance with the principles of transparency, including reporting, mutual accountability and enforceability of commitments.

1.9.

The EESC recognises the potential benefit of foreign direct investment for development, as long as it is directed towards SDGs. Earnings on foreign direct investment should primarily be reinvested in the developing countries where they have been generated. Beneficiary countries should have a clear investment strategy. New investor countries — such as China, Brazil and India — should take the principles of sustainable development into account when investing in developing countries.

1.10.

The EESC supports innovative and complementary sources of financing for development, such as crowdfunding, the work of international charities and remittances to countries from their diasporas. The Committee welcomes proposals for new sources of financing submitted by the Leading Group on Innovative Financing for Development. These could become a significant source on the condition that they are applied globally and are not too much of a burden for the sector.

1.11.

Civil society, including social partners and non-governmental organisations, must be involved far more actively and in a far more structured way in shaping development programmes, monitoring their implementation and evaluating their outcomes and impact. Both developing and developed countries therefore need to systematically put together and improve the system for monitoring development aid processes and involve the relevant civil society organisations in it. Here the EESC is willing to make available its considerable experience of cooperation with partners in, for example, the ACP countries, Latin America, Asia, Eastern Partnership, and EuroMed.

1.12.

If civil society is to be able to carry out this task, it must be backed up by programmes for building the capacity of civil society institutions in partner countries.

2.1.

2015 is a key year in terms of establishing a new global approach to development. The main mission of the Millennium Development Goals, reducing poverty, has only partially been achieved. The new sustainable development goals (SDG) (1) should bring about the fundamental changes that the EESC has long been calling for. The Committee welcomes the fact that many of its recommendations have been incorporated into the SDGs.

2.2.

In recent opinions the EESC has requested that the new development goals become elements of global sustainable development (2). It has promoted the vital role of civil society in development policy (3) and pointed out the need to include social security in EU development policy (4). The Committee has also submitted a number of proposals on involving the private sector in post-2015 development (5), on including sustainable development goals and the role of civil society in EU investment agreements (6), on the contribution of trade to growth and development (7), and on the post-2015 objectives in the Euro-Mediterranean region (8). The joint extraordinary meeting of the REX section and the EESC’s Sustainable Development Observatory on 20 October 2014 adopted recommendations on the agenda for sustainable development beyond 2015 which apply to the forthcoming meetings on SDGs and financing for them.

2.3.

Social dialogue as a tool for addressing relations between employers and employees must become a key part of the post-2015 development agenda so that the social stability essential for successful ongoing development of the society in question can be maintained through collective agreements that cater fairly to their interests.

2.4.

The EESC insists on the need of consistency between free trade goals and sustainable development goals in on-going negotiations in the framework of WTO or currently undertaken by the EU on services, environmental goods and in the implementation of existing WTO agreements.

2.5.

All trade and investment agreements should comply with the sustainable development criteria including their impact on employment, vulnerable people and gender equality. They should not prevent the developing countries from managing crises, regulating capital flows, enforcing fair taxation and delivering essential public services. The EU should undertake full sustainability impact assessments, of EPAs in particular, focusing especially on the rights to development, and the specific rights to food, health and a fair wage, also taking into account the impact on vulnerable groups.

2.6.

The global consensus on sustainable development must respect fundamental human rights and focus on conflict prevention and peace building, eliminating social inequalities, good governance, support for local democratic self-government, strengthening the role of women, and private sector involvement in development. To achieve this end, the international legal instruments, conventions, agreements and regulations should be adopted, promoted and ratified by the UN members (9). We consider the European Commission communication A Global Partnership for Poverty Eradication and Sustainable Development after 2015  (10) to be a good basis for the forthcoming negotiations and call on the EU to play a leading role.

3.1.

The EESC stresses the need for a holistic approach to sustainable development. Each country takes prime responsibility for its own development, while the global community is responsible for creating an international environment enabling sustainable development in all countries and respect for global public goods, preservation of natural resources, stable financial markets, management of migration and targeted support for technological advances aimed at sustainable development.

3.2.

Bringing all available financial resources into play is a precondition for achieving SDGs. According to Unctad estimates, the annual investment needed in developing countries to meet key sustainable development objectives for the period 2015 to 2030 is USD 3,9 trillion, with USD 2,5 trillion not covered (11).

3.3.

