Written by Jana Niedringhaus

AEGEE (Association des Etats Généraux des Etudiants de l’Europe/European Students’ Forum) is a non-governmental, politically independent, and non-profit student organisation, which was created in 1985. The mission of AEGEE is the creation of a borderless Europe, based on democracy and respect for human rights, by bringing together 13,000 students in around 150 cities and 38 countries with different cultural backgrounds. We strive for a democratic, diverse and borderless Europe, which is socially, economically and politically integrated and values the participation of young people in its construction and development. Our main goal is to strengthen mutual understanding among young Europeans and bring Europe closer by empowering them to take an active role in society. The current focus areas as defined by the members at a grassroots level are: Climate Emergency, Mental Health, Political Activism and Social Equity. 

This paper sheds light on AEGEE’s position towards Circular Economy. AEGEE acknowledges the importance and the urgent need for a more Circular Economy in Europe. The current system is flawed and raw material extraction and systematic (waste) leakages need to be minimized. Especially the focus which is often put on recycling as a solution for the existing waste and resource problems conveys a distorted picture of how the current crisis can be tackled. In addition, due to a lack of education and transparency it is difficult for European citizens to grasp what Circular Economy really entails which makes it harder for citizens to advocate for a change of the existing linear model. Therefore, AEGEE tries to offer a space for non-formal education in the field of Circular Economy, as we believe that this is an important component.

One important aspect which is required for a successful transition to a more Circular Economy is targeted formal as well as non-formal education in order to enable European citizens and particularly youth to make informed decisions and properly advocate for their needs. It should teach relevant skills, like evaluating outcomes of our decisions, systems thinking, having a flexible mindset, communication as well as collaboration and leadership skills. Unfortunately, formal education is currently not equipping students with the right skills. Nevertheless, European citizens and especially young people should be willing to (re)learn and develop skills in order to always be able to question the system and show alternative ways.

Another important part for a transition towards more circularity is the empowerment of consumers. The current system often focuses on recycling which should rather be treated as the last resort. We, as a society, should focus on extending products’ and materials’ lifetimes through designing for repair, by empowering people through relevant legislation, spaces, and education, which highlights the need for EU legislation to set down these rights. Keeping products and materials in use as long as possible as well as a right to repair strengthens communities and (local) economies. Realizing these crucial aspects of Circular Economy requires commitment, transparency and accountability of business. 

A key component which could foster both education as well as consumer empowerment is national and European legislation. In this process youth should be a permanent stakeholder, as young people are a main driver of change while at the same time being affected long-term. Legislative barriers need to be removed in order to enable a swift and easy transition to a Circular Economy for producers and consumers. There is still much room for improvements to realize a Circular Economy.

Circular Economy provides opportunities on many different levels. Not only is it a necessary step towards more sustainability but it is also a new way of thinking, approaching problems and valuing resources. AEGEE believes that society needs politics to implement policies for a circular system. In turn, politics needs society to express their needs and especially producers to adapt their behaviour. Circular Economy has several social benefits, such as providing meaningful work and helping to remove the gap to the labour market of disadvantaged groups. Enabling a just and inclusive transition is very important to AEGEE!

AEGEE acknowledges the efforts already being made by the European Union and national governments. However, AEGEE believes that in order to reach climate-neutrality by 2050 and fulfil the goals of the European Green Deal more effort is required. Currently, there is an overall lack of progress in terms of legislation, education, changes of production and consumption patterns, transparency and cooperation. It needs a combined effort of all parts of society. Therefore, we believe that we ourselves have to keep working and improving, but at the same time also producers and decision-makers have to push forward and lead the way. This is the only way we can reach the goal of an economy that is more circular, regenerative, inclusive and which stays within the planetary boundaries!

We, the people of AEGEE, meeting at the Autumn Agora Salerno 2019, hereby declare:

We ACKNOWLEDGE that we have a moral and social responsibility to make Europe and the world a better place for current and future generations.

We UNDERSTAND that Sustainable Development aims to meet the needs of present generations without jeopardising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

We face challenges in all three pillars of Sustainable Development:

• Environmental – the ongoing pollution of our home, habitat destruction for millions of species, and the refusal to acknowledge planetary boundaries, leading to both a loss of biodiversity and to the climate emergency
• Social – barriers to inclusion, growing inequalities, the normalisation of  hate speech, weakened democratic institutions, lack of solidarity and of civic education
• Economic – a model that creates great disparities in society and stimulates overconsumption by focusing on short-term economic growth at the expense of society and the environment

The United Nations Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development was signed by all 193 member states. This agenda includes the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): a universal call to action to protect the planet, end poverty and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity. The SDGs are all interconnected and rely on one another to achieve an equilibrium of environmental, social and economic sustainability. We need a multilateral approach from all stakeholders on all fronts to achieve that balance.

We COMMIT to incorporating the three pillars of sustainability into everything we do.

We empower the youth of Europe to work towards sustainable development and achieving the SDGs through non-formal education, awareness-raising and our collective actions. We will measure our contributions to the SDGs and publish them to inspire others to get active in the fields of sustainable development and movements for climate and environmental justice.

We need more than just individual actions.

We COMMIT to demanding from every politician and decision-maker the systemic change that is necessary in order to mitigate and adapt to the climate crisis, move towards a fair and equal society and a suitable economic model for the challenges of our generation and the ones to come.

We CALL upon every politician and decision-maker to acknowledge their moral and social responsibility to make the world a better place for current and future generations. We urge them to do this by leading the necessary systemic change to the current paradigm:

First and foremost, we call upon decision-makers in Europe and around the world to immediately undertake a multilateral approach to the global environmental crisis, to declare a state of climate emergency and to communicate the urgency for change. We call on them to acknowledge the intrinsic value of nature and to mobilise all of humanity’s resources to maintain Earth as a habitat, both for humanity and for the other species we share it with.

Secondly, we call upon decision-makers in Europe and around the world to tackle the growing inequalities in society. We demand universal healthcare and education, fair payment and social benefits for all. We must end exploitation and protect the dignity of the individual. We call for transparent and democratic societies that can provide their citizens with a fulfilling and healthy life in a safe environment.

Thirdly, we call upon decision-makers in Europe and around the world to rethink our economic models and find alternatives in which economic prosperity and environmental protection go hand in hand, and success isn’t just measured by GDP growth. Consumerism and endless growth at the expense of the environment and the people should no longer be the norm. We urge them to transition to a model that doesn’t intensify inequalities but instead fosters prosperity for all.

We must involve everyone in the process: individuals, civil society, governments and businesses. It’s only by educating all stakeholders about these issues, increasing participation and creating citizens’ assemblies, that we can mobilise the ethical leadership we need to bring about the systemic change that Europe and the world are calling for.

The people of AEGEE at the Autumn Agora Salerno on 26th October 2019

.PDF Download

The 2019 European Elections enter into history as the first signal of ownership of the European project by citizens.

The stop to falling turnout proves that the European election will no longer be a second-class vote. The presence of three trans-European parties in the campaign testifies that more Europeans understand that some issues are trans-border. The centrality of environmental concerns in the campaign, indicated by green parties’ high results and the importance of this question in every party agenda, shows that for a significant number of Europeans, this kind of question call for continental answers.

This demonstrates that concern about European politics is growing among citizens across the continent, that the citizens of European countries seek control on their future and that they are conscious of their shared responsibility regarding the fate of Europe.

But this overhaul remains unsatisfactory, even disturbing, in several respects:

• the increase in participation is still weak amongst young people: this year, still 59% of young people are the let-offs of European democratization
• trans-European parties now exist but remain invisible: Volt, Diem25 and Pirates only get five seats, and the future of the Europeans remains in the hands of national and nationalist forces, reinforcing Europe’s schizophrenia
• European campaign contents are still dominated by the most radical components of national political lives, with the risk that the new European debate tends to an ominous extremism threatening the fundamental values of European integration: peace, democracy and prosperity.

Therefore, while welcoming the 2019 election’s democratization and transformational potential, we call the European society as a whole:

• to be extremely vigilant on political decisions and orientations of Europe in this next European legislature
• to ensure that in the 2024 election will display counter-proposals resulting from direct trans-European consultations and political dynamics
• to become examples of active citizens both during, before and after elections
• to include the voice of young people in decision-making processes at local, national and European level
• to include the whole process in a debate and reflection on the future of our continent by 2040.

If we admit that the youth is the most European component of our society, that they are the most concerned about the future and that they have the highest potential for innovation, it is in European youth that slumbers the alternatives to this Europe of divisions and of fear of the future.

The whole of European civil society must resolutely lean on these new generations for Europe to become the instrument serving our common societal projects.

AEGEE-Europe, LEAP2040 and AAFB are three organisations related to Franck Biancheri. This joint declaration is part of their dedication to continue the battle Franck Biancheri fought during 30 years for the democratisation of Europe and provide it with a new horizon: 2040.

Press Release

Inclusive Mobility Alliance puts forth recommendations

for a more inclusive Erasmus programme

The Inclusive Mobility Alliance has been officially launched on the 22nd of January 2019 at the European Parliament. Gathering more than 20 organisations with expertise in Disability, Youth and Higher Education, the Alliance aims at making Erasmus+ more inclusive. Students and young people taking part in Erasmus+ mobilities represent respectively approx. 0.17% and 2.8% of all beneficiaries. These low figures have been stagnating for the past 10 years and are the main reasons behind the creation of the Inclusive Mobility Alliance.

Based on the United Nation Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (UNCRPD), the Alliance has produced 17 policy recommendations on how to make the Erasmus programme – the flagship of the European Union – more inclusive to students and young people with disabilities. The recommendations that are being published in a timely moment, when the next Erasmus programme for the period 2021-2027 is being drafted by the European Commission.

The recommendations call for a needs-based approach and include, among others:

• The necessity for all staff working with Erasmus+ to be trained on working and communicating with

potential beneficiaries in an inclusive way

• Inviting the European Commission to revise the Erasmus Charter for Higher Education including a

clause on disability and inclusion

• Inviting Member States to allow the portability of grants and support services between different countries

“Erasmus + is certainly the most successful program of the Union and more than any other has concretely contributed to the process of European integration. For this reason, we have gladly hosted this event: because we consider a priority for this experience to become truly as accessible as possible for everyone, regardless of the economic and physical conditions, and, therefore, truly inclusive,” said the Members of European Parliament Damiano Zoffoli and Luigi Morgano

“We have the right to experience the lifechanging benefits of mobility. The recommendations released by the Alliance are a roadmap to ensure this right,” said Yannis Vardakastanis, President of the European Disability Forum.

“For decades, the EU has proudly flagged the motto “unity in diversity”. I believe it is time to add more layers to the diversity of nations we proudly celebrate. Talking about inclusion of all needs of all people in Erasmus+ is bringing fairness to a flagship project of an Union we want to be actually diverse,” said João Pinto, President of the Erasmus Student Network.

By signing the Inclusive Mobility Alliance Declaration, MEPs Luigi Morgano and Damiano Zoffoli (S&D) and the 21 partners organisations have expressed their commitment to support the work of the Alliance and fight for more equal and fair access to the Erasmus+ programme for those underrepresented groups.

For more information please visit http://inclusivemobility.eu or contact dominique.montagnese@esn.org.

