Foster employability and fight social exclusion through the development of lifelong learning (LLL) key-competences: reviewing twenty years of LLL policies

Abstract Purpose – This study aims to provide an overview of the past two decades of lifelong learning (LLL) policies for enhancing employability and reduce social exclusion in young people of European countries through the development of the so-called LLL key-competences. Design/methodology/approach – Built on a quasi-systematic review, this contribution explores traditional and new methods for promoting the LLL transition, and then employability, in young adults (e.g. apprenticeship, vocational training, e-learning, etc.). Findings – It argues the need to identify all the possible approaches able to support policymakers, as they can differently impact key-competence development. Originality/value – Finally, based on the consolidated EU policy experience, we propose a strategy of implementation of the LLL programmes that facilitates the institutions’ decision processes for policy-making through the use of decisional support system.

1. Introduction 1.1 Fostering employability through the development of lifelong learning key-competences A wide range of aspects revolves around employability, a concept used by Hillage and Pollard (1998) to indicate those capabilities necessary to find and retain a job and obtain a new one when needed . Indeed, several factors can impact on employability. First, the context interpreted as the current trends in the market labour but also some individual difference traits, which can have an impact on the individual employability since they have been for a long time assessed for predicting workers' success at the early stage of their career (Sartori et al., 2016a;Sartori et al., 2016b;. On the other hand, about employability, great emphasis is usually assigned to the role of competences that can be acquired, developed and transferred in a constant manner throughout the all stages of life, namely, key-competences for LLL or just keycompetences. Key-competences have been associated over the years with several definitions (Elbers, 1991;Mulder, 2007;McClelland, 1973), as affirmed by Velde (2001, p. 1): [. . .] there is both a concern about the meaning of competence and how it is interpreted in the workplace, and the demand for competence in the workplace, for different kinds of worker key competence, for more opportunities to become competent, and for it to be sustained and nourished in a lifelong learning way.
1.3 Reach out to European young adults at risk of work and social exclusion; the challenge of lifelong learning policies In light of the above considerations, at the individual level, LLL policies aim to enable young adults to identify and develop those key-competences necessary to find, retain and progress in employment: that is, to improve their employability. In the past two decades, the development of LLL policies resulted in a diversified market configuration for adult education throughout Europe, which is expected to increase further. The continuous acquisition of key-competences is perceived determinant for professional success and career for two main reasons. First, the expected growth of the adult education market has resulted in the need to develop a systematic analysis of education policies linking it to forecasts for the demand of work skills in the future. Secondly, referring to the Strategic objective 1 "Making lifelong learning and mobility a reality" of EU Council (2009/C 119/02), a significant issue related to LLL is the idea of social justice. Limited learning opportunities and the inequitable access to the training system provide a broader social exclusion of many groups of young people (Gorard and Rees, 2002). Success, in this context, is understood as those policies that show the improvement of learning outcomes, particularly those reaching out to young adults at risk of social exclusion and other vulnerable groups.
Following this framework, as well as the EU Council Resolution on a renewed European agenda for LLL adult learning (2011), new policies are going to be developed over the Horizon 2020 programme [1], with the aim to encourage higher education institutions to embrace adult learners as a means of displaying social responsibility and a greater openness towards the community at large. The overarching objective of these new policies is the improvement of the above key-competences related to adult education in general, and young adults and vulnerable groups in particular, focusing on the area of integration between LLL programmes and higher employability. In this context, previous successful policies, both traditional and innovative, that reached out to young adults at risk of work and social Reviewing twenty years of LLL policies exclusion, have been first identified with the present literature review. Next, we will focus on the outcomes and effects of such policies above briefly presented (i.e. strategic LLL keycompetences development, employability, challenging social exclusion). While analyzing why, for which target group, and in which national and regional section these programmes could be successful, by using a new technological decision support system (DSS), will be finally discussed as a possible practical solution applied to the present review.