The EESC agrees with the view that the world does in fact have enough financial resources that could be used. In addition to official resources (12), there also are hidden sources, such as the financing of hostilities and conflicts around the world. Availability of resources is also diminished by tax avoidance, the shadow economy, and illicit financial transfers, which should be systematically combated.

3.4.

The task of finding and marshalling resources cannot be separated from the obligation to use them properly. We must continue to adhere to the principles of effectiveness and efficiency adopted in Monterrey, Doha and Busan and resolutely combat wasteful and inefficient use of all forms of financial and non-financial resources designated for development.

3.5.

Development assistance should be judged not only in terms of amount, but also its quality and its contribution to achieving sustainable development goals and improving quality of life. New indicators that include value criteria therefore need to be created and statistics offices in developing countries reinforced, for example through transfer of know-how and shared information.

3.6.

Broader participation of organisations from the whole spectrum of civil society in formulating national targets and development plans would help bring the interests of the private sector in line with public objectives. It is in their common interest to promote the principles of transparency, accessibility of public tenders, effectiveness and efficiency of invested funds and the responsibility of public officials for implementing the development strategy adopted.

3.7.

To fulfil its role in development the private sector needs a favourable business environment that encompasses respect for the generally recognised democratic principles of the rule of law, facilitates company start-ups and growth, cuts down on bureaucracy, increases transparency, reduces corruption and encourages investment. The private sector must adhere to the internationally accepted principles of corporate social responsibility, respect fundamental economic and social rights and sustainable development requirements and create new jobs in accordance with the ILO Decent Work Agenda.

3.8.

The EESC calls for better coordination and coherence of all EU policies related to sustainable development (13) in order to avoid any duplication, overlap, fragmentation and possibly even inconsistencies in approach and to deepen systematic bilateral coordination of Member State development assistance aimed at achieving SDGs.

4.

4.1.1.

Although ODA cannot meet all development assistance needs, it will continue to be essential for people in the least-developed countries, countries in a state of armed conflict, at risk from natural disasters or epidemics and people living on isolated islands and in countries without access to the sea.

4.1.2.

ODA funds should be used as a priority to eliminate poverty in poor countries and those in vulnerable situations. The EESC points out that poverty has also increased in middle-income countries as a result of unequal distribution of wealth. ODA should be leveraged to marshal all sources of aid, including private investment, to eradicate poverty.

4.1.3.

The EESC calls on the Commission and the Council to agree on a common European position on ODA in negotiations at the Addis Ababa conference. The EU should reaffirm its commitment to providing total ODA of 0,7 % of GNP and 0,15-0,20 % of GNP as ODA to the least developed countries. The EESC points out that the climate protection measures to be discussed at the Paris conference in December 2015 will require additional resources.

4.1.4.

Data on the amount of ODA do not in themselves show the quality and results of the aid provided or its actual impact on the development of the recipient country. The EESC supports the proposal of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) to monitor aid and support for sustainable development provided not just by ODA, but also outside the ODA framework (14). Non-financial aid (such as education, sharing of experience, technology and know-how, and scientific and technological cooperation) often has greater developmental benefits for the country than financial aid.

4.1.5.

Budget support for developing countries should always have a specific allocated budget and donor and beneficiary should have a specified mutual accountability for seeing that this form of aid is used effectively for SDGs and in compliance with internationally recognised rules for financial management and control including robust conditional provisions and measures to tackle and prevent corruption. The EU funding itself should be credibly protected from corruption. The Committee recommends building on experience in implementing European cohesion policy in developing countries to better target development resources to SDGs and to more rigorously monitor how they are used and assess the results achieved.

4.2.1.

The EESC believes that the importance of both public and private domestic resources for development will increase substantially in the near future.

4.2.2.

To increase the volume and effectiveness of the use of domestic resources, illicit financial flows, laundering of the money derived from illegal activities, including undeclared work, the trafficking of migrants or the export of non-recovered waste should be consistently combated, tax collection improved, corruption and criminality tackled and the extensive informal sector incorporated into the legal economy. Developing countries need to be assisted in implementing fundamental fiscal reforms and improving tax administration. The EESC calls on the EU to work more actively towards achieving international agreements on the fight against tax evasion, tax havens and illicit financial flows and towards improving cooperation with the OECD Centre for Tax Policy and Administration and the UN Tax Committee.

4.2.3.