For an intersectional approach to youth policy and anti-discrimination law 

Written by Juliette Beaulaton

Introduction 

AEGEE (Association des Etats Généraux des Etudiants de l’Europe/European Students’ Forum) was created in 1985 with the vision of creating a unified Europe, based on democracy and a respect for human rights, by bringing together students with different cultural backgrounds. Today, AEGEE / European Students’ Forum is a non-governmental, politically independent, and non-profit student organization, which has around 13,000 members from 160 cities and 40 countries all over Europe. We strive for a democratic, diverse and borderless Europe, which is socially, economically and politically integrated and values the participation of young people in its construction and development. Our main mission is to strengthen mutual understanding among young Europeans and bring Europe closer by empowering them to take an active role in the society. In Autumn 2016, AEGEE established “Equal Rights” as one of its main thematic focuses for the upcoming three years. This Focus Area aims at acknowledging and tackling discrimination based on gender identity, expression and sexual orientation and promoting equity from an intersectional perspective.

AEGEE-Europe believes that in order to protect all young people from discrimination and strive for substantive equality, policy makers need to adopt an intersectional approach at every stage of the policy-making process, including in the field of anti-discrimination law and youth policy.

The goal of Youth Policy is to “provide young people with opportunities and experiences that support their successful integration into society and be active and responsible members of their society, as well as agents of change”1. Moreover, in its Communication on the new EU Youth Strategy, the European Commission stressed that the strategy should “strive to improve the prospects of all young people regardless of their background or social status” and insist on the need to ensure that the EU youth policy is truly inclusive.2

1 Council of Europe (2015), Access of Young People from disadvantage neighbourhoods to social rights CM/Rec(2015)3, p26, available online: https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=090000168066671e

2 European Commission (2018), Engaging, Connecting and Empowering young people: a new EU Youth Strategy, COM(2018) 269, p4 https://ec.europa.eu/youth/sites/youth/files/youth_com_269_1_en_act_part1_v9.pdf

3 European Youth Forum (2016), Policy paper on Equality and non-discrimination, p4 https://www.youthforum.org/sites/default/files/2017-11/0099-16_Policy_Paper_Equality_Non-discrimination_FINAL2_0.pdf

It is our conviction that those goals cannot be reached without rethinking the way we make policies, starting by acknowledging that “youth” is not an homogeneous social category3 , but is composed of people with very different social identities – gender, ability, race, geography, economical background and else – that interact with each other to create complex and unique experiences that can make “one-size-fit-all” policies ineffective or even harmful. Moreover,

youth policy goals cannot be separated from a strong anti-discrimination legal framework equipped to protect young people.

This position paper makes a case for an intersectional approach to youth policy and anti-discrimination law. After defining key concepts, the paper will present the development of the research on intersectional discrimination and how current policies handle intersectional inequalities and discrimination, then put forth AEGEE-Europe’s position and key recommendations.

Definition 

To clarify the position of AEGEE-Europe, certain concepts must be defined.

Intersectionality

US legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw4 coined the term to reflect the complexity of the experience of violence and discrimination of Black women. Crenshaw showed that this experience could not be adequately captured using a ’single-axis’ framework based on race or sex alone. Instead, as in an actual crossroad or intersection – racism and sexism factor into Black women’s lives in ways that can only be captured by looking at the race and gender dimensions of those experiences together5. Since then, the intersectional approach is widely used as a framework which aims at exposing the interconnection between different identities such as gender, race, sexual orientation, class, (dis)ability, etc. in order to account for complex, lived experiences of discrimination,

4 Crenshaw, K. (1989) Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics

5 ENAR (2018), Intersectionality and policy-making on discrimination in the European Union, available online: http://www.enar-eu.org/Intersectionality-Why-EU-policy-makers-should-adopt-an-intersectional-approach

6 Fredman, S. (2016), Intersectional Discrimination in EU gender equality and non-discrimination law, Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, p4

7 Fredman, ibid, p8

8 European Commission (2008), Proposal for a Council Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation, COM(2008)0426, available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52008PC0426

The central problem identified by the notion of intersectional discrimination then is how to render visible and properly remedy the wrongs of those who are multiply disadvantaged6.

Equality

For the purpose of this position paper, we choose a substantive definition of the concept of Equality. As Sandra Fredman argues, a definition of equality as the principle that “likes should be treated alike” is not enough if we want to adopt an intersectional perspective. We therefore subscribe to Fredman’s definition incorporating four dimension (i) the need to redress disadvantage, (ii) the need to address stigma, stereotyping, prejudice and violence, (iii) the need to facilitate voice and participation; and (iv) the need to accommodate difference and change structures of discrimination7.

Discrimination 

The legal definition of discrimination should be clarified to ensure that there is a harmonized understanding of the scope – at least at European level. In the European Commission’s Proposal for an Equal Treatment Directive8, discrimination refers to:

“1.Direct discrimination – where one person is treated less favourably than another is, has been or would be treated in a comparable situation; 

2.Indirect discrimination – where an apparently neutral provision, criterion or practice would put persons of a particular religion or belief, a particular disability, a particular age, a particular sexual orientation, or else, at a particular disadvantage compared with other persons, unless that provision, criterion or practice is objectively justified by a legitimate aim and the means of achieving that aim are appropriate and necessary and; 

3.Harassment shall be deemed to be a form of discrimination within the meaning of paragraph 1, when unwanted conduct related to any grounds takes place with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a person and of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. “

However, contrary to the scope proposed in the Directive proposal, the definition of discrimination should cover all forms of discrimination, irrespective of grounds, as explicitly outlined in Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Multiple and Intersectional discrimination 

Discrimination on several ground can take different form. According to Sandra Fredman, there are three identifiable categories. Firstly, “sequential multiple discrimination” (or cumulative discrimination), which occurs when a person suffers from discrimination on different grounds on separate occasions. Secondly, “additive multiple discrimination” (thereafter referred to as multiple discrimination) which occurs when a person is discriminated against on the same occasion but in two different ways. Fredman gives the example of a gay woman who “might claim that she has been subject to harassment both because she is a woman and because she is gay. Such discrimination can be said to be ‘additive’, in that each type of discrimination can be proved independently”. Finally, Intersectional discrimination “does not simply consist in the addition of two sources of discrimination [and] the result is qualitatively different’, it creates a unique experience of discrimination that only occurs because the person concerned is at the intersection of different identity.9 Crenshaw uses the example of the discriminatory hiring practices of a company that discriminate against black women. Since the company can prove that it is hiring both black men and white women, at first sight it cannot be accused of sexism or racism. The experience of black women is therefore is qualitatively different and rendered invisible, therefore difficult to prove and address.10

9 Fredman, ibid, p10

10 Crenshaw K. (2015), Why intersectionality can’t wait, The Washington Post, available online: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-theory/wp/2015/09/24/why-intersectionality-cant-wait/

This position paper will focus on intersectional discrimination.

Context 

Over the past years, there has been a growing interest in how multiple and intersectional discrimination affects people’s lives, and therefore whether existing legal frameworks are equipped to pursue goals such as inclusion, equality or the fight against discrimination. Studies and surveys adopting an intersectional approach are beginning to shed light on these aspects of discrimination and gather data to support the development of new policy-making frameworks. Scholars have also engaged in a critical assessment of existing legal frameworks and identified the gaps when it comes to dealing with equality and discrimination.

While navigating through studies integrating an intersectional perspective, the most striking aspect is the considerable lack of relevant data collection. Most studies used by policy makers

still research mainly one social category at a time. The new European Commission’s Communication on the EU Youth Strategy post-2018 falls into this category. While it attempts at proposing some disaggregated data in its staff working documents – for instance with data based on age and gender – the Commission’s research does not take into consideration other identities possibly intersecting with age.11

11 European Commission (2018), Commission Staff Working Document accompanying the document Engaging, Connecting and Empowering young people: a new EU Youth Strategy, COM(2018) 269 final, available online: https://ec.europa.eu/youth/sites/youth/files/youth_swd_169_part_6_2_en_autre_document_travail_service_part6_v4.pdf

12 European Youth Forum (2014), Survey on “Youth and Multiple Discrimination in Europe”, available online: https://www.youthforum.org/sites/default/files/2017-12/Survey-on-Youth-and-Multiple-Discrimination%20(1).pdf

13 FRA (2011), EU-MIDIS Data in Focus Report 5: Multiple discrimination, available online : http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2011/eu-midis-data-focus-report-5-multiple-discrimination

14 EIGE, Gender Equality Index 2017, available online: https://eige.europa.eu/gender-equality-index/2015/domain/work

15 Nagy, A. (2015), Creating a platform for Romani women and girls: Making them heard and seen through education, Commission on the Status of Women (Fifty-ninth session), p. 5

16 Khan, T. (2018), Sexual health and LGBTI Muslims, Blog ILGA-Europe, available online: https://www.ilga-europe.org/blog/sexual-health-and-lgbti-muslims

17 FEANTSA (2017) Homeless in Europe, LGBTIG Homelessness, The Magazine of FEANTSA, available online: https://www.feantsa.org/download/fea-008-17-magazine_v33480239002912617830.pdf

There is however an increasing effort in Europe to study multiple and intersectional discrimination and to raise awareness among the civil society and policy makers. In November 2014, the European Youth Forum published the results of a survey on “Youth and Multiple Discrimination in Europe”12 in an attempt to foster further research in the field. The results suggest that multiple discrimination and intersectional discrimination play a strong role in young people’s lives. The results of the survey illustrate how policies focusing on a single issue can fail to reach parts of a targeted groups as the needs inside this group can vary greatly for those at the intersection between different identities.

Dedicated agencies and NGOs are pursuing the work on intersectional discrimination to gather more data and present concrete examples of how young people’s life can be affected. Examples include the 2010 European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) Report on Multiple discrimination affecting Minorities in the EU. The report investigates the experience of ethnic minorities and integrates data on gender and age to highlight how being at the crossroad of these different identities change the way ethnic minorities experience discrimination. It notably concludes that “gender and age are strong predictors of discrimination for certain groups”13 taking for example the fact that young ethnic minority/immigrant men tend to report high levels of discriminatory treatment. Similarly, the European Institute for Gender Equality is now working on improving data collection and presenting data reflecting intersecting inequalities.14

The literature on intersectionality and testimonies also provides for very concrete examples of how intersectional discrimination affects young people and of the limits of certain policies. Examples range from the experience of young Roma women with education 15, access to sexual health for LGBTI Muslims16, or even the question of homelessness.17

Adequacy of current regulatory responses 

With the increasing interest in multiple and intersectional discrimination, it is interesting to question the relevance of existing legislation to assess how those concept and concerns are taken into account in Europe. Some national18 and European19 administrations as well as equality bodies20 have started to research how to improve policies by integrating an intersectional approach. However, those initiatives focus mostly on gender equality policies, and are rarely translated into policies or measures21. While the intersectional perspective is increasingly used as a theoretical framework, its application to public policy progresses slowly.

18 Swedish Secretariat for Gender Research, Gender Mainstreaming with an intersectional perspective, available online: http://www.includegender.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Gender-Mainstreaming-with-an-Intersectional-Perspective-pdf.pdf

19 Forest M., Platero R. (2008) Quality in Gender+ Equality Policies, Report analyzing Intersectionality in Gender Equality Policies for Spain and the EU, Institute for Human Sciences.

20 EQUINET (2016) innovating at the intersections, Equality bodies tackling intersectional discrimination, available online: http://www.equineteurope.org/IMG/pdf/equinet_perspective_2016_-_intersectionality_final_web.pdf

21 European Commission (2015) Strategic Engagement for gender Equality 2016-2019

22 Denstad F., Youth Policy Manual, How to develop a national youth strategy, Council of Europe publishing, 2009 available online: https://pjp-eu.coe.int/documents/1017981/7110707/YP_Manual_pub.pdf/7b17e1e6-e8b6-4041-902e-3b3ad0973c45 OR; Council of Europe and European Commission, Youth Policy Essentials, Council of Europe publishing, 2017

23 Fredman, S., 2016, Intersectional Discrimination in EU gender equality and non-discrimination law, Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers

24 Fredman, ibid, p64

In the field of youth policy, practices and legal frameworks still varies greatly from one European country to another. While it is therefore difficult to assess the attention that is being paid to multiple and intersectional discrimination at national and local level, roadmap and guidelines created at European level by European Institutions or by the Council of Europe, are already indicators of the way policy are designed. It is striking to see that there has not be any attempt to develop comprehensive guidelines or research on intersectionality and youth policy based on previously mentioned models dealing with gender equality.

