Upload
aubrie-barker
View
212
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The EU and social policy
The case for a European Social Union
Frank VandenbrouckeSummer School ‘The EU Inside Out’
22 May 2015
Main argument
A basic consensus on the European Social Model and the role the European Union has to play (and not to play) in the domain of social policy…
… is not a luxury.
It is an existential necessity.
Structure of the presentation
• The diversity of European welfare states
• Why is a basic consensus on social policy a necessity?
– Eurozone– EU28
• Which solidarity?
• The idea of a ‘European Social Union’
• Example: social investment as a common ambition
• Policy recommendations & tough nuts to crack
The diversity of EU welfare states Input: expenditure on social protection, gross, in % of GDP (2010)
RO LV BG EE SK PL LT MT CZ CY LU HU SI ES PT UK GR IE IT BE AT SE FI GE NL DK FR00
05
10
15
20
25
30
35
old age & survivors Sickness/Health Care Unemployment DisabilityFamily/children Housing & Social Inclusion n.e.c. Other & adm. costs
The diversity of EU welfare statesOutcome: a two-dimensional map of outcomes
The diversity of EU welfare states: povertyPoverty risk and poverty threshold: “national” conception (SILC 2010)
CZ NL SK AT HU SI SE FI DK FR LU BE MT CY GE EE IE UK PL PT IT GR LT BG ES RO LV.000
5.000
10.000
15.000
20.000
25.000
.000
2000.000
4000.000
6000.000
8000.000
10000.000
12000.000
14000.000
16000.000
18000.000
AROP total population, SILC 2010 Poverty threshold PPP
The performance of European welfare states
50.000 55.000 60.000 65.000 70.000 75.000 80.000
8.000
10.000
12.000
14.000
16.000
18.000
20.000
22.000
24.000
26.000
17.0000
14.8000
21.2000
9.6000
13.1000
16.1000
17.5000
15.2000
23.100022.2000
14.1000
20.5000
19.4000
14.7000
19.200018.6000
15.1000
14.000015.0000
10.1000
14.4000
17.100017.9000
22.6000
13.500013.2000 13.200014.2000
16.2000
At-
risk
-of-
pove
rty
rate
tota
l pop
ulati
on, S
ILC
2012
(IE=
SILC
201
1)
Low povertyHigh employment
High povertyHigh employment
Low povertyLow employment
High povertyLow employment
Employment rate 15-64, LFS 2012
The welfare state is not ‘the problem’
Switz
erla
nd
Finl
and
Germ
any
Unite
d St
ates
Swed
en
Neth
erla
nds
Japa
n
Unite
d Ki
ngdo
m
Norw
ay
Cana
da
Denm
ark
Aust
ria
Belg
ium
New
Zea
land
Aust
ralia
Luxe
mbo
urg
Fran
ce
Kore
a
Irela
nd
Icela
nd
Esto
nia
Chile
Spai
n
Pola
nd
Turk
ey
Czec
h Re
publ
ic
Italy
Port
ugal
Mex
ico
Slov
enia
Hung
ary
Slov
ak R
epub
lic
Gree
ce
1 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 14 15 16 17 18 21 22 23 25 28 31 32 34 35 42 44 46 49 51 55 62 63 78 91
.000
5.000
10.000
15.000
20.000
25.000
30.000
35.000
40.000
Public Spending 2009 Private Spending 2009
OECD countries ranked according to Global Competitiveness Index 2013-2014
Publ
ic an
d pr
ivat
e so
cial s
pend
ing
as a
% o
f GDP
Structure of the presentation
• The diversity of European welfare states
• Why is a basic consensus on social policy a necessity?
– Eurozone– EU28
• Which solidarity?
• The idea of a ‘European Social Union’
• Example: social investment as a common ambition
• Policy recommendations & tough nuts to crack
The consequences of monetary unification
Transfers might mitigate the symmetry/flexibility trade-off
The EU’s way: more symmetry, more flexibility
Flexibility determines social order
Institutional advantage of coordinated bargaining
Competitiveness:symmetrical approachnecessary
=> convergence
Defining the EMU’s social objective is a necessity rather than a luxury
• EMU forces upon the member states a shared conception of flexibility
• A basic consensus on the functioning of the social model is necessary for the long-term sustainability of EMU
– short term: stabilisation– mid term: a symmetric guideline on wage cost competitiveness& institutions that can deliver– long term: sustainability of pensions
• Symmetry => convergence w.r.t. fundamental parameters => shared objectives
• Legitimacy => convergence in prosperity
‘excessive social imbalances’ associated withinadequate and disparate investment in human capital
The human capital asymmetry: employment and formal educational attainment
.000 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000 50.000 60.00045.000
50.000
55.000
60.000
65.000
70.000
75.000
80.000
85.000
% of population (15-64) with lower secondary education attainment, 2012
Empl
oym
ent r
ate
15-6
4, 2
012
Many low-skilledLow employment rate
Few low-skilledHigh employment rate
Few low-skilledLow employment rate
Why a ‘European Social Union’?
• an inevitability of European Monetary Union
• integration and social regulation in EU28
– Social dumping?– Social sovereignty?
• the very core of the European project.
Why a ‘European Social Union’?
• an inevitability of European Monetary Union;
• Freedom of movement and national social cohesion in EU28:
– Social dumping? – Economic freedoms right to strike (Viking, Laval)
• the very core of the European project.
Social dumping…
… or “convergence machine”?
Source: Lefebvre and Pestieau, Peut-on mesurer la performance de l’Etat Providence?
Why a ‘European Social Union’?