Today the level of domestic private investment, direct or portfolio, is several times higher than foreign investment. It should be channelled into investment goals, for example through incentives or well-prepared and secured PPP projects, so that it could become a significant tool for achieving SDGs.

4.2.4.

There is a wealth of untapped domestic resource potential in developing countries with rich mineral resources where, despite relatively high state revenue, the majority of the population lives in poverty and building of the national economy, infrastructure and social services is neglected. The methods of certain foreign investors in the extractive industry in developing countries are rightly criticised by civil society, which calls for compliance with basic standards for environmental protection, social protection of workers, transparency of tax payments and transfers of profits abroad, and reporting in accordance with the OECD regulations for multinational companies (15). The EESC welcomes measures to remedy the situation, such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (16).

4.3.1.

The EESC believes that where governments are not fully able to deliver the necessary investment from public sources — for infrastructure, in particular, but also for public services — and these investments are not commercially feasible, public-private partnerships must be used and PPP projects should be financed through blending in line with OECD recommendations (17).

4.3.2.

PPP projects must be drawn up in line with the development strategy of the country in question on the basis of feasibility studies, take into account ex-ante sustainability factors, and comply with the principles of transparency, mutual accountability, and enforceability of commitments. Social partners and other civil society representatives should be involved in assessing the benefits of these projects for sustainable development and monitoring compliance with ILO conventions.

4.3.3.

Blending should also be used for social entrepreneurship and sustainable projects for the integration of vulnerable groups into the economic environment.

4.4.1.

In 2013, the influx of foreign direct investment (FDI) into developing countries was as much as USD 778 billion, but its contribution to sustainable development is often unclear. Only 2 % of total FDI to developing countries goes to those that are least developed. In sub-Saharan Africa it goes mainly to the extractive industry without contributing more directly to the rest of the economy. New investor countries — such as China, Brazil and India — should take the principles of sustainable development into account when investing in developing countries.

4.4.2.

According to the study by the NGO EURODAD on the state of finances of developing countries, the amount of money leaving these countries in 2014 was twice that of financial resources entering them from abroad, including from ODA, FDI, charities, profit transfers, remittances and other sources (18). Efforts must be made to ensure that these funds are reinvested as much as possible in a way that benefits sustainable development in the beneficiary countries.

4.4.3.

National development strategies should also include support for investment. Favourable conditions such as peace, stability and good governance must be created in order for FDI to be obtained and channelled towards SDGs. Developing countries should also incorporate SDGs into investment agreements concluded and offer adequate guarantees for these investments. The EESC recommends that investment support agencies and financial institutions in sending countries and those in receiving countries enter into direct technical cooperation linked with national sustainable development strategies.

4.4.4.

There should be support for investments that bring some profit in the short term but also provide the opportunity of long-term profitability through their social impact, such as capacity building or the environment, which would lead to sustainable development.

4.5.1.

Crowdfunding and investment are a potential tool for financing smaller development projects (19). The EESC notes that these instruments should be defined and an appropriate regulatory framework must be drawn up quickly, as recommended in its opinion (20).

4.5.2.

The EESC welcomes the growing number of international charitable funds, foundations and programmes to promote sustainable development, such as the Global Fund to Fight HIV, Tuberculosis and Malaria, the Global Partnership for Education, and the GAVI Alliance, which supports immunisation of children in the least developed countries. These funds and foundations, in which public institutions cooperate with private donors and NGOs, should improve the coordination of their work and direct it towards SDGs.

4.5.3.

Funds designated for ODA but not currently allocated to investment projects could be put into development investment funds and secured bonds so as to generate short-term revenue and help to create further resources (21). In the longer term this should help increase the volume of resources needed for development aid (22).

4.5.4.

The EESC welcomes some of the proposals of the Leading Group on Innovative Financing for Development (23) and backs efforts to create new sources of financing for SDGs. However, these new sources must be used in a consistent way globally, without jeopardising the competitiveness of the sector concerned, and their use to further SDGs must be transparent. The ECSC would welcome a voluntary worldwide initiative from the banking sector to help finance the gap between needs and the resources available to achieve SDGs.

4.5.5.

Funds coming from diasporas — that is, people transferring savings to their countries of origin — are a little-used source that could also be employed to meet SDGs. The costs of these transfers should be reduced. Members of diasporas should be offered training and incentive programmes that support their interest in investing in development projects that would increase the value of their savings while contributing to SDGs.