Methodology
This article aims to identify LLL policies approaches that can guide the choices of policymakers regarding policies for enhancing the employability in young people and reduce risks of social exclusion. The initial assumption (discussed in the first part of the article) is that the key-competences promote by LLL correspond to antecedents of the concept of employability and to improve LLL policies means enhancing the employability of young adults in Europe to fight phenomena of social exclusion.
The paper is built on a quasi-systematic review of the approaches to LLL policies present in the literature of the last twenty years, and the identified methodology is divided into three phases. Phase 1: longitudinal analysis using semantic search by keywords (e.g. lifelong learning policy; LLL policy; lifelong-learning policy [. . .]) present in the following DBs such as Scopus, PubMed, Embase and Psychinfo. The inclusion criteria included all the published articles about lifelong learning policies (years 1998-2018) involving original article written in English with qualitative and quantitative approaches, review literature and mixedmethod study. The exclusion criteria included articles by unknown authors, review sections of books, and articles written in a language other than English. This result in 109 articles extracted. Phase 2: Mapping of the analysis results (Peersman, 1996) and selection of the most representative research on LLL policies in European countries based on the following analysis units: the orientation of LLL policies and related professional practices; criticism of the effects of LLL policies; and programmes for the implementation of LLL policies.
After such a review, 87 articles were selected for the assessment of the next phase. Phase 3: Elaboration of the summary map with a focus on the objectives and results of the research. Such a quality assessment was conducted by two reviewers, and it was mainly based on the relevancy and validity of studies. Articles were carefully examined and selected by one of the two authors. Finally, 50 articles were included, and the most important points were extracted and summarized in a table (Table 1). Based on a thematic content analysis, articles were discussed next in a narrative form in line with the research goal.

Literature review 2.1 Reviewing twenty years of lifelong learning policies in Europe
Despite the term, LLL has an extensive practice in contexts, and its meaning is often not very clear (Clain, 2016), each country has its own definition and, consequently, its own LLL policies. Although there are some definitions of LLL (TeAchnology, 2010;Evaluate IT, 2004;Tempus, 2002;Idahoe-Campus, 2009), we can consider LLL as training that: [. . .] should take place at all stages of the life cycle (from the cradle to the grave) and, in more recent versions, that it should be life-wide; that is embedded in all life contexts from the school to the workplace, the home and the community (Laal, 2011, p. 471

BG
The main goal of this research is to systematize the achievements in the implementation of projects and initiatives of The paper explores the role and contribution of the Bulgarian library associations in the development of Library association; LIS higher education; lifelong learning; state university of (continued) signifiers" as having a multiplicity of meanings in a given context according to its actors and contexts, this paper explores globalization which does not mean homogeneity and uniformity. The paper examines these meanings by discussing the diverse points of view based upon existing educational and training policies, within the framework of the world agencies. The paper includes, in the first section, an integrated approach of the concepts of curriculum, LLL and evaluation and, in the second section, the discussion of each of these concepts

Keywords
Learning to learn and LLL are considered the main tasks of schools Breiter (2003) DE This paper tries to develop a concept of a regional education network that includes pre-school, K-12 and further education, public libraries and community centres, as well as other educational institutions.
Taking the path of the digital divide as a social and educational divide and focusing on the school as one major player in the regional network, the innovation process and the actors involved in it are highlighted and explored. Using action research in a project between schools, local community, private partners and the university, the concept of the regional network is illustrated

Reviewing twenty years of LLL policies
The idea of LLL first appeared in the 1970s, to promote social equality. At first, within a humanistic tradition, the first LLL policies were advocated as a model for developing a better society and quality of life that would allow people to adapt better to changes. Shifting from an idealistic to a pragmatical perspective, starting from the 1980s a climate featured by young unemployment, declining productivity and increasing public deficits, raised in Europe (Rubenson, 2006). In such times, LLL policies became a solution for those dissatisfied with their employment to enhance employability levels. Towards the end of the 1990s, a new set of transitions and adjustment challenges for society, industry and individuals happened. Increased exclusion of large segments of the population, especially of young adults, exacerbated socio-economic divisions and seen as a threat to Europe cohesion as such. Moreover, while there was an understanding that adult education in itself does not serve to create jobs, LLL was addressed to promote those life learning key-competences for adapting to new social and economic life. Such a policy evolution is linked to the research stream developed to evaluate the social impact of such policies and resumed in the review presented in Table 1.