Recent publications from the Council of Europe or the European Union still do not to take into consideration now established research on intersectionality and policy-making. The recently published EU Youth Strategy fails to recognize that the strategy it wishes to implement is not neutral and will therefore have different impact depending on which other social category young people belong to. Similarly, Youth policy manuals and guidelines do not address the need for comprehensive data collection that would reflect the various needs of the targeted population.22

Concerning anti-discrimination law, critical assessments of existing European framework have clearly identified “severe structural obstacles to intersectional claim”23. This situation leaves parts of the population unprotected against acts of discrimination. Fredman proposes an extensive analysis of Intersectional discrimination in EU gender equality and non-discrimination law, which identifies the main challenges, including the complete fragmentation of EU anti-discrimination law in different Directives with various scope and grounds24.

The European Commission attempted to address this problem by proposing in 2008 a new anti-discrimination directive know as the Equal Treatment Directive or Horizontal Directive which would expand protection against discrimination on the grounds of age, disability, religion or belief and sexual orientation, to the areas of social protection, healthcare, education, housing and access to goods and services. The legislative process has now been on stand-by

in the Council of the European Union for 10 years despite repetitive call from NGOs to continue the negotiations.

In 2007, the European Commission also took the initiative to publish a Report on Multiple Discrimination, highlighting good practices and presenting recommendation on how to best address this type of discrimination25. It is however unclear if the European Commission has followed up on those recommendations.

25 European Commission (2007) Tackling Multiple Discrimination, Practices, policies and laws, available online: http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=776&langId=en

26 The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities have been identified as relevant examples of the integration of an intersectional perspective.

27 Symington, A., (2004), ‘Intersectionality: A Tool For Gender And Economic Justice, Facts and Issues’, The Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID)

28 Hankivsky O., Cormier R., (2011), Intersectionality and Public Policy: Some Lessons from Existing Models, Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 64, No. 1

29 Hankivsky O., (2014), An intersectionality-based policy analysis framework: critical reflections on a methodology for advancing equity, International Journal for Equity in Health, Vol. 13, No. 119, available online: https://equityhealthj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12939-014-0119-x

There are examples of international conventions26 that do take into consideration an intersectional perspective, as well as concrete proposition from legal scholar on what could be the next steps to integrate this perspective into anti-discrimination laws and practices. It is also clear that European institutions are aware of the problem of intersectional discrimination considering past research, but this interest and those initiatives have not yet had an effect on policy making.

Position of AEGEE-Europe 

AEGEE-Europe believes that young people’s identity depends on much more than just their age. It depends on their belonging to various social categories and on various factors that define their experiences and their needs. Considering young people as individuals solely defined by their age in youth policy and the fight against discrimination is no longer an option if policy makers want to achieve the ambitious goal set in their policies.

One basic idea of intersectionality is “that a person’s experiences with a multitude of factors, such as race, gender, ability, age and socio-economic location, can interact or intersect in ways that can either advantage or disadvantage the person’s well-being and development”27 and therefore also impact if and how they benefit from policies aiming at supporting their well-being and development.

To truly understand the experience of young people and create policies that protects them and gives them the opportunity to become active members of society, policy makers need to incorporate an intersectional approach at all stages of the policy-making process28. An intersectional approach offers the necessary tools to critically assess existing policies, understand the intersection of social categories and fight against complex mechanism of oppression and discrimination. Intersectionality encourages policy makers to examine established practices – such as the focus on singular identities or categories – and forces us to answer questions such as: how policy affects diverse population, who is targeted by existing legislation, what inequities and privileges are created by current policy responses and so on29.

Without concrete changes in policy-making frameworks, anti-discrimination laws and youth policies are failing to truly challenge oppressive and discriminatory structures or are even reinforcing those structures by designing policies benefiting to the most privileged. Youth policies and anti-discrimination laws complement each other in fostering structural change for new generation. It is therefore imperative that they are designed to reach all young people.

Recommendations 

AEGEE-Europe recommends that:

Relevant European and National authorities drastically improve qualitative and quantitative data collection to gather intersectional evidence. Evidence-based policy is at the core of the policy-making process and it is essential that policy-makers have access to disaggregated data on multiple and intersectional discriminations.

Relevant authorities invest resources to enable research institutions to develop user-friendly methods to translate intersectionality theories into practical frameworks for policy makers and complement existing research on intersectionality and public policy.

The European Commission continues the work started in 2007 in its Report on Tackling Multiple Discrimination30 and follows up on the its recommendations.

30 European Commission (2007) Tackling Multiple Discrimination, Practices, policies and laws, available online: http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=776&langId=en

The European Commission develop common guidelines and good practices on the adoption of an intersectional approach in policy-making.

European Member States urgently adopt the Equal Treatment Directive to make the first step toward harmonizing anti-discrimination law in the EU

Governments commit to work on anti-discrimination legislation that include all forms of discrimination, irrespective of grounds, as explicitly outlined in Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as well as guidelines outlining methods to ensure that cases of multiple and intersectional discrimination are better handled.

The European Union and the Council of Europe continue to fund projects empowering youth organisation to work on discrimination, following the example of the Council of Europe’s Priorities for the 2018-2019 programme of activities that integrated Multiple discrimination and intersectionality as one of its priority.

National and European policy-makers involve youth organisations in the development, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of youth and anti-discrimination policy and ensure that consultation processes are both targeted and accessible to more marginalized populations.

National authorities provide the necessary resources and build the capacity of equality bodies in addressing multiple discrimination.

Equality bodies continue to develop and share knowledge and good practices to advocate efficiently for the adoption of an intersectional perspective.

Youth organisations develop or use existing guidelines to adopt an intersectional approach in the running of the organisation, the allocation of resources and the development of projects.

Youth organisations raise awareness and educate their members on the concept of intersectionality and promote the use of an intersectional approach in the organisation of trainings and events.

Bibliography and resources: 

European Commission (2007) Tackling Multiple Discrimination, Practices, policies and laws, available online: http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=776&langId=en

European Commission (2008), Proposal for a Council Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation, COM(2008)0426, available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52008PC0426

Council of Europe (2015), Access of Young People from disadvantage neighbourhoods to social rights CM/Rec(2015)3, available online: https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=090000168066671e

European Commission (2015) Strategic Engagement for gender Equality 2016-2019, available online: https://ec.europa.eu/anti-trafficking/eu-policy/strategic-engagement-gender-equality-2016-2019_en

European Commission (2018), Engaging, Connecting and Empowering young people: a new EU Youth Strategy, COM(2018) 269, available online: https://ec.europa.eu/youth/sites/youth/files/youth_com_269_1_en_act_part1_v9.pdf

European Commission (2018), Commission Staff Working Document accompanying the document Engaging, Connecting and Empowering young people: a new EU Youth Strategy, available online: https://ec.europa.eu/youth/sites/youth/files/youth_swd_169_part_6_2_en_autre_document_travail_service_part6_v4.pdf

Swedish Secretariat for Gender Research, Gender Mainstreaming with an intersectional perspective, available online: http://www.includegender.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Gender-Mainstreaming-with-an-Intersectional-Perspective-pdf.pdf

EQUINET (2016) innovating at the intersections, Equality bodies tackling intersectional discrimination, available online: http://www.equineteurope.org/IMG/pdf/equinet_perspective_2016_-_intersectionality_final_web.pdf

European Youth Forum (2016), Policy paper on Equality and non-discrimination https://www.youthforum.org/sites/default/files/2017-11/0099-16_Policy_Paper_Equality_Non-discrimination_FINAL2_0.pdf

ENAR (2018), Intersectionality and policy-making on discrimination in the European Union, available online: http://www.enar-eu.org/Intersectionality-Why-EU-policy-makers-should-adopt-an-intersectional-approach

European Youth Forum (2014), Survey on “Youth and Multiple Discrimination in Europe”, available online: https://www.youthforum.org/sites/default/files/2017-12/Survey-on-Youth-and-Multiple-Discrimination%20(1).pdf

FEANTSA (2017) Homeless in Europe, LGBTIG Homelessness, The Magazine of FEANTSA, available online: https://www.feantsa.org/download/fea-008-17-magazine_v33480239002912617830.pdf

FRA (2011), EU-MIDIS Data in Focus Report 5: Multiple discrimination, available online : http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2011/eu-midis-data-focus-report-5-multiple-discrimination

IGLYO, (2014) Intersectionality toolkit, available online: https://www.asgi.it/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Inter-Toolkit1.pdf

IGLYO (2015), Position paper on Intersectionality, available online: http://www.iglyo.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/IGLYO-Position-Paper-Intersectionality.pdf

Bullock S., Brestovansky M., Lenco P., Inclusion, Diversity and Equality in Youth Work, The Principles and Approaches, RIDE project, University of Gloucestershire, available online: http://rideproject.eu/media/ride-the-principles-approaches-en.pdf

Crenshaw, K. (1989) Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics

Denstad F., Youth Policy Manual, How to develop a national youth strategy, Council of Europe publishing, 2009 available online: https://pjp-eu.coe.int/documents/1017981/7110707/YP_Manual_pub.pdf/7b17e1e6-e8b6-4041-902e-3b3ad0973c45

Forest M., Platero R. (2008) Quality in Gender+ Equality Policies, Report analyzing Intersectionality in Gender Equality Policies for Spain and the EU, Institute for Human Sciences.

Fredman, S., (2016) Intersectional Discrimination in EU gender equality and non-discrimination law, Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers (European Commission) , European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/d73a9221-b7c3-40f6-8414-8a48a2157a2f/language-en

Hankivsky O., Cormier R., (2011), Intersectionality and Public Policy: Some Lessons from Existing Models, Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 64, No. 1

Hankivsky O., (2014), An intersectionality-based policy analysis framework: critical reflections on a methodology for advancing equity, International Journal for Equity in Health, Vol. 13, No. 119, available online: https://equityhealthj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12939-014-0119-x

Nagy, A. (2015), Creating a platform for Romani women and girls: Making them heard and seen through education, Commission on the Status of Women (Fifty-ninth session)

Parken, A. (2010), A multi-strand approach to promoting equalities and human rights in policy making, Policy & Politics, Volume 38, Number 1

Symington, A., 2004, ‘Intersectionality: A Tool For Gender And Economic Justice, Facts and Issues’, The Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID)

Crenshaw K. (2015), Why intersectionality can’t wait, The Washington Post, available online: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-theory/wp/2015/09/24/why-intersectionality-cant-wait/

Khan, T. (2018), Sexual health and LGBTI Muslims, Blog ILGA-Europe, available online: https://www.ilga-europe.org/blog/sexual-health-and-lgbti-muslims

1. Introduction

AEGEE (Association des Etats Généraux des Etudiants de l’Europe/European Students’ Forum) was created in 1985 with the vision of creating a unified Europe, based on democracy and a respect for human rights, by bringing together students with different cultural backgrounds. Today, AEGEE is Europe’s largest interdisciplinary youth organisation with 40 countries, 200 cities, and 13,000 friends. The extensive AEGEE network provides the ideal platform for young volunteers to work together on cross-border activities such as international conferences, seminars, exchanges, training courses and case study trips. To combat the challenges young people are currently facing in Europe, AEGEE’s work focuses on four main areas. The main focus areas of the strategic plan of AEGEE-Europe 2017-2020 are: European Citizenship, Civic Education, Youth Development, Equal Rights (1).

