The Lisbon Strategy and the economic integration

Résumé du document

On the 23rd and the 24th of March 2000, the European Council settled major goals for the next decade hoping that the European Union will ‘become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion '. At that time the EU growth was high and the unemployment rate was decreasing. Consequently, the European Council members planned to achieve these goals by ‘improving the existing processes; introducing a new open method of coordination at all levels ' under the guidance of the European Council. Basically, the Council hoped that the economic situation and the economic integration would be enough to be a major power in the world.

Almost a decade later, the EU is trying to deal with a global economic crisis and has already changed the strategy which questioned the relation between the economic integration and the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy.

Extraits

[...] Commission of the European Communities, Strategic report on the renewed Lisbon Strategy for growth and jobs: launching the new cycle (2008- 2010), Brussels High Level Group dir. Wim Kok, Facing the challenge, The Kisbon Strategy for growth and employment, November 2004, p Euractiv.com, “Cohen-Tanugi: Lisbon Strategy 'inadequate' answer to globalization” April 2008. European Commision on growth and jobs, http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/faqs/background/index_en.htm. efficient internal market, the right policies on external trade, the updating and enforcement of EU competition law, well-targeted European research programmes, the effective use of EU Structural and Cohesion funding and the application of EU environmental policies are all crucial to delivering the prosperous and modern society which is the ultimate aim of the Lisbon Strategy”, European Commision on growth and jobs, http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/faqs/background/index_en.htm. [...]

[...] - Deroose Hodson Kuhlmann broad economic policy guidelines: before and after the re-launch of the Lisbon Strategy”, Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol Number pp. 827-848. - Dieckhoff Gallie renewed Lisbon Strategy and social exclusion policy”, Industrial Relations Journal,Vol issue pp 502. - Euractiv.com, “Cohen-Tanugi: Lisbon Strategy 'inadequate' answer to globalisation” April 2008, on http://www.euractiv.com/en/innovation/cohen-tanugi-lisbon-strategy- inadequate-answer-globalisation/article-171675. - Huiskamp Vos (K.J.), “Flexibilization, modernization and the Lisbon Strategy”, The international journal of comparative labour law and industrial relations, Winter 2007, pp. 587-599. [...]

[...] Finally, the rise of the China in the global economy is seen by some authors like Laurent Cohen- Tanugi as a threat that the Lisbon Strategy will not face, consequently, the Economic Integration would not be sufficient to implement this competitive economy[14] and the European policies have to be incorporated with a global policy towards the rest of the World. The Lisbon Angenda has been adopted with the idea that “growth is not an end in itself, it is a prerequisite for being able to maintain and increase Europe's prosperity and thus for preserving and enhancing our social models[15]”. This orientation of the European policy towards social concerns can be achieved by further economic integration. However the realignments and the overall results reveal that it is not enough. [...]

[...] High Level Group dir. Wim Kok, Facing the challenge, The Kisbon Strategy for growth and employment, November 2004, p stratégie de Lisbonne commence à porter ses fruits, elle a en tout cas conduit à une amélioration des résultats économiques de l'Europe en avec 6,5 millions d'emplois nouveaux créés, et une croissance qui a rebondi. Elle a surtout amorcé un processus de convergence dans les réformes, de benchmarking, donc la mayonnaise est en train de prendre y compris au niveau des partenaires sociaux, de la société civile”, Euractiv.com, “Cohen-Tanugi: Lisbon Strategy 'inadequate' answer to globalisation” April 2008. [...]

[...] An overall failure of the goals that set in 2000 The Lisbon Strategy was supposed to be achieved through an average growth of 3%. However, the economic situation gradually worsened and in 2005 Barroso considered that “potential output growth in the 15 pre-2004 enlargement states (EU 15) [averaged] was just For Barroso, the first five years have been globally disappointing. This failure comes from the poor economic results of the EU and also from the inequalities of the results between the States; some of the Member States were much behind than some others[10]. [...]