In the review-table is possible to observe the above historical evolution of the LLL policies oriented to different outcomes (i.e. employability, social exclusion, development of strategic competencies). This progress is in line with a different target of the population. While that at the end 1990s LLL were thought as a way for helping older people to be updated with the last digital revolution (i.e. the spread of internet and of personal computers), nowadays LLL policies focus more on the young adult situation: namely, they are more oriented to avoid social exclusion by developing strategic LLL competencies instead of just technological skills. This change in LLL policies over time also affects the several methodologies used for delivering such policies. Indeed, lifelong learning policies are comprised between traditional and new methods programmes, very diverse and fragmented. Probably the most established LLL way of job inclusion among the EU member states is represented by apprenticeship and vocational practices, which will be next introduced together with other new learning methods-based communication technology (ICT) as a mean to educate participants, such as the Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs).
Beyond conceptual and methodological differences, it is possible to observe a convergence point among the different LLL programmes: avoiding social exclusion through participation in the job market by enhancing self-employability. On the other hand, such institutional action has also been developed to face current criticisms regarding the supply of adult education in many European countries defined as inadequate because it often fails to include the most vulnerable groups such as the young, the unemployed, the low skilled (Jarvis, 2004). Recent criticisms on LLL policies' effects will be discussed after the following section on methods and LLL programmes.
Besides social exclusion, it should also be acknowledged the links set during the Sixth International Conference on Adult Education (CONFINTEA; 2017) between LLL and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development by United Nations (Robinson, 2017). The conference affirmed the essential role of LLL in supporting the future transformation of the world, especially with regards to population health, environmental sustainability and economic resilience.

Traditional and new methods for delivering lifelong learning and job market inclusion in European young adults
In the following sections, we present different LLL programmes (i.e. apprenticeship systems, vocational training or vocational community colleges, active labour market programmes, ICT training and MOOCs) related to LLL policies development. Starting from the more traditional and established programme, we will introduce next how computers and the internet have harnessed best to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of education at all levels and in both formal and non-formal settings.
2.2.1 Apprenticeship systems and vocational practices. In the review table, it is interesting to address the various ways in which EU member states deal with the transition from school to employment in their own country. Traditionally, there are three different ways in which the labour market integration of young peoples is organized in: apprenticeship systems (i.e. young people enter a company and attend vocational schoolbased training simultaneously), school/college-based vocational education, higher education (i.e. young people learn skills in an institutional setting) and learning-by-doing (i.e. young people enter the workplace and learn the necessary skills while working). In most countries, all three pathways are used depending on different occupations; however, the relevance of the different channels varies. For example, in Germany, despite many worries that the dual system no longer provides the safe transition to employment it once did (Busemeyer and Trampusch, 2013), still more than 60% of a school-leavers' cohort enter an apprenticeship (BMBF, 2013); while in the UK, the higher education initial participation rate of 18 and 19year old in learning was 23% (Department for Education, 2014). Mediterranean and Latin states remain relatively centralized and comprehensive, with continuing domination of a fairly traditional educational paradigm. The Nordic countries moved partially and cautiously toward the apprenticeship system. However, they still stand apart in their regional affinities for local public control combined with structural and curricula integration and universalism. The Nordic states also tend to have extensive participation in adult continuing developing the established European LLL key-competences and have, arguably, gone further than most in realizing the goals of LLL (Öhrn and Weiner, 2017). As well, the vocational education and training system is seen as a priority by the European Union to promote the development of the member states. This priority has also been reaffirmed by the Maastricht Communiqué of 14 December 2004, which indicated the need for greater European cooperation in the field of Vocational Education and Training (VET), identifying the commitments that each EU member state would take actions that need to be done in this regard (Oliver, 2010).