This policy paper is part of the focus area of Youth Development and has the purpose to highlight the importance of transversal skills and competences for young people in a modern Europe, to present the challenges they face and to state the position of AEGEE-Europe followed by recommendations to different stakeholders.

Transversal competences are the skills, knowledge and attitudes relevant to a broad range of occupations and sectors. They are also defined as the basic, essential, cross-thematic, cross-curricular or 21st century skills and competences (2)

2. The growing importance of transversal skills and competences

In order to understand why transversal skills and competences have become more important, examining the context of the world young people live in provides the answers.

First of all, the world is changing and it has its influence on the lives of young people as well. Five global forces will influence the way we live and work according to Linda Gratton, Professor of Management Practice at London Business School (3). The five forces are are:

• The force of technology (rapid technological developments that change all aspects of our lives)
• The force of globalisation (e.g. urbanisation, an ever-increasing global marketplace for talent and work, but also continuously growing competition and fragmentation)
• The force of demography and longevity (global migration increases and people live longer, healthier and more productive)
• The force of society (as the world changes, society changes and the way people view their lives and their communities as well)
• The force of energy resources (the challenge of the short term versus the long term, increasing energy costs, a rapidly changing climate and a culture of sustainability)

As a logical result, these global forces also effect Europe as is shown the ‘White Paper on the Future of Europe’ (4), a whitepaper that describes how Europe might look like by 2025.

Besides the global forces, the so-called student-to-work transition is also part the context for most young people. And it is quite important since the transition period from being student to having a working life plays a key role in later career success (5).

One of the effects of the global forces is their influence on the student-to-work transition. It is likely that young people will enter a labour market that is changing to a more and more dynamic environment, in which they will need to pro-actively manage their own career. The increasing importance of flexibility and the ability to employ yourself make the modern career more complex than it was before (6). Many jobs that exist at this moment didn’t exist a decade ago and there will probably be new ways of employment in the future. It is likely that children who now enter primary school will have jobs that don’t exist yet (4). On top of that, the school-to-work transition also brings other challenges such as developing a personal identity, searching for work that fits them, and going through the organisational socialisation process (7).

In order to cope with the challenges young people face in a modern Europe, they need to be equipped with a broad set of skills and knowledge that they can acquire and develop throughout life, instead of a fixed set of skills or knowledge, and they need the ability to adapt to change (8-11).

3. Important transversal skills and competences for young people

The image that the previous section paints makes it clear that living in a modern Europe is about the ability to adapt to the environment. Which transversal skills and competences do young people need to master to be able to adapt themselves to a dynamic context of life and work? It is hard to give a clear answer, although different sources have done research followed by recommendation for today’s youth. This section will show some of the recommendations that follow up on the statements made in the previous section, not excluding other transversal skills and competences that might also be important.

3.1 Transversal skills and competences for lifelong learning

As a measure against the changing context and their influence on the lives of young people, the European Parliament and Council set out a recommendation on the key competences for lifelong learning. In the recommendation they defined 8 key competences that are considered important for every European to develop and update throughout their lives to be able to adapt to change. They are based on the need for personal fulfilment and development, active citizenship, social inclusion and employment (9):

• Communication in mother tongue
• Communication in foreign languages
• Mathematical competence and basic competences in science and technology
• Digital competence
• Learning to learn
• Social and civic competences
• Sense of initiative and entrepreneurship
• Cultural awareness and expression

The recommendation encourages Member States to make it part of their lifelong learning strategies, and was reviewed in January 2018 (9). The key competences also function as the building blocks for further learning and career development (12).

3.2 Transversal skills and competences related to the school-to-work transition and career management

Looking more specifically at the requirements for young people to pro-actively cope with the challenges of the modern labour market and the need to reach a successful school-to-work-transition, several transversal competences were identified by research on this topic.

According to Nurmi et al., the competences of self-efficacy combined with personal goalsetting seem to be important during the school-to-work transition. Self-efficacy stands for the ability to judge your own capacities to execute a specific performance. Individuals with a higher sense of self-efficacy are better in preparing themselves for their career (13). Since young people are faced with different choices and challenges, personal goalsetting helps them to stay focussed (14).

Besides reaching a successful school-to-work transition, students need to be flexible and self-managing when it comes to the modern career. Therefore students may also need to master the concepts of career adaptability and career competences (5).

Career adaptability stands for the ability of preparing for and participating in the work role and being able to cope with the unpredictable adjustments caused by the changes in work and work conditions. Career adaptability helps young people to take advantage of opportunities and deal with barriers and setbacks (15), and is an important resource for reemployment (16) and finding a higher quality job (17). There are four competences which are important in mastering career adaptability and can be developed by the individual (15):

• career concern (looking at your planning and future)
• career control (making the right decisions and knowing what direction to go)
• career curiosity (being curious about alternative paths)
• career confidence (having confidence to be able to overcome obstacles to achieve career goals)

As well as career adaptability, career competences can also be developed by the individual. Although they might look similar, career adaptability is primarily about adapting to constant changes in the career while career competences help to match personal competences with those necessary in a successful career (14). Six career competences prove to be most important for young people (18):

• reflection on motivation (reflection on values, passions, and motivations about your career)
• reflection on qualities (reflection on strengths and shortcomings)
• networking (being aware of your network)
• self-profiling (presenting your knowledge, abilities, and skills to others)
• work exploration (exploring work-related and career-related opportunities)
• career control (setting goals and planning how to fulfill them)

3.3 Transversal skills and competences related to international careers

Taken the influence of the global forces in consideration, especially globalisation, young people might also need to master transversal skills and competences related to international career paths. EU Careers, the European Personnel Selection Office, focusses on 8 professional skills and general competences in their recruitment process to select the best applicants. According to the consultation between AEGEE-Europe and EU Careers, these competences are also considered to be important in other international careers (19):

• Analysis and problem solving
• Communicating
• Delivering quality and results
• Learning and development
• Prioritising and organising
• Resilience
• Working with others
• Leadership

4. Current challenges in providing young people with transversal skills and competences

4.1 Introduction

The way in which teaching and learning takes place has evolved rapidly in the last two decades, and providing young people with the right set of transversal skills and competences will need a new approach. Especially the use of technology has a big impact on formal, non-formal and informal learning (9). Young people are now able to learn from longer distances and have access to more information. They also increasingly learn in settings outside formal education, while these learning experiences are often not recognised (12). Opportunities to acquire competences have grown and therefore collaboration between formal an non-formal learning settings is required to make better use of these new opportunities (9).

Furthermore, the need for key skills and competences is dynamic, as it will change through time depending on the new context young people will enter. This means that the way education, training and learning is organised and assessed needs to be updated from time to time. Being able to respond to changing needs in competences will continue in the lives of young people as they grow older, therefore young people need to be prepared to continue learning throughout their lives (9).

Experiences on practices and challenges regarding transversal skills and competences were measured in a survey that AEGEE released among its members (students and graduates, mostly between the age of 18-30). Members from 20 different countries across Europe replied, representing a wide range of study fields. Results show that there is a big gap between transversal skills and competences members find important and which they learn(ed) in university. They seem to be open to various ways of learning as 89% wants to learn transversal skills and competences in non-formal and informal settings, 79% in university (internships included), and 56% wants to learn them during their professional job. However, only 15,4% of the members says that skills and competences learned in non-formal education is recognised by their university, while 83,7% of the members want the university to recognise it (in terms of certificates or creditpoints). Furthermore 39% of the members doesn’t (and didn’t) feel prepared for the job they want, of which 66% says it is because university is too theoretical and is too far from the ‘real world’. 39% of the members does feel prepared of which 46% says it is only because of the combination with skills learned outside university in non-formal education. As a possible solution, 40% of the members want policy makers on European and national level to providing more support towards their development of transversal skills. Most popular mentioned options are: financial support, providing courses on transversal skills in and outside university, recognition of non-formal and informal learning, and creating awareness among students on the importance and opportunities regarding transversal skills.

Given the statements made in the introduction, which are based on various sources including the survey AEGEE released, there seem to be two main challenges to make better use of the new opportunities: modernisation of education systems, and validation and recognition of transversal skills and competences. But what exactly are the priorities in modernising the current education systems, and what is the current status quo of the validation and recognition of transversal skills and competences in formal, non-formal and informal learning?

Modernising education systems

Since education systems play such an important role in preparing young people with the right set of knowledge and skills since their early childhood (20), attention should be paid to the way transversal skills and competences are organised throughout every layer of education and training systems.

In fact, the foundation for personal development and more easily acquiring skills throughout the entire life begins in early childhood education and care. This proves that quality education from earliest stages on are crucial in providing young people with the right set of skills in later stages of their lives. Although the EU average participation rate of early education and childhood care of 94.3% (measured in 2014) is something to be proud of, but children from disadvantaged backgrounds and minority groups are still underrepresented (20). This results in some young people having a disadvantage from the beginning in their proces to master transversal skills.

Many education systems that follow up on early childhood education and care struggle to respond to the changes our societies and economies are undergoing. Digitalisation and the increasing diversity among pupils, among other things, require new school curricula and innovative ways of teaching and learning (20).

When it comes to mastering the key competences for lifelong learning, it is mainly focussed on formal learning in primary and secundary education levels, and less in other levels and forms of formal and non-formal education and training, as results from consultations with stakeholders (education ministers and non-governmental stakeholders, among others) show (9). At the same time, too many students from Europe’s higher education systems graduate with poor quality basic skills (e.g. literacy, numeracy, digital skills). They also lack important transversal skills and cooperation at higher education systems with schools, vocational education institutions and adult learning is limited (10). Another challenge is that too many teachers in higher education lack pedagogical training and long term support in their professional development (10). High-quality teaching is essential in providing transversal skills and competences in higher education (20), therefore it is necessary that teachers are supported to be able to continuously adapt to changing curricula.

To a great extent, progression in the development of education and training systems in Europe is in the hands of national policy makers (20). The EU can assist the efforts of countries in Europe to modernise education and training systems, but they decide for themselves on how they implement recommendations (21). Nonetheless, all countries have a shared interest that these reforms make progress and lead to results, and efforts are being made to do so. On the other hand education and training institutions, and perhaps policy makers on regional levels, could also take action without having to wait on efforts of national policy makers. However, this depends on the level of bureaucracy and autonomy these institutions deal with.

Validation and recognition of transversal skills and competences

For finding a job, study abroad or keeping track of progress made on a broad set of skills, it is important that young people have a clear overview available of their (transversal) skills and qualifications. The European Union supports the transparency and recognition of knowledge, skills, and competences in various ways to make it easier to study and work anywhere in Europe. One of its contributions is the European Qualification Framework (EQF), which makes it easier to compare National Qualification Frameworks (NQF’s) across different countries in Europe. The EQF and NQF’s are not limited to formal education, as they cover qualifications at all levels and in all sub-systems of education and training. 39 European countries are currently developing and implementing their National Qualification Framework of which 21 National Qualification Frameworks were considered operational in 2017. A National Qualification Framework is considered operational when it is integrated in the national education and training systems. It is expected that these countries will continue to develop their qualification systems in order to keep up with changes and new qualifications (22).