4.6.1.

Micro-enterprises and SMEs, which are the main source of potential for growth and job creation, are faced with insufficient access to funding. This problem is particularly acute in the least developed countries and tools must therefore be sought to facilitate SME access to financial resources. This must be done while respecting the differences in types of entrepreneurship in developing countries, where micro-enterprises, small-scale retailers and small family farms predominate.

4.6.2.

There are many different microcredit systems for SMEs. The Committee thinks those using mobile phone applications are the most effective. It also welcomes using microcredit for funding green energy projects and initiatives to provide zero-interest microcredits. Loans for SMEs (USD 10-200 thousand), which are currently lacking, could be replaced by capital leasing and other instruments. This requires help for developing the financial market and local banks, including local agents.

4.6.3.

Support from developed countries for SMEs should include transfer of experience, managerial skills and technical know-how, training in financial management and financial literacy, and support for their inclusion in value and supply chains. The EU should promote the application of the principles of its directive on combating late payment to improve funding of SMEs.

4.6.4.

Micro, small and medium-sized enterprises operating in the agricultural sector must be protected from land-grabbing investment practices that lead to their collapse. The creation of instruments insuring against the effects of climate change would also help them. Development plans must not neglect support for social economy enterprises, which could play a key role in achieving SDGs.

4.6.5.

Ensuring that financial tools such as basic bank accounts or financial applications for mobile phones are accessible to the broadest possible strata of the population in developing countries is key to economic and social development.

4.7.1.

Civil society in developed countries, including social partners and non-governmental organisations, is a direct protagonist in development and plays an important role in helping to steer development cooperation and monitoring its effectiveness (24).

4.7.2.

Systematic support needs to be given to creating and improving a system to monitor processes and results of development aid in individual countries that directly involves relevant civil society organisations. This is a way of helping to identify and eliminate hurdles to achieving SDGs. The EESC has had good experience over many years with the work of joint committees, platforms and consultative bodies, such as the ACP-EU follow-up committee, EU-Latin American and EU-Caribbean meetings with organised civil society and so on.

4.7.3.

Social partners are also direct providers of development aid. Trade unions in developed countries carry out socially oriented development projects and support the institutional development of partner trade union organisations. Employers’ organisations, chambers of commerce, SME associations and industrial federations carry out joint projects with partner business organisations in developing countries and pass on experience to them.

4.7.4.

Non-governmental organisations play a unique role in development aid, both in developed and developing countries. They are particularly active in helping to cope with the aftermath of humanitarian and natural disasters and work in the social sphere on such matters as health, gender issues and education. They also bring in funds from the general public, organise collections, awareness-raising events and so on. One interesting example is the financing of a form of distance education which helps build people-to-people contacts between ordinary citizens.

4.7.5.

The EESC calls on the European Commission to support the work of EU civil society organisations aimed at meeting SDGs with adequate funding of programmes to build civil society institutions in partner countries. The EESC is currently drawing up an information report to complement this opinion that will recommend models for effectively involving civil society in the implementation and monitoring of the post-2015 development agenda.

17.11.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 383/57

Rapporteur:

Ronny LANNOO

1.1

In this opinion, the EESC sets out recommendations on stakeholder consultation, as provided for in the Treaties, with a view to enhancing the quality of these consultations and bridging the gap between the EU and its people. This exercise has also been undertaken by the European Commission by means of a broad consultation of stakeholders on the consultation procedures, and translated into the Better Regulation package put forward by Commission Vice-President, Frans TIMMERMANS. At the request of the Commission, the EESC will later issue an opinion on the entire Better Regulation package.

1.2

The EESC is concerned about the way in which stakeholder consultations are carried out and therefore also about the quality of the results of such consultations. It is therefore calling for consultations to be consistent and representative and to ensure added value for the organisations and interest groups concerned.

1.3

On the basis of a sample of consultations assessed in the first half of 2014, the Committee concluded that there is an uneven qualitative approach across the various DGs concerned, and found an insufficient volume of responses and thus a lack of representativeness, as well as shortcomings in the use of appropriate language and terminology for the target groups concerned and in the reporting of results and follow-up. Overall, it can therefore be concluded that the existing guidelines here are not being sufficiently implemented.

1.4

Conscious of the difficulty entailed in appropriately consulting the diverse range of citizens and organisations in the EU Member States, the EESC has put forward below a number of structural, practical and realistic proposals and asks the European Commission to cooperate constructively in developing and implementing new measures.