• an inevitability of European Monetary Union;
• Freedom of movement and national social cohesion in EU28:
– Social dumping? – Economic freedoms right to strike (Viking, Laval)
• the very core of the European project.
Why a ‘European Social Union’?
• an inevitability of European Monetary Union;
• Freedom of movement and national social cohesion in EU28: ‘a balancing act’
– Social dumping? – Economic freedoms right to strike (Viking, Laval)
• Two dimensions of solidarity: domestic (national) and pan-European
Why a ‘European Social Union’?
• an inevitability of European Monetary Union;
• Freedom of movement and national social cohesion in EU28: ‘a balancing act’
– Social dumping? – Economic freedoms right to strike (Viking, Laval)
• Two dimensions of solidarity: domestic (national) and pan-European
Structure of the presentation
• The diversity of European welfare states
• Why is a basic consensus on social policy a necessity?
– Eurozone– EU28
• Which solidarity?
• The idea of a ‘European Social Union’
• Example: social investment as a common ambition
• Policy recommendations & tough nuts to crack
A European Social Union
A Social Union would
• support national welfare states on a systemic level in some of their key functions
• guide the substantive development of national welfare states – via general social standards and objectives, leaving ways and means of social policy to Member States – on the basis of an operational definition of ‘the European social model’.
Þ European countries would cooperate in a union with an explicit social purpose, pursuing both national and pan-European social cohesion
Convergence in prosperity: the social investment imperative
• A social investment agenda (cf. Europe 2020, SIP)
– Child-centred social investment strategy– Human capital investment push– Reconciling work and family life– Later and flexible retirement– Migration and integration through education and participation– Minimum income support and capacitating service provision
• The political deal the EU needs is one wherein all governments pursue budgetary discipline and social investment, and are supported therein in a tangible way by the EU.
Spending on education 2004-2008-2012
Romania
Hungary
Portuga
l
Greece Ita
lyLat
via
Bulgaria
Spain UK
Slove
nia
Finlan
d
Irelan
d
Swed
en
Denmark
Lithuan
ia
Netherl
ands
France
Estonia
Austria
Belgium
Czech Rep
ublic
German
y
Poland
Slova
kia
Luxe
mbourg-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Real public spending on education, 2012 vs. 2004-08Spending % GDP, 2008, vs. average
Spending on education 2004-2008-2012 and PISA results
Romania
Hungary
Portuga
l
Greece Ita
lyLat
via
Bulgaria
Spain UK
Slove
nia
Finlan
d
Irelan
d
Swed
en
Denmark
Lithuan
ia
Netherl
ands
France
Estonia
Austria
Belgium
Czech Rep
ublic
German
y
Poland
Slova
kia
Luxe
mbourg-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Real public spending on education, 2012 vs. 2004-08 PISA 2012 (Math, Science, Reading) vs. averageSpending % GDP, 2008, vs. average
Convergence in prosperity: the social investment imperative
• A social investment agenda (cf. Europe 2020, SIP)
– Child-centred social investment strategy– Human capital investment push– Reconciling work and family life– Later and flexible retirement– Migration and integration through education and participation– Minimum income support and capacitating service provision
• The political deal the EU needs is one wherein all governments pursue budgetary discipline and social investment, and are supported therein in a tangible way by the EU.
Structure of the presentation
• The diversity of European welfare states
• Why is a basic consensus on social policy a necessity?
– Eurozone– EU28
• Which solidarity?
• The idea of a ‘European Social Union’
• Example: social investment as a common ambition
• Policy recommendations & tough nuts to crack
The case for a European Social Union
• support national welfare states on a systemic level in key functions (e.g. stabilization)
• guide the substantive development of national welfare states
– via general social standards and objectives
Þ symmetric w.r.t. to competiveness (wage policy & capacity to deliver)Þ social investmentÞ minimum wages and minimum income protectionÞ solidarity in reform – leaving ways and means of social policy to Member States
The case for a European Social Union
• support national welfare states on a systemic level in key functions (e.g. stabilization)
• guide the substantive development of national welfare states
– via general social standards and objectives
Þ symmetric w.r.t. to competiveness (wage policy & capacity to deliver)Þ social investment (investment in and protection of human capital)Þ minimum wages and minimum income protectionÞ solidarity in reform – leaving ways and means of social policy to Member States
The case for a European Social Union
• support national welfare states on a systemic level in key functions (e.g. stabilization)
• guide the substantive development of national welfare states
– via general social standards and objectives
Þ symmetric w.r.t. to competiveness (wage policy & capacity to deliver)Þ social investment (investment in and protection of human capital)Þ minimum wages and minimum income protectionÞ solidarity in reform – leaving ways and means of social policy to Member States
The case for a European Social Union
• support national welfare states on a systemic level in key functions (e.g. stabilization)
• guide the substantive development of national welfare states
– via general social standards and objectives
Þ symmetric w.r.t. to competiveness (wage policy & capacity to deliver)Þ social investmentÞ minimum wages and minimum income protectionÞ solidarity in reform – leaving ways and means of social policy to Member States
T
ough nuts to crack
Thank you!
1. F. Vandenbroucke, The Case for a European Social Union. From muddling through to a sense of common purpose, Euroforum Policy Paper, Sept. 2014 www.kuleuven.be/euroforum/papers
2. F. Vandenbroucke, with B. Vanhercke, A European Social Union. 10 Tough nuts to crack, Friends of Europe, Spring 2014 http://www.friendsofeurope.org
3. Unequal Europe. Recommendations for a more caring EU. Final Report of the High-Level Group on Social Union, Friends of Europe, Spring 2015 http://www.friendsofeurope.org