Dynamic Knowledge-based Economy Research Articles

A Review of the European Commission’s Plans for an Electronic Customs Environment

Success in international trade is an essential component in the current European Union (EU) ‘Lisbon agenda’ which aims to make the EU ‘the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world’. The performance of customs administrations is very much a determining factor in the success or failure of the EU strategy, but there are reasons to believe that the current vision of creating a paperless customs environment in Europe is insuffi ciently ambitious, fl awed at a practical level, and inadequately resourced and managed. The extension and rationalisation of reform plans need to be advanced by taking full account of the nature of modern supply chains or, more importantly, their potential for further development. Further, there is a need to advance the processes for increasing the political priority and momentum afforded to the customs reform project. Without signifi cant remodelling the current blueprint for EU customs in the 21st century will fail to deliver key Lisbon agenda goals and will risk surrendering Europe’s competitive edge in international trade to nations that have more aggressive customs strategies.

The Quantitative Analysis of Research Activities - The Case of Romania

The European Council in Lisbon set the European Union the strategic goal of becoming the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world by 2010. The measures to be implemented by 2010 pursuant to the conclusions of the Council are primarily to serve the goals among which one is more and better networked research and innovation within the framework of a European Research Area. The research and development have the role of a driving force for a competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy. The pursue of the Lisbon Agenda and the increase of the quantum of investments in research is the key factor in the change of the paradigm of present development of Romania; this development should be grounded in research and innovation. In the paper we analyzed the following statistics: the proportion of expenditures for research activities in the GDP, the proportion of expenditures for education in the GDP, the number of researchers in service/mil. inhabitants, the competitiveness indicator, etc. The proportion of the expenditures for research and development in the GDP, of 0.38 in 2002, places Romania on one of the bottom positions in Europe. Regarding the financing of research activities, the European Union has set a level of financing of RDI of two thirds private financing and one third public financing. In our country, however, the proportion of private financing is high compared to other candidate states or even member states of the EU (the average in the candidate states was 55% in 1999, while the average for the member states was 44%). In 2002, in Romania, GERD consisted of 48.4% public financing and 7% foreign financing. Romania has undertaken to achieve an adequate financing of the Research - Development - Innovation system, as well to reach a level of RDI expenditures of about 1% of the GDP by 2007. At the same time, a minimum target of 3% of the GDP is envisaged as total expenditures for the RDI by 2015.

Formation à la recherche et partenariats de recherche public-privé : Contribuer ensemble à l’excellence scientifique et à la croissance économique

The European Union has set itself the daunting target of becoming the world's most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy by 2010. Any hope of success against the United States and the Asian tiger economies lies in the quality of scientific and technological research. In France, postgraduate training has long labored under a deep academia/industry divide. Although the universities have introduced supervised 3 year doctoral courses along the lines of the English-speaking countries, they still produce too many postdocs with little experience or understanding of, and little taste for, the private sector. This ignores career realities: the public sector can offer employment to only half the postdocs it produces. The rest must fall back on positions in the private sector, in some cases with a sense of failure, ill suiting them to drive the intellectual economy forwards compared to their international competitors. To combat the divide and emphasize the quality of the research training available within industry, the public/private National Association for Technical Research (ANRT), acting on behalf of the Ministry of Research, created the Industrial Research Training Agreement (Cifre) scheme in 1981. Higher education laboratories and private companies combine to offer doctoral students the opportunity to undertake their 3 year course in a mixed public/private environment (the exact ratio is not defined but in the case of the Servier Research Group, an early and active participant in the scheme, at least one third of the course is spent in the private sector). The doctoral thesis is thereby transformed into a meaningful career qualification. Funded by the Ministry, with maintenance grants to the students and compensatory payments to the companies, the Cifre scheme, which is currently being expanded, has produced 12,000 postdocs personally and intellectually equipped for careers transiting seamlessly between the public and private sectors, to the enrichment of each.

Transnational recognition and accreditation of engineering educational programmes in Europe: perspectives in a global framework

In a previous paper the author described the present situation and recent advances regarding accreditation of engineering programmes in Europe. This paper contains an attempt at examining perspectives from a global viewpoint. While the variety of educational approaches within European higher education is to be considered a great asset of the European cultural background, the ‘Bologna Process’ is working to build up the ‘European Higher Education Area’ (EHEA) and ‘a system of easily readable and comparable degrees’ in the context of making Europe ‘the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world’. In this framework a pan-European system of accreditation of engineering programmes and qualifications will be essential in order for European engineers to be competitive on a global scale. While the merely ‘professional’ aspects of recognition are covered by the European Directive 2005/36/EC ‘on the recognition of professional qualifications’ (which replaces all previous Directives on the subject, including the 1989 General Directive 89/48/EEC), little progress has been made towards trans-European accreditation of educational programmes as the entry route to a profession. This is particularly damaging in highly internationalized professions, like engineering. Several initiatives have been put forward in recent years to remedy this situation: in particular, this paper will illustrate the current EUR-ACE (EURopean ACredited Engineer) project, which is working towards the establishment of a European system for accreditation of engineering educational programmes based on a network of spontaneous agreements between national and regional bodies and associations concerned.