In formal education, credit systems for higher education (ECTS) and for vocational education and training (ECVET) were based on the European Qualification Framework and are now widely used and developed throughout Europe for validation and recognition of learning outcomes, including transversal skills and competences. In only a few countries within the EU the use of ECTS is not compulsory for all higher education institutions (23). 15 countries have credit systems compatible with ECVET while 14 countries are either developing compatible credit systems or are testing the technical components (24). But it is also important that young people can demonstrate what they have learned as an addition to formal education, so that this is valued and can be used.

Therefore, the 2012 Council Recommendation on validation encourages Member States to work on national arrangements for validation of non-formal and informal learning by 2018 (25). One of the benefits of validation of non-formal and informal learning is that it helps to fight social exclusion by providing a way for early school leavers, the unemployed and others at risk, particularly low-skilled adults, to validate their skills (26). Authorities on national and regional levels as well as sectoral bodies recognise its importance and have introduced many arrangements for validating non-formal and informal learning. Cooperation between formal education systems, National Qualifications Frameworks, employers and the third sector make it possible to gain recognition in formal education in the form of (partly) qualifications, creditpoints, certificates or even acces to formal education (26). Currently, 17 countries implemented validation arrangements to assess non-formally or informally acquired skills and competences which are based on standards used in formal education (22).

Progress is being made but there are still some challenges ahead in order to meet the 2012 Council recommendation principles. The update from 2016 on the European Inventory validation of non-formal and informal learning presents the most recent progress and challenges and comes to a few conclusions:

• “The key message is that Member States are gradually placing validation of non-formal and informal learning higher on their policy agendas.
• Education remains the main sector in which validation is developed, but there are also numerous initiatives in the third sector. Labour market initiatives are less common, and involvement of employers is still limited.
• Information on the number of beneficiaries and participants in validation is still limited, which restricts potential for adequate monitoring, cost-benefit analysis and impact assessment of validation.
• The main challenges to meeting the 2018 deadline are in professional development of validation practitioners and prioritisation of disadvantaged groups; these principles have comparatively low activity and reach.” (26)

In order to help member states to establish national validation arrangements by 2018, the European Commission and Cedefop published guidelines on validation in 2015 (27). A new update on the European Inventory validation of non-formal and informal learning is planned for 2018.

5. Current practices in providing young people with transversal skills and competences

Luckily there are several positive developments which support the development of transversal skills and competences among young people. Examples are policies, supporting EU agencies and other initiatives setup by the European Union and other international institutions. This section provides a small selection of these developments with the intention to give some insight on what is already being done.

• The European Commission is responsible for proposing and enforcing legislation as well as by implementing policies and the EU budget (28).
• The strategic framework for European cooperation in Education and Training 2020 (ET 2020) is the current foundation in strengthening education and training systems. “ET 2020 is a forum for exchanges of best practices, mutual learning, gathering and dissemination of information and evidence of what works, as well as advice and support for policy reforms” (11).
• The new Skills Agenda for Europe supports the strategic importance of skills for sustaining jobs, growth and competitiveness and strengthens existing initiatives to assist Member States, individuals and organisations. They launched 10 actions designed to make the right training, skills and support available to people in the EU, by (12):
  • “improving the quality and relevance of training and other ways of acquiring skills;
  • making skills more visible and comparable;
  • improving information and understanding of trends and patterns in demands for skills and jobs (skills intelligence) to enable people to make better career choices, find quality jobs and improve their life chances.”
• The 2012 Council Recommendation on validation of non-formal and informal learning promotes better validation and transferability of skills and competences gained through informal and non-formal learning on the European labour market (25).
• The first vision on a European Education Area was set out in the Commission Communication on Strengthening European Identity through Education and Culture (2017). The idea is to establish a European Education Area by 2025 based on trust, mutual recognition, cooperation and exchange of best practices, mobility and growth (8).
• The First Education Summit took place in January 2018 to discuss the first steps of a European Education Area. The summit was joined by European Ministers of Education and different stakeholders in education (29).
• The Council recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning is a key reference document for the development of competence-oriented education, learning and training (9).
• As explained in the previous section, the European Qualifications Framework is the bridge between National Qualification Frameworks so that qualifications are understandable across different countries (24).
• The Europass Framework helps European citizens to present their skills and qualifications by offering different CV formats or by using an European Skills Passport (30).
• The Commission Communication on the Modernisation of Education of 2016 set out action aimed to improve and modernise education systems in order to assure high quality education (20).
• The Council recommendation on tracking graduates helps to improve the collection of data from graduates which can be used to modernise education systems and to improve the student-to-work transition (31).
• Cedefop is the European Union’s reference centre for vocational education and training. Cedefop is working with the European Commission, Member States and social partners. Its mission is to support development of European vocational education and training policies and to contribute to their implementation (32).
• The European Training Foundation is a decentralised agency of the European Union and helps with the education and training systems in EU partner countries such as Armenia, Georgia, Azerbijan, Russia, Turkey, Belarus, Moldova and Ukraïne (33).

Finally, youth organisations belong to the practices in providing young people with transversal skills and competences (34). Besides being a provider of non-formal education, there are also various examples of skills related projects where youth organisations were involved. Two of them are the GR-EAT project and the COY project that AEGEE-Europe participated in, in cooperation with institutions and other youth organisations. The projects aimed to recognize and validate informal learning to make it valuable for the labour market (35-36).

6. Position of AEGEE-Europe

AEGEE-Europe recognises the importance of transversal skills and competences for young people as it makes them adaptable to change and helps them to cope with the challenges they face in a modern Europe. Therefore AEGEE-Europe supports policies and good practices initiated by the European Union and other international institutions that help European countries to provide important transversal skills and competences to young people.

Although progress is being made, AEGEE-Europe believes that the added value of providing young people with transversal skills and competences can be only made full use of when all stakeholders including national governments, policy makers, education and training institutions, employers, and young people are aware its importance, recognise its added value and take action to implement it in their systems and lives.

AEGEE-Europe supports modernisation of education and training systems in order to provide all young people with the right set of transversal skills and competences.

In particular AEGEE-Europe supports and encourages:

• Formal education institutions to recognise and validate transversal skills and competences gained through formal, non-formal and informal learning. Collaboration between providers of formal an non-formal learning is required to make better use of new opportunities.
• A structured and holistic approach between different formal education and training systems to provide the most important transversal skills and competences throughout all layers of formal education and training.
• Preparation of young people for a succesful school-to-work transition, self-managing careers, and the ability to continue learning throughout their lives.
• Timely response to changing needs in competences. The way education, training and learning is organised and assessed needs to be updated from time to time.
• Offering pedagogical training and long term support in the professional development of teachers. Especially since it is necessary to enable teachers to go along with the modernisation efforts and its influence on their jobs.
• Inclusiveness and equal chances in formal education and training systems.

Finally, AEGEE-Europe acknowledges that it is important for young people to be able to demonstrate what they have learned in all forms of education and training. Therefore AEGEE-Europe believes that recognition and validation of transversal skills and competences learned in formal, non-formal and informal of education and training should also take place outside formal education. For this reason AEGEE-Europe supports cooperation on qualification frameworks like the European Qualification Framework and National Qualification Frameworks that make it easier to compare and understand qualification levels from all learning experiences throughout Europe. Additionally, AEGEE-Europe strives for better integration of qualification systems in the labour market as the benefits of qualifications of transversal skills and competences would even be bigger when the labour market would make better use of it and recognises the benefits.

7. Recommendations

7.1 Recommendations to European institutions

The recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning can be seen as a success since it has influenced the majority of countries in the EU in their policies and its relevance is confirmed by stakeholders (9). Following up on this experience, AEGEE-Europe encourages European institutions to research the possibility of a recommendation on key competences directly related to (international) career management with the intention to build on sustainable careers for (young) European citizens who will become part of an increasingly dynamic and complex labour market.

7.2 Recommendations to national governments and education and training institutions

AEGEE-Europe notices that progress is being made and good efforts are put in action to provide young people in Europe with transversal skills and competences, and encourages national governments and education and training institutions to continue to do so. But at the same time there are still some challenges. Following up on the previous section, AEGEE-Europe recommends national governments and education and training institutions to cooperate on international and national level on the modernisation of education and training systems and on the recognition and validation of transversal skills and competences learned in formal, non-formal and informal education and training.

AEGEE-Europe encourages national governments and education and training institutions to make use of opportunities and guidance provided by the EU and other international institutions. AEGEE-Europe advocates for mutual learning and sharing of best practices between countries to inspire each other to move forward, for example on the further operationalisation of National Qualification Frameworks in countries that are still working on it. In order to identify the needs and priorities on national level, involvement from all stakeholder including employers, the labourmarket, graduates and young people is important. Cooperation with stakeholders is essential for the quality, acceptance and relevance of qualifications.

Finally, AEGEE-Europe believes that creating a stronger awareness among young people on the importance and opportunities in learning, validation and recognition of transversal skills and competences will help them to understand the added value and pro-actively make use of these opportunities. Therefore AEGEE-Europe recommends national governments and education and training institutions to actively promote the importance and opportunities regarding transversal skills and competences.

7.3 Recommendations to employers and the labour market

Labour market initiatives to validate transversal skills and competences are not common, and involvement of employers is still limited. While different impact studies prove there is a considerable potential in recruitment, career management and recognition of work-based learning and training (22). Other benefits for employers come from keeping the workforce adaptable to change which reduces different types of costs on the long term. Anyhow, the labour market plays a key role in the development of transversal skills and competences of young Europeans who start their careers, besides the possible benefits. Therefore, AEGEE-Europe wants to emphasize their responsibility on the development, recognition and validation of transversal skills and competences and encourages the labour market and employers to take a bigger step in that direction.

7.4 Recommendations to youth organisations

Youth organisations play an important role as providers of non-formal education for young people in Europe (34). Now that there are new opportunities in recognising and validating non-formal learning, AEGEE-Europe recommends to youth organisations to explore them and help their members to benefit from it. For example in close cooperation with schools and higher education systems. Furthermore, AEGEE-Europe calls upon youth organisations to participate in projects and initiatives that support recognition and validation of non-formal and informal learning, and non-formal learning itself.

7.5 Recommendations to young people

Finally, AEGEE-Europe encourages young people to make use of the opportunities available (37). A lot of learning, recognition and validation opportunities can also be found outside formal education and outside one’s country of origin, for example by taking part in mobility programs. Young people should strive to continue learning throughout their lives and use transversal skills and competences as a way to adapt to change and to have sustainable careers.

Annex 1: Policy Trip

As part of the creation of this policy paper, the Policy Officer (Steven Glasbeek) and the Working Group Coordinator (Svenja van der Tol) visited Brussels to meet several youth organisations and EU institutions as input for our Policy Paper on Youth Development. They met live with the Lifelong Learning Platform (LLLP), EU Careers, Thinkyoung, Erasmus Student Network (ESN) and European Movement International (EMI).

They also held Skype meetings with Cedefop experts Stelina Chatzichristou and Dmitrijs Kulss, and Youth for Exchange and Understanding (YEU) after the policy trip. The purpose of all these different meetings was to gather direct input for our policy paper, and to discuss potential ways of cooperation.

We would like to thank all the organisations for the input they have provided during our live/Skype meetings, and for the feedback they have given. We look forward to further cooperation in the future on sharing the message sent by this policy paper!

Annex 2: Glossary

Young people

People between the age of 16 and 30.

Formal learning

“Learning that occurs in an organised and structured environment (such as in an education or training institution or on the job) and is explicitly designated as learning (in terms of objectives, time or resources). Formal learning is intentional from the learner’s point of view. it typically leads to certification (38).”