In addition to these established pathways, many national governments installed active labour market programmes. Originally, these programmes were meant to be temporary and should address mass youth unemployment in the 1980s or after the transition of Eastern European countries (Sharland et al., 2013). However, they seemed to have become established systems to address mainly disadvantaged people. Ideally, programmes address the individual needs of young people by getting skills to find employment (e.g. Careers' Services, finding an appropriate occupation, identification of necessary qualification needs, CV writing, job interview training), aid to gain the necessary qualifications and skills to enter a profession (e.g. school-based apprenticeships or other vocational training) or subsidized employment: i.e. young people enter temporary employment to gain work experiences and manage to build up networks, which should improve their chances in the unsubsidized labour market.
2.2.2 Innovation and new technologies for enduring learning. As a recognized part of training procedures, the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in the learning and training field has made progress over time. This is noticeable in the last studies present in the review table suggesting that the integration of ICT in training has positive effects on learning results (Bates, 2001;Diochon and Cameron, 2001;Jochems et al., 2013;Leask and Pachler, 2013). The way in which learning can result from the combination of education and training with the use of ICT is principally known as e-learning but also as computer-based Reviewing twenty years of LLL policies training (CBT) and web-based training and, eventually, as MOOC, (Ismail, 2001;Šumak et al., 2011). MOOC have been considered as a possible solution for many emerging states for promoting a low cost but effective teaching system (Kaplan and Haenlein, 2016). For example, learn LLL key-competences such as word processing, programming, image editing, financial spreadsheets and web development do not necessarily require the presence of traditional education.
The reason why there are a variety of technologies, methodologies, frameworks and architecture systems available, is because the impact of learning aspects change, based on different user types, the subject of learning, and e-learning interaction necessary. The importance of multimedia learning aspects, for example, is related to the ability of users in dealing with these new instruments, which are in turn related to some user differences, as argued within the framework of the technology acceptance model theory (Davis et al., 1989). Current technology acceptance research evaluates causal effect sizes between unskilled and experienced users (Šumak et al., 2011). The acceptance of e-learning, studies commonly, consider young adults as typical users, where researchers usually find high acceptance of e-learning technology about this young generation compare to the previous ones. As well, from another point of view, the successful implementation and introduction of e-learning technologies require adaptability among teachers, professors and trainers who use these technologies for providing learning materials to users (Šumak et al., 2011). Usually, such people need training too, to develop those LLL competences for benefiting, providing and spreading a better e-learning service.
E-learning technologies are mainly used in educational institutions, but as well in organizations to offer advanced ways of providing education to their users. The use of these technologies in the organizational field is quite recent. E-learning, as well as distance education systems, and MOOC have been considered by organizations as a possible solution for promoting a low cost, but effective training system, face learning challenges. But it is not only a question of costs; education programmes aim to address the worst contemporary problems: unemployment, skills mismatches and lack of labour mobility without borders inside or outside organizations, companies and institutions. Considering the Work programme 2014-2015 of Horizon 2020, in fact, the ICT is crucial to boosting the modernization of education and training for the developing the so-called LLL competences. The challenge is to reinvent the education ecosystem and re-empower teachers in the digital age. Partnerships and collaboration between public and private stakeholdersincluding innovative entrepreneursmore open and innovative practices for richer and more engaging and motivating learning and teaching experiences will be key to facilitate the transformation of the education and training.

Discussion
As seen, in the last decade, a new model of LLL policy was developed to facilitate a more advanced understanding of processes of social inclusion. The approach recognizes the multidimensional nature of vulnerability and the ways in which young people draw on different resources to secure employment. To make effective these transitions, young people have to draw on a variety of resources including educational qualifications, vocational training and skills, as well as general knowledge. Aspects of a personal agency such as initiative and motivation are also crucial, and it is essential to acknowledge processes of rationalization as a factor that provides a mediating link between such personal resources and above outcomes. In many cases, young people are able to compensate for deficits in specific resources (education, for example). However, when a resource deficit is combined with weak policy agency, there is likely to be a dramatic increase in the chances of "negative" outcomes.