Strategic Interaction among EU Governments in Active Labor Market Policy-making

The European Union (EU) recently committed to becoming ‘the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world.’ Active labor market (ALM) policies are a critical part of the European Employment Strategy (EES) – the plan designed to achieve this objective. ALM policies entail several possible externalities that, spilling across national boundaries, may create incentives for European governments to free ride off the efforts of their neighbors. We provide empirical evidence that the national best-response functions for ALM spending (worker-training programs in particular) are indeed downward sloping; an increase in expenditures in one country decreases equilibrium expenditures in its neighbors. Therefore, levels of ALM spending may well be too low, notwithstanding the mildly increasing coordination fostered through the EES framework. Stronger enforcement procedures may be necessary if the European Union is to achieve its EES objectives.

POLICY BENCHMARKING IN THE EUROPEAN UNION:

The Lisbon process is intended to move the European Union (EU) towards a dynamic but socially inclusive knowledge-based economy. Policy benchmarking through the ‘Open Method of Coordination’ is being applied to a wide range of relevant policy areas. This article considers the benchmarking indicators that are being used in relation to the knowledge-based economy on the one hand, social inclusion on the other. It examines the indicators that have been selected, the uses to which they are being put and their appropriateness for policy coordination, policy learning and performance improvement. It explores three ambiguities or tensions that they reveal. First, the article argues that being in part the offspring of the process of monetary union, the OMC is being used to track progress towards a single future, rather than to expose the range of possible alternative futures and the trade-offs they involve. Second, whereas the goal of the Lisbon process is a dynamic knowledge-based economy, the article argues that the benchmarking indicators are remarkably static and it sets out what dynamic indicators would be more appropriate. Finally, whereas patterns of social and economic development are increasingly shaped by global processes, the Lisbon process remains focussed on action at the national level: the article argues the case for a stronger global dimension for indicators of change. The article concludes by considering the implications of its findings for governance and accountability in the EU.

Innovation for European competitiveness and cohesion: opportunities and difficulties of co-evolution

The European Union aims to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world by 2010. Nevertheless, half the Europe-25 Member States possess limited innovation capacities. This article argues that the co-evolution patterns of physical and social technologies indicate two possible scenarios: either the forward-looking elements will start a chain reaction mobilising the rest of the national system, as in Ireland; or the dynamic elements will integrate sectorally and transnationally to the global system, leaving the rest of the economy in a permanent low-cost and low-competitiveness trap. The former is a win-win scenario for the European system of innovation, whereas the latter is second-best. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Corporate social responsibility, what's in a name? A critical appraisal of the Green Paper

In July 2001 the European Commission issued a Green Paper entitled Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility. The paper was elaborated by the Directorate-General for Employment and Social Affairs. It focused on companies’ responsibilities in the social field. The term ‘corporate social responsibility (CSR) emerged from discourses and statements delivered by companies reflecting upon, even praising, their own functioning. The European Union's concern with the topic is rooted in the expressed conviction that CSR can be a positive contribution to the strategic goal set in Lisbon ‘to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion’ (European Commission 2001: 4). This article seeks to examine the Green Paper's ‘new speech’ from the conceptual angle of collective labour law. It assesses the legal nature of the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) as well as its implications, in particular for human and fundamental workers’ rights, and for the trade union movement. It also addresses the question of whether CSR amounts to a new understanding of the freedom of enterprise.

The Open Method of Co-ordination: A Supranational form of Governance?