Non-formal learning

“Learning embedded in planned activities not explicitly designated as learning (in terms of learning objectives, learning time or learning support). Non-formal learning is intentional from the learner’s point of view. Non-formal learning outcomes may be validated and may lead to certification (38).”

Informal learning

“Learning resulting from daily activities related to work, family or leisure. It is not organised or structured in terms of objectives, time or learning support. Informal learning is in most cases unintentional from the learner’s perspective. Informal learning outcomes may be validated and certified (38).”

Transversal competences

The skills, knowledge and attitudes relevant to a broad range of occupations and sectors (2).

Annex 3: Bibliography

1)         AEGEE-Europe. What is AEGEE?. Retrieved from AEGEE-Europe: Europeans Students’ Forum: http://www.aegee.org/about-aegee/

2)         Unesco International Bureau of Education (2013). IBE Glossary of Curriculum Terminology. Retrieved from: http://www.ibe.unesco.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/IBE_GlossaryCurriculumTerminology2013_eng.pdf

3)         Gratton, L. (2014). The shift. London: William Collins.

4)         European Commission (2017), White Paper on the Future of Europe, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/white_paper_on_the_future_of_europe_en.pdf

5)         Akkermans, J., Nikänen, M., & Vuori, J. (2015). Practice Makes Perfect? Antecedents and Consequences of an Adaptive School-to-Work Transition. In Promoting Older Workers’ Job Retention and Health by Working Hour Patterns (p. 65-86).

6)         Vuori, J., Toppinen-Tanner, S., & Mutanen, P. (2011). Effects of resource-building group intervention on career management and mental health in work organizations: randomized controlled field trial. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 273-286.

7)         Koivisto, P., Vuori, J., & Nykyri, E. (2007). Effects of the school-to-work group method among young people. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 70, 277-296.

8)         Commission Communication on Strenghtening European Identity through Education and Culture – The European Commission’s contribution to the Leaders’ meeting in Gothenburg, 17 november 2017. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/communication-strengthening-european-identity-education-culture_en.pdf

9)         Proposal for a Council Recommendation of 17 January 2018 on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning, https://ec.europa.eu/education/sites/education/files/recommendation-key-competences-lifelong-learning.pdf

10)       Commission Communication on a Renewed EU agenda for higher education, https://ec.europa.eu/education/sites/education/files/he-com-2017-247_en.pdf

11)       2015 Joint Report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training (ET 2020) – New priorities for European cooperation in education and training, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52015XG1215%2802%29

12)       Commission Communication on a New Skills Agenda for Europe, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52016DC0381

13)       Bandura, A., Barbarabelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. Child Development, 72, 187–206.

14)       Nurmi, J., Salmela-Aro, K., & Koivisto, P. (2002). Goal importance and related achievement beliefs and emotions during the transition from vocational school to work: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 241–261.

15)       Savickas, M. L., & Porfeli, E. J. (2012). Career adapt-abilities scale: Construction, reliability, and measurement equivalence across 13 countries. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75, 661–673.

16)       Koen, J., Klehe, U. C., Van Vianen, A. E. M., Zikic, J., & Nauta, A. (2010). Job-search strategies and reemployment quality: The impact of career adaptability. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 71, 126–139.

17)       Koen, J., Klehe, U. C., & Van Vianen, A. E. M. (2012). Training career adaptability to facilitate a successful school-to-work transition. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81, 395–408.

18)       Akkermans, J., Brenninkmeijer, V., Huibers, M., & Blonk, R. W. B. (2013a). Competencies for the contemporary career: Development and preliminary validation of the career competencies questionnaire. Journal of Career Development, 40, 245–267.

19)       Entry-level graduates. Retrieved from EU Careers: https://epso.europa.eu/job-opportunities/entry-level-graduate_en

20)       Commission Communication on Improving and modernising education, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1481206862153&uri=COM:2016:941:FIN

21)       Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, (articles 165 and 166), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A12012E%2FTXT

22)       Cedefop. (2017). Briefing note – Qualifications frameworks in Europe 2017 developments. Retrieved from Cedefop: http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/sl/publications-and-resources/publications/9127

23)       Cedefop (2010). Linking credit systems and qualifications frameworks: An international comparative analysis. Luxembourg: Publications Office.

24)       Cedefop (2016). ECVET in Europe: monitoring report 2015. Luxembourg: Publications Office.

25)       Council recommendation of 20 December 2012 on the Validation of non-formal and informal learning, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32012H1222%2801%29

26)       Cedefop; European Commission; ICF (2017). European inventory on validation of non-formal and informal learning – 2016 update. Synthesis report. Luxembourg: Publications Office.

27)       Cedefop; European Commission (2015). European guidelines for validating

non-formal and Informal learning. Luxembourg: Publications Office. http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/publications-and-resources/publications/3073

28)       European Commission on Governance in the European Commission, https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/c_2017_6915_final_en.pdf

29)       European Commission. (2018). First European Education Summit. Retrieved from European Commission: https://ec.europa.eu/education/education-summit

30)       Decision No 2241/2004/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2004 on a single Community framework for the transparency of qualifications and competences (Europass), http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex%3A32004D2241

31)       Proposal for a Council recommendation on tracking graduates, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52017DC0249

32)       Cedefop (2012). Cedefop in brief. Retrieved from Cedefop: http://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/publications-and-resources/publications/8083

33)       The ETF. (2017). The ETF: An EU Agency – 2017. Retrieved from The European Training Foundation: http://www.etf.europa.eu/webatt.nsf/0/4DF2ECA7B7DCA0CDC12580E60047E8A3/$file/ETF%20in%202017.pdf

34)       European Youth Forum (2012). Study on the impact of Non-Formal Education in youth organisations on young people’s employability – executive summary. Retrieved from European Youth Forum. http://www.youthforum.org/sites/default/files/publication-pdfs/Study%2C%20No-Formal%20Education.pdf

35)       GR-EAT. The Project. Retrieved from GR-EAT: Guideline for recognition – European Advanced Tool: https://gr-eat.eu/the-project/

36)       The AEGEAN. (2014). COY Project: Certificates for Youth Workers. Retrieved from the AEGEAN: http://www.zeus.aegee.org/magazine/2014/06/03/coy-project-certificates-for-youth-workers/

37)       Rodriguez, P. H. (2015). Policy Paper – In Transition from Education to Working Life. Spring Agora Asturias: AEGEE-Europe.

38)       Cedefop (2014). Terminology of European education and training policy. Luxembourg: Publications Office.

January 30, European Parliament Brussels – the Events and Visitors’ Centre of the European Parliament saw groups of excited students from various parts of Europe entering the gates to discuss one of the most relevant and challenging topics of today’s time. The European Youth Seminar “Migration, Free Movement and Refugees – When Dreams Face Death by Drowning” held the promise to engage young people in the understanding of a very complex European issue, and offer them the space to discuss possible solutions.

Background

The European Youth Seminars of the European Parliament were launched in 2016 and have already given the opportunity to dozens of student groups to visit the European Parliament, engage and discuss relevant topics of today’s and the future of Europe, and engage directly with decision-makers from various backgrounds.

“When you hear ‘Members of the European Parliament’, it sounds like these politicians are too important and busy to talk to students like us. It was great to hear about their personal story and their passion, to learn what is their motivation to be in politics.”
– remarked one of the students from Hungary, part of the study group of the EP Seminar on Migration that brought 35 students from Hungarian high schools to #VisitEP.

Youth Seminar ‘ Migration, Free Movement of Refugees – When Dreams Face Death by Drowning ‘ .Plenary session. European Parliament Multimedia Directory

Ideas discussed

There were too many things to discuss about migration and refugees. Nevertheless, the students coming from 14 different nationalities have come up with great ideas that are reflecting the perceptions of young people. The seminar’s participants have received introduction to the topic from an expert, Joanna Apap, from the European Parliament Research Service, policy analyst on the topic of migration. In the followings, the three different Idea Labs offered space for young people to discuss: “Free movement within the EU as a citizen’s right”, “Refugees and the right to asylum”, and “Which immigration policy for the 21st century?”. During the final plenary session, participants had the chance to present their ideas to MEP Martina Dlajabová (ALDE).

Youth Seminar ‘ Migrtion, Free Movement of Refugees – When Dreams Face Death by Drowning ‘ .Plenary session. European Parliament Multimedia Directory

Ideas included city-level incentives that could support local governments in integrating refugees by employment, highlighting the importance of mobile learning opportunities, touching upon the topic of language inclusion, and calling for a stronger emphasis and education of European values as the foundation of the continent; the young participants have come up with a set of great recommendations.

Some of the ideas “could be taken straight to the European Parliament plenary” – Ms Dlabajová remarked.

Conclusion

The European Youth Seminar on Migration and Refugees has given the opportunity to 70 young people from diverse backgrounds to get more acquainted not only with the European institutional framework and Brussels, but also what it means to be an active citizen and a European. The Seminar offered to space to learn and to exchange ideas, but has offered even more: the inspiration to take action together and care about one of the most challenging topics of our time.

AEGEE / European Students’ Forum looks forward to continuing our cooperation with the European Parliament in putting young people and the citizens of Europe in the heart of decision-making in EU policies.

Some more impressions from the participants:

“What have I learnt during the seminar?
I have learnt that even though politicians in the EU did a lot so far, it is still not enough as the pace of life and changes are getting only faster and faster. Sometimes there is even not enough time to think, but only time to react to what is happening.
We all do mistakes when it comes to everyday life, but the most important is to take lessons and to improve things that have been done so far. In order to live in such a fast changing environment, we need to be very flexible, we need to respect one another and work together, only then we can move forward. Everyone one is different and have different opinions, but when it comes to the common future we should pocket our pride.
What also amazes me is that even though we are young, politicians care about our opinion on such important issues. We know that our voice also matters and that gives more courage to act.” Wiola Rudnicka (AEGEE-Warszawa)

Introduction

AEGEE / European Students’ Forum is a non-governmental, politically independent, and non-profit student organization, which has around 13,000 members from close to 200 cities and almost 40 countries all over Europe. We strive for a democratic, diverse and borderless Europe, which is socially, economically and politically integrated and values the participation of young people in its construction and development. Our main mission is to strengthen mutual understanding among young Europeans and bring Europe closer by empowering them to take an active role in the society. For this reason, AEGEE aims to create a space for dialogue and learning opportunities for young people as well as act as their representative to decision makers.

Civic Education has become an important topic for our organization, while having a twofold approach and purpose. On the one hand, we aim to increase the civic competences of AEGEE members to enable them to become responsible citizens. On the other hand, we aim to put civic education on the political agenda at all levels. In 2008, AEGEE with other organizations lobbied for the introduction of the European Citizen’s Initiative (ECI) as the first transnational participatory democratic tool of the EU. We contributed to it by initiating a project called “Take Control – Ways to democracy in Europe”. Additionally, AEGEE took part in The ECI Campaign^[1] together with many organisations such as Democracy International. Eight years later, AEGEE used the ECI to raise awareness on the topic of civic education by launching the “More than Education – Shaping Active and Responsible Citizens” European Citizens’ Initiative. The project has allowed us to develop our own civic competences and is, therefore, a great example of informal civic learning. Furthermore, the purpose of using the ECI tool has been to assess its strengths and the limitations as a tool for European citizens.

The following policy paper aims to achieve three things. First, the paper will highlight the importance of such a participatory democratic tool. Secondly, there will be a summary of the experience of young Europeans dealing with the ECI and lastly the paper will outline possible improvements for the ECI.

During the preparatory phase of the project we discovered some imperfections of the tool, therefore the development of this policy paper started in the initial stages of the ECI – More Than Education campaign.