In these circumstances, those who were unable to rely on previous formal education were most vulnerable to social exclusion. In light of this, the development of LLL competences becomes the first step to take for any educational policymaker. In the next section, we will analyze the expected outcomes of such LLL policies and a discussion concerning recent criticisms on such programmes follows.
3.1 Employability and strategic lifelong learning key-competences development as significant outcomes of lifelong policies in Europe With the economic crisis, the decreasing of job positions for younger, and the concurrent high rates of youth jobless, young people are remaining in education and training for a longer time and they get a stable occupation later in life. On the other side, a growing number of them find new ways of combining part-time work with education and training paths, sometimes through long periods. In most of the European countries, there has been a trend to shorter job periods, job jumping, the prevalence of part-time and short-term jobs and self-employed work (Mackenbach et al., 2008). The psychological result of being a young adult without a work identity and continuously in training can generate situations of distress and negative mental states such as anxiety, depression, isolation, disaffection, disengagement, and, eventually, social exclusion (Quintano et al., 2018;OECD, 2016). Lifelong learning policies are, in a way, responding to the demands of such a context. They look for providing a greater variety of flexible learning possibilities, including different settings of learning, by replying to the challenges of modern life and to the diverseness of individual needs. Personalized training careers involve individuals able to take responsibility for building their personal learning pathways to increase their strategic LLL key-competences and next employability. Nevertheless, this also means that organizations and communities must be sensitive to people's needs. For this reason, in many instances, LLL policies are recommended as a way of promoting social coherence (although not much attention is paid to how this can be reached).
Analysis of policies across Europe ranges all the way from demand-led of voluntary partnership in the UK (i.e. the network model) to the more formalized social partnership models of the northern continental and Nordic states, to the more static models common in more of the southern European states (Green, 2002). The common trend in legislation and governance in Europe has been away from direct government administrative control over educational processes and towards greater devolution of operational control to other levels. Given that, the growing uncertainty of employment has prompted new models for employment practices, eventually leading to new patterns and status of careers (Mills et al., 2006).
Lifelong learning policies represent a driver to foster expertise among multiple organizations and jobs, potentially enabling creativity and performance (Maurer, 2001). Such a consideration appears of particular importance given that nowadays fewer individuals follow stable or expected career patterns within one organization, whereas a greater and growing number of career experiences are likely to develop across, rather than inside of, company boundaries (O'Mahony and Bechky, 2006). Such a mobile labour force may well need to rely on LLL policies interventions aiming at fostering higher employability. In line with literature from the career realm, it is underlined the role of the individual in continually managing career-related changes, entailing willingness and adaptability (Pulakos et al., 2006) and defined career identity to give direction to one's career pathway. Such a LLL skill can be well-defined in terms of employability, which refers to the full range of individual capabilities to gain and maintain an employment and to obtain a new one if required (Hillage and Pollard, 1998). Employability has been Reviewing twenty years of LLL policies conceptualized from multiple perspectives and theoretical proposals, which encompass a focus on the individual, the organization, or the society as a whole. Such a construct, therefore, represents a concept underlying the development of LLL policies aiming to enable young adults to identify and develop the key-competences necessary to find, retain and progress in employment.
3.2 Lifelong learning policies collateral effect: challenging young people social exclusion issues in contemporary Europe Young people at risk of social exclusion can also hold multiple disadvantages (e.g. disabilities, lack of school qualification, belonging to a minority ethnic group), all of which decrease further their chances of finding, retaining, and progressing in employment. Other young people come from a family background where previous generations were excluded from the labour market, and thus, lack an understanding of the needs to acquire or retain key-competences. These conditions can create vulnerable groups of people with few chances to be involved in LLL programmes. However, even without these kinds of disadvantages, the number of young people not in education, employment or training (NEET) within Europe remains high. It is remarkable that the number of young people not in employment but attending formal education varies across different European countries.