The 'Open Method of Co-ordination' was first introduced in the European arena at the Lisbon Summit of March 2000. To reach the European Union's goal of becoming 'the world's most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy, capable of sustainable economic growth with better jobs and greater social cohesion', a new method of intervention was needed. The Open Method of Co-ordination (OMC) was, thus, presented as the appropriate tool for an integrated approach toward achieving an economic and social renewal. This method is now applied in the employment field and in the fight against poverty and social exclusion. Other sensitive fields, such as pensions and immigration, have been identified as future areas where OMC could be applied. Social partners at the European level have also been called to develop their own experience of OMC. They are now in charge of benchmarking best practices as regard to life-long learning and the quality of industrial relations in Europe. As the Commission states in its European Governance White Paper, OMC is aimed at completing or reinforcing Community action, in particular when there is little scope for legislative solutions. This new form of intervention is not to replace traditional means. Rather, the European Union (EU) would play a role consistent with its supranational position. The objective is to organize a learning process to allow the exchange of experience and best practices. OMC is gaining ground in the European polity. Since its introduction, many areas that, until then, were considered falling under the sovereignty of Member States are now tackled at a European level. Some commentators even define OMC as a possible new way of Building Social Europe. For the time being, it seems that one of OMC's main interests remains in the new approach to legislation that about it allows. OMC shapes a form of supranational governance by mean of soft regulation, providing a dynamic that is interesting to look at, not only from aEuropean perspective but also from an international one. The purpose of this article is to analyse this new tool of intervention and underscore its potential to offer a model of supranational governance. The Open Method of Co-ordination is composed of different phases, each one deeply marked by a common feature: co-ordination. The very structure of OMC relies on the presence of a supranational actor able to co-ordinate. But in order to grasp its importance, one cannot consider OMC only from the Lisbon Summit. To have a fully-fledged comprehension of this new regulatory tool, it is necessary to look at the whole development of the European Employment Strategy. It is in the field of employment that this method finds its premises and was first developed. With this background, it is possible to see from where the different components of OMC come, and also to give a clearer picture of the fundamentals of this new form of governance. The reminder of this paper is organized as follows. Starting from the Delors White paper of 1993, it analyses the contributions that each European Summit has made to the framing of a strategy that was first confined to the employment field and, later, became a method applicable to any sensitive area. OMC is an interesting tool to look at, in particular, in considering new forms of supranational governance in a global context.

Momentum for Research in Europe

AbstractOn the road to becoming the most dynamic knowledge‐based economy in the world — Increasing competition for the best minds

Changes of Education Policies within the European Union in the Light of Globalisation

Education issues have traditionally not played a central role within the European Union (EU). This has gradually started to change in recent years. At the Lisbon European Council in March 2000, the heads of states and governments of the EU member countries, in response to the challenges of globalisation and the information society, set out a new strategic objective for the coming decade: ‘Becoming the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion’. This implies major changes, and education will be among the areas affected. Two questions can be raised in relation to this development: (1) How can a European education policy be created within the existing framework of the EU? (2) What could be the content of such an education policy? This article sets out to answer these questions by examining new methods of working and the initiatives that have been undertaken. It goes on to look at some of the problems and challenges confronting the EU in adapting Europe's education and training systems to the demands of the knowledge society, and, using an examination of how the EU is trying to find new methods for cooperation in the field of education and how elements of a European education policy can be found in present initiatives, it explores some scenarios setting out how the work of the EU and a European education policy can develop.

European Structural Indicators, A Way Forward

At the 2000 Lisbon summit, the European Union formulated the ambition to transform itself into "the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion'. It is remarkable that, until recently, European statisticians were hardly involved in the design of a statistical information system and related "structural' indicators for this important policy purpose. Instead, indicators have been designed that do not measure what they intend to measure, are based on incomparable data and give the impression of a fairly incoherent shopping list of numbers without an underlying vision on the use of these numbers in policy making. This paper argues that indicators can best be based on a coherent accounting system, such as the national accounts, and that the SESAME- system, which is an extension of national accounts and so-called Social Accounting Matrices, offers promising perspectives in this regard.

The European Higher Education Area: A New Framework for the Development of Higher Education

Hand in hand with European integration, European higher education must also integrate itself so as to better prepare the highly trained workforce that Europe needs if it is to become the most dynamic and competitive knowledge-based economy in the world. The Bologna Process will lead to the required integration of European higher education while preserving the diversity of European cultures and guaranteeing the assurance of quality. The research role of European higher education is also to be preserved and expanded. Higher education, as the author concludes, must be unified at European level while remaining differentiated at world level.

A new partnership between science and politics. European scientists ought to adapt to new research policy paradigms.

A new partnership between science and politics. European scientists ought to adapt to new research policy paradigms.

Training Teachers for Quality Education in Europe

SUMMARY The political context in which European co-operation activities in education are taking place has recently changed significantly. After the Lisbon Council, which set it as a strategic goal for the European Union to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledgebased economy in the world and recognised the important role education and training play in this respect, these fields gained a new political importance. Teachers will undoubtedly be at the front line in meeting these challenges. And the Commission will have to take into consideration initiatives in the field of teacher training and other education staff, reiterating the importance that the Commission attaches to them all, as a key factor for the development of quality education in Europe.

Improving the image of biotechnology the European way

One of Europe's most valuable resources, its outstanding research in the life sciences, will be made a star on the socioeconomic stage. The European Commission's (EC) recognition of the tremendous potential of biotechnology to improve human lives and the economy radiates from the consultation document Towards a Strategic Vision of Life Sciences and Biotechnology.1 “To become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world…”, the European Union, via the EC, is endeavouring to create the climate of regulation and social acceptance in which technologies can thrive.