1.5

The Committee calls on the Commission to make the guidelines and quality standards for stakeholder consultation binding on all of its directorates-general. To ensure that these guidelines are applied, the Committee proposes that a coordination unit be set up at the level of the general secretariat to provide support to the DGs in stakeholder consultation.

1.6

A more strategic approach to the consultation process, from preparation to assessment, with systematic involvement of the relevant existing structures (organisations representing the target groups and advisory and consultative bodies) should ensure a greater, high-quality response. Setting out a clear timetable for consultations and explaining their purpose would enable stakeholders to increase their capacity to participate in consultations.

1.7

The Committee points out that accurate stakeholder mapping is essential to a quality consultation process. To this end, the EESC recommends that the Commission make use of existing structures, such as the Committee and representative organisations, and draw on the transparency register. New structures are, therefore, not required.

1.8

In the Committee’s view, a fresh effort needs to be made to streamline the methods and tools used for stakeholder consultation. Initially, there are two possible methods of consultation: written/online or oral/discussion. The methods and tools selected should depend on the stated aim, target group, etc., in the framework of the strategic approach to the consultation process. Furthermore, it would be advisable to make effective use of the new technologies, particularly with a view to better reaching certain target groups, such as young people.

1.9

Under this approach, a distinction should be drawn between consultations of civil society organisations and of the general public. The difference between the two is not only a matter of methodology, but also of objective, since for the former group the aim is to ensure representativeness, while for the latter, it is about promoting inclusion and participation.

1.10

Where the written questionnaire method is chosen, the Committee feels that such questionnaires should be made available in all official EU languages. In addition, the EESC advocates that the questionnaire be submitted in advance to the organisations representing the target groups concerned in order to prevent overly specialised jargon making the questionnaire difficult for the target groups to understand.

1.11

When the results are being processed, the Committee would stress the importance of giving a quantitative and qualitative weighting to the various responses, depending on whether they come from individuals or civil society representative organisations, or depending on the representativeness and involvement of that organisation. The response submitted by a representative organisation would then receive a greater weighting.

1.12

In order to increase participation in consultations, the EESC emphasises the importance of a summary report of the responses received being drawn up for each consultation, and of explanations being given as to why certain responses were, or were not, taken into account in the further stages of drafting the proposal.

1.13

In view of its role set out in the Treaties, the Committee would like to act as facilitator to ensure the success of stakeholder consultations. It can participate and cooperate in all of the key phases of the process (identifying the stakeholders, drafting the questionnaires, summarising and following up the results). In order to bring structure, stability and representativeness to the process, the Committee could, as in the past, hold hearings and conferences and establish platforms and forums for dialogue.

1.14

When it comes to stakeholder consultation, the European Commission should make more use of the potential offered by closer cooperation with the Committee, as recommended in the protocol on cooperation between the Committee and the Commission signed on 22 February 2012 (1). In the interests of optimising resources, and taking the approach of interinstitutional cooperation, this would enable maximum benefit to be derived from both the specific skills and knowledge of the stakeholders and the expertise, experience and competence of the Committee in consultation practices.

1.15

With regard to interactive meetings, the EESC could act as organiser, in conjunction with the Commission, as it already does regularly in the framework of structured dialogue platforms (for example on immigration, on consumption, etc.).

1.16

Finally, the EESC calls for a sustained campaign to raise awareness of the consultation process and the individual consultations. The Committee would like to take an active part in this through the organisations represented within it.

1.17

Furthermore, the EESC, as a promoter of structured civil dialogue and an essential instrument of participatory democracy, encourages the Commission to step up its use of structured dialogue platforms. This would not only enable stakeholders to play a continuous part in all stages of the policy process, but would also have a positive impact in terms of cost and time.

2.1.1

In accordance with Article 11(3) of the Treaty on European Union, ‘the European Commission shall carry out broad consultations with parties concerned in order to ensure that the Union’s actions are coherent and transparent’.

2.1.2

‘Consultation’ is a process whereby the Commission gathers the opinions and views of the public and stakeholders. This complementary process takes place without prejudice to the structured civil dialogue (Article 11(2) TFEU) and consultations carried out within specific frameworks, such as consultation of the social partners as part of social dialogue (employers’ organisations and trade unions) (Article 154 TFEU) or of advisory bodies, such as the European Economic and Social Committee (Article 304 TFEU) (2), which it may on no account replace.