The differences stem from the educational systems, but other factors such as the length of compulsory schooling and access to tertiary education also play a role. On average, 37% of all young people within European member states are in formal education; however, this varies across the individual member states. After leaving formal education, they are either unemployed, inactive, passive job seekers, discouraged to enter the labour market or deliberately to avoid it. In 2009, when the financial crisis worsened by leaving few available jobs, in the EU, nearly 17% of the population 18-24 years of age were classified as NEET, varying from 6% in The Netherlands to 26% in Spain.
As seen earlier, LLL is expected to contribute to overcome the economic and social crisis and meet the Europe 2020 targets on employment, poverty reduction, education, sustainability and innovation. Especially for young adults, suitable LLL skills and qualifications are necessary to gain access to employment. In recent decades, there have been structural shifts which created mismatches between labour supply and demand (e.g. shift towards the service industries, shift towards non-manual labour) and those without the skills to adapt to these changes are more likely to become long-term unemployed or to work in low-paid unstable work (Forrier and Sels, 2003). Recent research shows that in a European comparison, there is a less vertical mismatch if the school-to-work transition is more highly stratified (Levels et al., 2014).
Lifelong learning, in this context, allows young people to build up a lifelong habit to adapt to changes in the workplace. As the Education, Youth, Culture and Sport Council meeting recalls that the last economic crisis accentuated the importance of the education to work transition: ensuring that young people leave education and training with the best possible support to obtain their first job is critical. Young people who face unemployment or a slow transition may experience long-term adverse effects in terms of future labour market success, earnings or family formation. This may, in turn, jeopardize public and private investment in their education and training, which results in a loss for the society as a whole. This is particularly true in the context of demographic challenges, which put added pressure on Europe's increasing scarcity of young people to integrate quickly and effectively into the labour market. As a consequence, several EU benchmarks set for the 2020 focus on the transition from education and training into the labour market for facilitating policy exchanges under the Education and Training 2020 (ET2020) framework on measures to enhance the employability of graduates (Council of the European Union, 2012). Moreover, for young adults, it is also relevant to remaining trainable by understanding the need to develop key-competences according to changes in the workplace. Nowadays every workplace presents rapid changes in tasks and in the structure, and it requires employees with the ability to adapt to these changes, to be positively engaged in LLL programmes.
3.3 All that glitters is not gold: risks connected to lifelong learning programmes and new challenges Considering the situations seen above, the presence of several policies, programmes, institutions and guidelines related to LLL constitutes an important background for an analysis of existing LLL policies across European countries. On the other hand, the risk of an uncontrolled promotion of LLL policies exists. For instance, it is important to consider LLL as a universal right; however, it must be contextualized on the basis of the real needs of the stakeholder. Among others, the greatest risk is to create a logic of competition that encourages the continuing education of people already trained or with a stable job, excluding those who are not entered in any career or training programme.