The European Commission decided to address the issues related to the ECI and launched an official consultation process, which AEGEE also participated in. As we are primarily an organisation that focuses on youth, this policy paper highlights a youth perspective of the ECI. Moreover, we mention future activities that will form part of an overall strategy.

In the first section of this paper, some aspects of the wider social and political context are described, which highlight the relevance of the ECI and other forms of democratic innovation and citizen participation. This follows a short section characterising the most important details of organizing an ECI.

The relevance of direct participation in policy making, tools like referendums and citizens’ initiatives was examined in a survey among AEGEE members. Its results and implications are presented in the third section.

Following this, the story of the “More than Education – Shaping Active and Responsible Citizens” ECI organized by AEGEE members is detailed. Based on a questionnaire and interviews with members involved in the campaign, the main benefits of the tool are described and faced obstacles are identified in order to form recommendations for further improvement of the tool.

As a conclusion, the final position of AEGEE and recommendations towards the European Union and member states for the development of the ECI are stated in the last two sections.

01| Contextualisation

Today’s Europe is a multicultural society that is experiencing constant changes in terms of various socio-economic factors such as the intensive migratory flow to Europe from non-European countries as well as migratory flows between European countries. Furthermore, effects of the financial crisis of 2008 are still perceptible in many regions. Potential radicalisation among marginalized groups and the extremist movements have become a serious threat to Europe. The EU as an actor has an important role to play in tackling cross-border challenges. However, the EU itself is challenged by other issues (for instance by the Brexit) and this puts any further development of the EU into question.

Although 68% of the Europeans identify themselves as citizens of the EU, only 56% are optimistic about the future of the EU and less than half, 42%, think that their voices count on the EU level [1]. This shows that many Europeans are still not fully aware of the European civic identity. The democratic governance of some European countries was challenged through social movements like the 15M in Spain or the Syntagma protests in Greece, which strived for better political representation. These revealing issues or even crises of European democracy contributed to the rise of populist politics.

It seems that to face these challenges a great amount of flexibility is required and new political, economic and social solutions need to be found. Direct democracy can play an important role in these processes at the local, regional, national and even European level. However, we should be aware that direct democratic procedures have a long-term political cultural learning effect. People have to first acknowledge and practice such forms of decision-making, in particular with the help of public debates. During this process they are likely to develop a different and more cooperative view on their life, community and society they are living in [2].

If bearing in mind the literal meaning of the word ‘democracy’ as the rule of the people, ‘direct democracy’ aims to achieve the most direct translation of the people’s will into political decisions that is practically possible [3]. Therefore, direct democracy can be described as a political system, which enables citizens to decide for themselves whether to adopt or change laws [4]. Similarly, participatory democracy is founded on the action of citizens who can exercise some power directly and decide on issues affecting their lives, however, this does not involve voting on specific policies [5]. Most importantly both concepts allow citizens to participate directly in law and decision making processes in addition to the right to vote during elections for representatives in the parliament. Examples for direct democratic tools are referendums, recalls and examples for participatory democracy are citizens’ juries, town meetings or citizens’ assemblies and initiatives. The ECI is also considered to be a participatory democratic tool, since it enables the citizens from all member states to propose legislation to the European Commission, but it does not include voting on a given issue [6].

02| The European Citizens’ Initiative: One year, one million signatures

The ECI was introduced in 2012. Since then, more than 50 Citizens’ Committees have tried to launch their own initiatives and collect the million signatures required. Any ECI can be successful if at least one million signatures are collected. So far four of them succeeded. In the following section the procedure of the ‘One year, one million signatures’ is described.

The main body that manages the whole procedure of an ECI is the Citizens’ Committee, which consists of at least seven EU citizens coming from minimum of seven member states. They have to request the European Commission to register their initiative. The Commission has two months to decide whether the proposed initiative complies with the requirements set out in the Regulation^[2] 211/2011 on the citizens’ initiative. In the meantime, the organisers have to set up a collection system and have it certified. If the aforementioned conditions are met, the Commission registers the ECI and the collection begins. One million EU citizens have to endorse the related idea of an ECI within one year from the date of registration for it to be successful. A minimum number of signatures^[3] has to be met in at least seven member states – these countries being at the choice of the Committee. Organisers can collect the signatures, to be seen as statements of support, either online or on paper. Citizens who want to support an ECI must be eligible to vote in the European Parliament elections. After the one year period has expired, the organisers have to have the offline signatures verified by the national authorities of individual EU Member States. Only then can the ECI be submitted to the Commission.

The consequence of a successful ECI is the following: Representatives of the Commission have to meet with the organisers to allow them to further explain their objectives, the organisers can present their ECI at a public hearing in the European Parliament and finally, the Commission must respond to the ECI. The response needs to spell out arguments for the Commission’s decision whether to act on the ECI or not. The Commission is not obliged to take any positive action regarding the subject-matter of an ECI which, as will be further explained, presents one of the biggest issues in the current regulation.

The tool itself has provided a new platform on which Europeans can share their ideas and spread their beliefs. Yet, the before mentioned procedure is fraught with technical, administrative and legal difficulties that potentially inhibit the usefulness of the tool.

03| Relevance of the European Citizens’ Initiative in the eyes of young people

In order to find out AEGEE´s position on the matter of direct and participatory democracy in Europe, a survey was conducted among 124 AEGEE members from 20 countries.

More than 70% of the participants believe that it is important to be actively engaged in politics on local, national or international level. However, only 5,6% of the respondents thought that they can have a big influence on European politics in general. The majority believes that young people can have only a little or some influence.

Having the possibility to participate directly in the legal decision making processes and to vote during elections was important for 75,6% of the participants. Only 12,1% of participants stated that it was not important at all or less important. Answers were similar when participants were asked about having this possibility at the European level. One of the participants highlighted two main reasons behind the importance of such a tool. For instance the control of the governance and the possibility to raise awareness about certain topics: “The only way a real democracy can work is by having the correct tools to control what politicians make. There should be a way to let our governments know that we do not agree with decisions they have made and to put on the table something that is being ignored.”

The results regarding the specific types of direct or participatory tools are more heterogeneous. 42,7% of the respondents thought that referendums are very or rather useful, 31,5%, stated that referendums are rather unuseful or not useful at all, and the rest 25,8% were neutral on this question. These results might be influenced by the recent use of referendums in some European countries with controversial outcomes, such as the Brexit or the referendum carried out in the Netherlands on the approval of the Association Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine.

In contrast to referendums, the European Citizens’ Initiative was generally a more favoured tool among the participants of our survey. 86,83% of the respondents thought it is very or rather important than unimportant to have a right to start an ECI. “Although I’m not particularly in favour of a direct democracy, having a road into the political structures of the EU is very important. This can provide information about interests, wishes and red lines from the general population”- wrote one of the respondents. Others also identified that the ability to make your voice heard is a very important aspect of the ECI, which can also encourage people to be active citizens since they can change things through it. “The right to start an initiative is important because the motivation for many citizens to keep themselves informed about politics is directly linked to the degree of self-involvement that it requires.” In other words, an ECI can empower citizens since it also “…brings people together and motivates them to fight for their dreams/opinions/projects and not just cast a vote” and “…it also strengthens the feeling of having your voice matter and thus improves the general feeling about democracy in the EU.”

          Although the above listed comments definitely support the ECI, many participants described their concerns about the actual impact of it: “The question, for me, however is the extent to which decision-makers actually change their opinions about it. I’m not certain of the answer to this question, but that does not mean that I don’t believe that the opportunity should be cherished and used maybe more often by Europeans citizens.” Similarly: “It is important, but it requires a huge effort and the result (examination by the Commission) does not have a particular impact.”

To summarise, young people find it relevant to have an opportunity to be involved directly or through participatory tools in the decision making process in the European Union. In contrast to referendums, which seem to be controversial among young Europeans, they favour the European Citizens’ Initiative, even though its impact is still questionable. We cannot conclude from this that more direct or participatory democracy itself would help young people to feel more involved and get more engaged in politics, but it could be one possible way to it. Improving the ECI tool itself, therefore, could be a significant step in fighting the challenges that Europe is facing.

04| Case study of the AEGEE ECI

          The ECI “More than Education – Shaping Active and Responsible Citizens”^[4] was registered on the 6th October 2016, with the following subject matter and main objectives:

Subject Matter:

A set of incentive measures, including support and monitoring, to develop citizenship education in curricula on all levels of formal education throughout Europe, aimed at shaping democratic citizens.

Main objectives:

A democratic society relies on the citizens’ participation, shared values and capability of critical thinking. The Commission should support member states in their responsibility to enable young people from all backgrounds to develop competencies for participating responsibly in society. To promote cohesion, action should be coordinated throughout the Union, by setting a long-term agenda, creating benchmarks, providing support to states, doing periodic evaluations and sharing best practice.

The preparation for this ECI started more than a year before registration by gathering a motivated team, later called the ECI task force. At the beginning, the team consisted of seven people, and later on other people joined to fulfil a certain task for a longer period or to participate in a specific project or event for a shorter time. Some people also left the task force throughout the preparatory phase, due to lack of time or losing motivation. It is important to highlight that all organizers participated in the campaign as volunteers, dedicating their time and effort to the project next to their studies and other duties. Results of the online survey conducted among 18 AEGEE members actively involved in the campaign showed that the main motivation behind joining the team was first of all the topic of civic education and secondly that they could get familiar and use the ECI. Even though for many of them this was the first time working with the tool, it brought a great opportunity to learn a lot and to educate AEGEE members about it. Therefore, when examining the development of the work and the results of this ECI, we should keep in mind the aspects of voluntary work and youth involvement.

During the preparatory phase, the task force consulted various experts such as professors, partners, civil servants and other ECI organizers. For instance Carsten Berg (the ECI Campaign) helped us to get a deeper understanding of the procedure and requirements of carrying out a ECI. Although, some of them emphasised that it is not worth the effort and the ECI should be improved in many aspects, we decided to continue keeping in mind that apart from the signature collection, our experience with the ECI could be a case study for further development of the tool. The consultations with many academics working on their masters and PhD theses on the ECI, showed us that there is a big interest in revising the tool.

On the 7th of July 2016 the ECI was registered by the European Commission for the first time. The announcement of it came as a surprise and because of technical difficulties with the online collection system, and because it seemed more feasible to start the campaign after summer, the AEGEE ECI had to be withdrawn.

The withdrawal from our side was met with concern from the European Commission’s side as the Commissioners had their meeting during which they decided to allow our Initiative around the same moment we sent our withdrawal statement. A phone call from the Commission asking us to reconsider our withdrawal suggested some political interest in our ECI, but the ECI was withdrawn nonetheless.

During the next three months a new website was created and the collection system hosted by the European Commission was set up by the task force and audited by the Luxembourgish authorities. For this audit, the organisers had to come up with a security policy, write a business impact assessment, risk assessment, and risk treatment plan, which was a challenging process in order to conform to high security standards. In this process, collaboration with the technical department of the European Commission went smoothly. However, it was difficult to understand what was happening on their side, as they take care of the development, installation and auditing of the software and servers.

Brainstorming for the campaign itself started as well. During summer events, some AEGEE members were introduced to the ECI and learned more about our own initiative. Finally, in October 2016 the ECI was registered for the second time and the signature collection could be started.

It was clear for the core team that for reaching one million people willing to sign the initiative a much bigger team was needed. Hence at the beginning we tried to focus on motivating AEGEE members to join the task force or organize a local signature collection and inviting other NGOs to set up coalition to do the ECI together. However, we met a very reluctant reaction from the civil society, emphasising that ECI is not worth the effort and it has no actual impact.