2.1.3

In addition to their involvement in consultations under Article 154 TFEU, the social partners, employers’ organisations and trade unions participate fully in the consultation mentioned in points 2.1.1 and 2.1.2, in the fields of consumer law, environmental law, trade policy, etc.

2.2.1

In 2002, the European Commission established minimum standards (4) for stakeholder consultations, which apply on a mandatory basis to stakeholder consultations on any proposal, legislative or non-legislative. Under REFIT, the Commission has also announced that consultations are to be carried out for evaluations, fitness checks and the drafting of implementing measures and delegated acts (5).

2.2.2

In its 2002 guidelines for DGs on carrying out stakeholder consultations, the European Commission provides for, inter alia, publication of the explanatory memorandum on the topic in question, its content and the purpose of the consultation. Afterwards, the number of responses, the nature of the respondents and a summary of the findings should be published.

2.2.3

As regards multilingualism, there are currently no formal rules in force.

2.2.4

The 2002 guidelines with minimum standards for stakeholder consultation lay down 10 steps in the consultation process, divided into three phases: define strategy (6), run consultation (7), analyse results (8).

2.2.5

The European Commission has had 12 different methods for its policy-preparation consultations depending on the objectives and the target group. The 12 methods are as follows: open online public consultation; studies; Eurobarometer; conferences, public hearings, meetings with stakeholders; meetings, workshops, seminars with those directly involved; focus groups; personal interviews; European Commission expert groups; SME panels; consultation of local or regional authorities; questionnaires; and online discussion forums.

2.3.1

Despite these guidelines and the large number of methods and tools available, many stakeholders are critical of the effectiveness of the current consultation system. Specific obstacles include difficulties in being informed of consultations (information being easy to find on the EU websites and publicising the consultations), the language and terminology, information on the results and, finally, the follow-up.

2.3.2

In addition, the quality and the approach of consultations vary significantly depending on the DG concerned and they lack coordination and a uniform methodological approach.

2.3.3

Based on a sample, the EESC has carried out a check of the application of the guidelines in the first 25 consultations held in 2014. On the basis of this sample, the following comments can be made:

In conclusion, there is generally a lack of representativeness and quality, and scant information is provided on the outcome and follow-up.

3.1

In the political guidelines of the new European Commission, a more democratic European Union is one of the 10 priorities. The objective of creating a mandatory register of all organisations and individuals that lobby the European Commission and the European Parliament is at the heart of that priority.

3.2

On 19 May 2015, the Commission published a package of measures aimed at better regulation, the Better Regulation package (10), on which the Committee will issue an opinion, at the request of the Commission. The measures envisaged are structured around four strands: more transparency and consultation, keeping existing laws under review, better impact assessment and quality control, and a new interinstitutional agreement.

3.3

As part of this, revised guidelines for stakeholder consultations have also been proposed. In preparation for these, a consultation (11) on the ‘Stakeholder consultation guidelines’ was organised. The findings (12) from this consultation have been taken into account in this opinion.

4.1.1

The Committee asks the European Commission to impose the existing internal guidelines as binding on DGs and to penalise non-compliance (for example, where there is no transparency regarding the responses or no assessment report), just as the quality of impact assessment is subject to sanctions by the Impact Assessment Board.

4.1.2

The Committee thus calls for a coordinating unit within the Commission’s general secretariat, under the direct management of the relevant Commission vice-president. This unit would also provide support to all DGs as regards the overall approach and strategy of consultations, the drawing up and implementation of quality requirements and procedures, quality guidance, information and follow-up.

4.1.3

The coordination unit would be assisted by an expert group, supplemented by representatives of the target groups at which the consultation is aimed. The EESC calls on the Commission to harness the Committee’s expertise here, particularly when it comes to selecting the target groups, validating the questionnaires, and summarising and following up the results.

4.1.4

A more systematic approach to consultations, with clear timetables and advance notice, should make it easier for stakeholders to prepare for their participation. In this regard, a reliable and regularly-updated provisional timetable of consultations is essential. More generally, the Committee proposes that the Commission put these consultations on a more structured institutional and representative foundation by taking advantage of the resources of the consultative bodies or their equivalents at national, regional and local levels.

4.1.5

The EESC asks the Commission to publish an annual evaluation of its approach to consultations and the results thereof.

4.2.1

Properly determining the target group of a consultation is essential to obtaining the necessary information. Professional tools of proven reliability are needed here. Effective cooperation with the existing structures, the Committee and legitimate and representative civil society organisations is also vital in this regard. Within the limits of its remit and by cooperating effectively with the organisations concerned and the Commission, the EESC could help identify representative organisations within certain target groups.

4.2.2

The work carried out by the EESC (16) on establishing criteria for the representativeness of civil society organisations could be used as a basis for the aforementioned process of identifying representative organisations. The EESC would thus like to further bolster the impact of and cooperation with such organisations in the consultation process.

4.2.3

A good geographical and target-group distribution should systematically be a particular focus. It must also be ensured that particular attention is given to under-represented and less-resourced groups in ‘stakeholder mapping’.

4.2.4

The EESC stresses the importance of introducing a substantiated weighting system in the analysis of consultation responses, giving priority to organisations that are representative and directly concerned.

4.2.5

With a view to increasing the participation of stakeholders in consultations, the content of feedback after consultations is very important. Stakeholders should see results from their input and thus feel that they have had a real influence on the policy proposals, or receive an explanation as to why certain elements were not taken into account.

4.3.1

The EESC could act as a ‘network of networks’ in order to disseminate the written (online) consultation to the various stakeholders (just as the Committee of the Regions does as regards local authorities). With regard to interactive meetings, the EESC could act as organiser, given its contacts and expertise in this area.

4.3.2

Questionnaires used in (online) consultations should be submitted for comments to civil society organisations representing the target group(s) concerned and in the language of the target audience. Furthermore, questionnaires should be tested in advance by a sample group of stakeholders. To this end, preliminary stakeholder mapping and the transparency register could be used as tools to target these organisations (see point 4.2). The EESC should act as facilitator here.

4.4.1

Under the guidelines, a time limit of at least 12 weeks should be set for responses to online consultations, and for interactive meetings 20 working days’ notice should be given. The Committee advises against launching consultations during the summer. Furthermore, the provisional timetable (advocated in point 4.1.4) should be adhered to as far as possible.

4.5.1

The EESC calls on the Commission, including its delegations in the Member States, to put in place an effective and sustained information campaign to publicise the consultations and encourage stakeholders to participate. The Committee could definitely also play a role here, and ask its members to disseminate information within their own networks.

4.5.2

Each consultation should be announced in a clear, appropriate and timely manner in the media of the Commission and the Member States and to the relevant civil society organisations. The representatives of the Commission in the Member States should also be involved in this overall approach.

4.6.1

The Committee deems it very important that the Commission take account of the points of view expressed during consultations and justify the extent to which it has done so.

4.6.2

In the substantiated weighting system used in processing the results (see point 4.2.3), organised civil society stakeholders should proportionately be the most represented.

4.7.1

The Committee is in favour of the publication of a summary report, accompanied by an overview of all the responses received. This will foster transparency.

4.7.2

In addition, the EESC advocates providing information — not least to the respondents — on the follow-up to the issue, such as amendments to the proposal and the next steps in the decision-making process.

5.1.1

In the interests of optimising resources, and taking the approach of interinstitutional cooperation, the Committee could thus make available to the decision-making process both its knowledge of stakeholders active in the various EU policy areas, and also its expertise, experience and competence in consultation practices.

5.1.2

In accordance with its work priorities and with the cooperation of the Commission, the Committee wishes to monitor and assess certain consultations, draw up an opinion on this matter, and if appropriate, organise a public hearing.

5.1.3

In close cooperation with the organisations concerned, the Committee would like to provide input and expertise to the Commission during the key stages of the consultation process, in particular the selection of the target group, the questionnaire, the summary and the follow-up.

5.1.4

Moreover, the EESC could act as a ‘network of networks’ and a facilitator in order to disseminate the written (online) consultation to the various stakeholders (just as the Committee of the Regions does as regards local authorities).

5.1.5

With regard to interactive meetings, the EESC could act as organiser, in conjunction with the Commission, as it already does regularly in the framework of structured dialogue platforms (for example on immigration, on consumption, etc.).

5.1.6

As part of an effective and sustained information campaign, the Committee could contribute by calling on its members to disseminate information within their own networks.

5.2.1

At different stages in the preparation, implementation and follow-up of a consultation, the EESC could act as an information channel between the European Commission and organised civil society.