Motivating others can be difficult, especially if the goal of reaching the one million signatures seems impossible to them and it was not really the aim. The Activity Plan of the Civic Education Working Group of AEGEE, which started organizing the initiative stated: “Note that it is not feasible to collect a million signatures this year. However, we are going to start collecting signatures and involve the Network in that.” Considering the ECI as a great opportunity to promote the importance of civic education turned out to be a difficult way to encourage young people to join.

When asking members of the task force or other people involved in the campaign whether at the beginning they believed in reaching the needed number of signatures, out of 18 nearly 40% (7 people) believed in doing so. Other four people (22.2%) did not believe in collecting that many, and the rest was aware of some difficulties, but still hoped for success. On the contrary, 16 people would probably or for sure do it again.

Most of the respondents highlighted that they learned a lot, and that the ECI offered them the opportunity to raise their voice for an important topic for them, that they could be part of a big scale initiative. One of the team members said: “It made me aware of the fact that to voice something that needs to be changed it takes a lot of effort to get people to become aware of the topic. It takes a lot of communication, motivation and good will from a good team of people to be able to do something. It also made me believe that as young students you can voice something and it can be heard by the politicians.”

One of the aims of an ECI is to raise awareness about an important issue. This was fulfilled in the case of the “More than Education” ECI. Even though due to the lack of financial resources we were not able to run a traditional campaign, we were able to discuss civic education with many European students within AEGEE on various occasions, such as during ten network meetings reaching 400 members or at conferences of 1000 people, while all of them learned about ECI. The fourth edition of the project Europe on Track^[5], thanks to ECI, was committed  to raising awareness on this topic. The task force was present at the Yo!Fest in Maastricht, organized by the European Youth Forum and other external events presenting the ECI. In May 2017 we organized an event in the European Economic and Social Committee with the title: ‘Mind the gap – how to strengthen civic education for all throughout Europe’ and as an opening eventhosted in Budapest the Franck Biancheri Award Conference ‘Education for the present- Democracy for the future’ at the Central European University tackling the topic of civic education and its role in building a strong democracy.

The impact of the ECI could be seen in the launch of new cooperation with many external organizations working on the topic too. In other words, it became an important promotional and networking tool for AEGEE. We could spread our views about the need to improve civic education in Europe and because of the ECI many organizations reached out to us and this opened new doors. One great example is be the cooperation with the European Economic and Social Committee. Other than hosting our event, they supported our work by helping to translate materials for us, gave us an opportunity to be present and introduce our views during the ECI day organized by them and included us in the meeting of the ECI ad hoc group and further collaboration is planned as well.

While working on the ECI and during the signature collection events, the people involved identified some obstacles. Maybe the most crucial part was the lack of financial resources. The project was only run from the budget of AEGEE and some small online donations all in all less than 500 Euros. Other than that, the long and complex administrative process and setting up the IT infrastructure caused a delay in starting the campaign, what resulted in some people losing motivation and leaving the team, as well as a problematic planning for further steps.

When asking organizers of signature collections about their experience, they highlighted that the ECI in general was not known by citizens, so first they had to explain this concept in general before starting to explain our particular ECI. They also mentioned that both the online system and the paper forms are not user friendly and caused a lot of confusion during the campaign. Some obstacles were: filling the online form took a lot of time and the platform is not mobile friendly; in case of paper forms the required data differ in each country and the text itself is very small, signatories made a lot of mistakes during filling them in. Moreover, organizing a signature collection in a public place in some countries requires registration at an administrative body. However, in some cases even competent officers were not sure how to proceed with it.

Another aspect of the whole ECI process is the communication with the Commission, which was not ideal. Although, our ECI is not going to reach the one million signatures, and by that call the European Commission to put the improvement of civic education on their agenda, we were happy to see that many new initiatives on the topic of education are being prepared, such as the public consultation: Promoting social inclusion and shared values through formal and non-formal learning^[6]. However, since we showed interest in the topic, and are willing to be actively included in the process, we were not informed about the ongoing work at the time of the registration.

Next to the ECI, an online petition^[7] has started as well, so AEGEE members who come from non-EU countries can be included in the campaign too. However while this is useful to get support from the non-EU members, these statements of support do not count in the one million needed for a successful ECI.

05| Position of AEGEE-Europe

Today’s Europe is facing many challenges that cannot be adequately tackled by single countries only. AEGEE believes that a better integrated and borderless Europe is possible and that the creation of active, responsible and democratic citizens are key elements of it. These citizens should be able and willing to participate in the changes and to find solutions for current issues.

Having the opportunity to raise awareness and call policy makers to action regarding issues that concern each citizen on local, regional or national levels is important. But AEGEE also believes that it is important to engage with people from other countries. AEGEE advocates for democratic tools which will enable every European citizen to participate in the decision making processes at local, national, but also European levels.

The recent survey among the AEGEE members showed that many of them question the use of referendums; therefore the European Citizens’ Initiative represents a more relevant participatory tool for them.

Based on our experience, the ECI is a great opportunity to promote a topic and raise awareness about an issue that matters to citizens. Throughout the year of collecting signatures, thanks to the ECI we were able to reach out to many stakeholders dealing with civic education. However, our example also shows that collecting one million signatures for a youth organization relying on voluntary work is not possible yet. Reasons behind could be the lack of funding and a need for specific knowledge and experience but also the user friendliness and possible results of using the tool. For instance, some contacted NGO partners refused to cooperate with us, due to previous experiences with campaigns and they found the tool not worth to invest time and financial resources in it.

AEGEE is motivated to take an active role in shaping the future of Europe.  Therefore, we call for a revision of the ECI to make it more accessible and usable for young Europeans. Fighting challenges faced by Europe nowadays is possible when every citizen feels responsible and is willing to bring their contribution to find solutions. Including more people – especially the youth – in policy making is a step towards in the development of a common European identity which is necessary for tackling common issues .

As we believe in the ECI is as an important tool, we

argue that it should be promoted and reshaped to a form, which truly enables citizens to raise their voices, influence policies and assist in creating a democratic Europe.

06| Recommendations for improving the European Citizens’ Initiative

AEGEE advocates for the following measures in order to make the ECI more accessible and usable for young Europeans.

6.1. Recommendations for the European Union

• The Commission should enter into dialogue/meet with organizers, not only at the end of the successful initiative but at the beginning of every registration in order to foster debate with citizens. The EC should be proactive in information the organizers on ongoing processes connected to the topic of their ECI and related issues.
• The Commission should provide the online platform for the online signature collection, so the technical side of the signature collection would not cause too much inconvenience to the citizens.
• Allow Citizens’ Committees to choose the starting date of the signature collection after the ECI has been registered, and within a certain period of time, in order to give them the opportunity to finish all the preparations and plan the campaign in detail. This would make it easier to apply for funds, since the organizers would be sure that the ECI is registered.
• Improve the platform where all ECIs are listed, by integrating information on European processes concerning the topics of the respective initiative.
• Offer financial support for Citizens’ Committees and/or financial advice on planning a campaign and applying for funds.
• Harmonize the minimum age of the signatories at 16 years of age in order to encourage young people to be active citizens from an early age onwards.
• Create a more user friendly platform for the online signature collection, which is easier to fill in, applicable for different websites and is accessible on mobile phones as well.
• Simplify and restructure the paper forms for offline signature collection, such as not having only three signatures per paper.
• It is of crucial importance that citizens of successful initiatives feel heard, taken seriously and are recognised in their efforts. Therefore, the hearing at the European Parliament should only be focused on them and other relevant experts and stakeholders that the Citizens’ Committee puts forward, even though this may not ensure a fully balanced debate with opposing viewpoints. But the Commission has other means at its disposal to ask for opinions from other stakeholders (such as a public consultation). Furthermore, the follow-up for successful ECIs should be improved: more details and fact-based answers from Commission should be given.
• Give a positive experience to unsuccessful ECI organizers: the Commission should address them personally in order to recognize their efforts and lay down the EU’s current actions related to the topic of the registered ECI. In order to recognise the efforts of organisers and to enhance the visibility of the ECI as a tool, the Commission should communicate via its own channels when ECIs reach certain numbers of signatures – milestones. Other than that, more information about the ECI should be given through (the channels of) national level authorities.

6.2. Recommendations for the Member States

• Harmonize the process of signature collection in the member states, such as the amount and type of personal data required to be filled in on the paper forms.
• Take an active role in informing citizens about the ECI and promoting it as a participatory democratic tool at the EU level.
• Create a user friendly environment for the ECI signature collection and offer country-specific advice for Citizens’ Committees, such as easily understandable and accessible guidelines.

References

[1] Standard Eurobarometer: Public opinion in the European Union, First results (87), pp. 21- 38.

[2] Dirk Berg-Schlosser (2007): Direct-democratic procedures as corrective mechanisms in consociational systems or for clientelistic structures—some brief remarks. In: Pállinger, Z., T., Kaufmann, B., Marxer, W., Schiller, T.  (2007): Direct Democracy in Europe. GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden.

[3] Marxer, W. (2004): „Wir sind das Volk“ — Direkte Demokratie: Verfahren, Verbreitung, Wirkung. Beiträge Liechtenstein-Institut Nr. 24. Bendern.

[4] Lakoff, S. (1996): Democracy: History, Theory, Practice. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

[5] European Institute of Public Administration (EIPA), Maastricht (NL) Best, E., Augustyn, M., Lambermont, F. (2011): Direct and Participatory Democracy at Grassroots Level: Levers for forging EU citizenship and identity? European Institute of Public Administration (EIPA), Maastricht (NL).

[6] Altuna, A., Suárez, M. (Eds.) (2013). Rethinking Citizenship: New Voices in Euroculture. Groningen: Euroculture consortium.

Annex:

1. Details of the survey: Relevance of the European Citizens’ Initiative as a direct democratic tool

• Conducted between 20th March and 3rd August 2017.
• Total number of respondents: 124. 119 AEGEE members + 5 non-AEGEE members
• Answers from 20 European countries: Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine.
• Average respondent’s age: 23 years; median age: 23.
• Gender characteristics: 50,4% females, 48,4% males and 1,5% other or preferred not to share their gender.

Figure 1: How important is it in your view that citizens have the possibility to participate directly in law- and decision-making processes on EU level in addition to the right to vote during European Parliamentary elections?

Figure 2: Do you believe referendums are generally useful direct democratic tools (at either the national or the European level)?

Figure 3: Do you believe it is important for EU citizens to have the right to start a European Citizens’ Initiative?

Details of the survey about the ECI conducted among the task force and other AEGEE members involved in some project during the campaign

• Conducted between June 9th – August 8th 2017.
• Total number of respondents: 18.
• Answers from 10 European countries: Belgium, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia.
• Gender characteristics: 72,8% females, 27,8% males.

^[1] More: http://www.citizens-initiative.eu/

^[2] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02011R0211-20150728&from=EN

^[3] http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/signatories

^[4] More details: https://morethaneducation.eu/ https://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/REQ-ECI-2016-000004/public/index.do

^[5] The “Europe on Track” project was launched to capture young people’s vision and wishes for Europe in 2020. It is a youth-led project where six young ambassadors across Europe with InterRail passes for one month informing and interviewing young people about their vision of the Europe of tomorrow. In order to do so, they participate in local events bringing content and creating spaces for dialogue and discussion with a main focus that changes every year, achieving a bigger impact through a travel blog, videos and social media.

^[6] More: https://ec.europa.eu/info/consultations/public-consultation-recommendation-promoting-social-inclusion-and-shared-values-through-formal-and-non-formal-learning_en

^[7] More: https://www.openpetition.eu/petition/online/more-than-education-shaping-active-and-responsible-citizens