5.2.2

For certain activities, such as interactive meetings, joint initiatives of the Commission and the Committee could be organised.

17.11.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 383/64

Rapporteur:

Mr Juan MENDOZA CASTRO

Co-rapporteur:

Ms ANGELOVA

1.1

The Committee supports the Green Paper on a Capital Markets Union, awaits the Commission’s proposals on what changes might be needed as to achieve the goals stated in the document and expresses its belief that the proposed measures will be based on a balanced consideration of the viewpoints expressed by all the stakeholders.

1.2

The aim of the Commission’s initiative should be to create the conditions for an efficient, modern financial services sector with appropriate regulations, which grants access to capital providers by companies seeking investment, especially SMEs and high growth companies.

1.3

The EESC sees the capital markets as pools of liquidity, where companies can raise funds and trade in financial instruments, and strongly supports the ultimate goal of the CMU — to overcome the current fragmentation of the markets thus enabling the listing of all types of companies.

1.4

Since a Capital Markets Union (CMU) is to a significant extent a reality for large companies, the EESC stresses the need for measures that will also allow SMEs to benefit from it.

1.5

The CMU should improve the financing of the economy in the long term by tapping the potential for promoting the best practices of corporate governance and corporate social responsibility, focusing not only on economic but also environmental and social objectives.

1.6

SMEs’ specific needs should be explicitly taken into account in any future decisions related to CMU. The EESC strongly recommends decisive and swift action to be taken in the following directions:

1.7

The EESC concurs with the acknowledgement in the Green Paper that a very low proportion of household savings finds its way into more productive investments than government bonds or bank deposits, especially at this time of financial repression for savers.

1.8

The EESC highlights the importance of traditional banking for the stability of the financial system. The EESC acknowledges the importance of completing the European Banking Union.

1.9

Sustainable high quality securitisation calls for promoting basic structures with short intermediation chains.

1.10

The EESC considers that the Green Paper provides a comprehensive review of the current state of play in the capital markets in Europe, as well as the measures needed to achieve a CMU.

2.1

Compared with other jurisdictions, capital market based financing in Europe is relatively underdeveloped. European equity, debt and other markets play a smaller role in financing growth and European businesses remain heavily reliant on banks, making our economies vulnerable to a tightening of bank lending.

2.2

There is also insufficient investor confidence, and European savings may not always be being put to the most productive use.

2.3

Building a CMU is a key initiative in the work programme of the Commission.

2.4

A CMU would ensure greater diversification in the funding of the economy and reduce the cost of raising capital, particularly for SMEs.

2.5

More integrated capital markets, especially for equity, would enhance the shock-absorption capacity of the European economy and allow for more investment without increasing levels of indebtedness.

2.6

A CMU should enhance the flow of capital — through efficient market infrastructure and intermediaries — from investors to European investment projects, improving allocation of risk and capital across the EU and, ultimately, making Europe more resilient to future shocks.

2.7

The key principles underpinning a CMU are: it should maximise the benefits of capital markets for the economy, jobs and growth; it should create a single market for capital for all 28 Member States; it should be built on firm foundations of financial stability; it should ensure an effective level of consumer and investor protection; and it should help to attract investment from all over the world and increase EU competitiveness.

3.1

The Committee fully supports the Commission’s initiative. If all the Member States of Europe are to thrive in a vibrant, knowledge based economy, a Capital Markets Union is a necessary structural reform. The blockage to the EU-wide development of a range of innovative financial products has to be freed up, as this is holding back competitive financing for investment, particularly for small and medium sized companies, start-ups and for long-term infrastructure products.

3.2

The aim of the Commission’s initiative should be to create the conditions for an efficient, modern financial services sector with appropriate but not excessive regulations, allowing a much wider range of sources of investment finance and thereby addressing the worryingly low level of investment.

3.3

The EESC sees capital markets as pools of liquidity, where companies can raise funds and trade with financial instruments. Taking this as a starting point, the EESC believes that the CMU has already been achieved for large companies and, in reply to the Commission’s questions in the Green Paper, will focus mostly on measures that will allow SMEs and high growth companies to also benefit from such a union.

3.4

The CMU should improve the financing of the economy in the long term by tapping the potential for promoting the best practices of corporate governance and corporate social responsibility, focusing not only on economic but also environmental and social objectives.