Moreover, another challenge to be faced is represented by the uneven distribution of the costs for LLL between enterprises, individuals and families (OECD, 2001). Both the underrepresentation of vulnerable groups and the uneven distribution of funding show the persistent weakness and ineffectiveness of some adult education policies. However, the role of LLL is still vital to overcome the economic and social crisis and to meet the Europe 2020 targets by fostering higher. Indeed with the last decade, the focus on young people was reinforced with the adoption of the first European LLL political strategy. Quality education and training, successful labour market integration and increased mobility were identified as key to unleashing young people's potential and achieving the ongoing Europe 2020 objectives. To reach such goals, EU LLL programmes, policies and strategies were implemented as follows: The Youth Guarantee Scheme, which has been implemented at European or national level to ensure that all young people aged under 25 get good-quality employment offers, continuing education or an apprenticeship or traineeship within four months of leaving school or becoming unemployed. It is included in the Youth Employment Package. The EU Youth Strategy for 2010-2018, which aims to provide more and equal opportunities for young people in education and in the labour market, and to promote active citizenship and social inclusion for all young people. Youth on the Move, a framework of policy priorities for action at national and EU level to reduce youth unemployment by facilitating the transition from school to work and reducing labour market segmentation. Here, the role of public employment services is vital, as they promote the Youth Guarantee scheme to ensure that all young people are in a job, in education or in activation, creating a European Vacancy Monitor and supporting young entrepreneurs. The agenda for new skills and jobs (COM:2010; 682): a European contribution towards full employment, aimed at enhancing the performance of education and training systems and seeking to equip young people with the relevant skills and competences for labour market needs. Which aims to improve employability and employment opportunities for young people. The "Youth employment initiative" (2013), which reinforces and accelerates the measures outlined in the "Youth employment initiative". It supports particularly young people not in education, employment or training in regions with a youth unemployment rate above 25%.

Reviewing twenty years of LLL policies
It is expected that appropriate investment in LLL will contribute to the overcoming the economic and social crisis and meet the Europe 2020 targets on employment, poverty reduction, and innovation. However, since then almost fifty policies have been developed over the last twenty years, recognize successful LLL programmes, both traditional and innovative, already reach out to young adults at risk of work and social exclusion, might help for developing new and better programs. In the next section, we analyze the practical implications concerning the present review and ways for managing such data.

Practical implications
Analyzing why, for which particular target group, and in which national and regional section, LLL programmes can be identified as successful could lead to better policy-making implantation. A practical proposal could be related to the development of a computational model that analyses, simplifies and connects data from all EU policy documents to allow easier access to information and to support policymaker in the different phases of the policy cycle. In this way, the policymaker would have the opportunity to explore the consequences of the introduction of new policies in advance of its effective application following a "what if [. . .]" approach. The investigation should consider quantitative and qualitative analyses to investigate policies both at the European and at the national level and in particular LLL policies, considering diversity issues as gender, culture, language, educational attainment, LLL competences developed, labour status, costs of previous LLL projects, etc. This would be an opportunity to generate new scientific knowledge, to create cooperation amongst different European countries and to collect data to compare and analyse adult education across Europe.
Since that most Educational and Training systems are now LLL competencies-centered, to guide the analysis of EU policies, the European taxonomy of Skills, Competences, Qualifications and Occupations (ESCO) can establish a framework capable of transcending sector and national specificities. Developed by the European Commission, the CEDEFOP (European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training), and a group of stakeholders, this taxonomy focused to the creation of a common language between education and training, and the labour market. ESCO is structured in three main hierarchical pillars: occupation (i.e. a grouping of jobs involving similar tasks, and which require a similar skillset); skill and competence; qualification (i.e. the formal outcome of an assessment and validation process which is obtained when a competent body determines that an individual has achieved learning outcomes to given standards). These pillars are interrelated to each other.
In June of 2002, the European Commission identifies fifteen qualitative indicators of LLL grouped in four main areas: (1) skills, competencies, and attitudes (Area A); (2) access and participation (Area B); (3) resources for Lifelong Learning (Area C); and (4) strategies and system development (Area D).
In light of this LLL policy analysis, the assessment and feasibility of the policy-making could be supported by intelligent DSS based on this common language. DSS is a computer technology solution that can be used to support complex decision making and problemsolving. Over the past three decades, DSS has taken on both a narrower or broader definition, while other systems have emerged to assist specific types of decision-makers faced with specific kinds of policy-making problems (Shim et al., 2002). As a computer-based system the DSS, simplifying the language, knowledge, and problem processing systems, could: and spell out the multiple indicators, taxonomies, and analyses conducted; connect all variables aimed to highlight the theoretical policy-effects associations.
In the end, the model could show the effects of the overall system under the application of a certain policy. In this way, to obtain the desired achievements, the policymaker would have the opportunity to explore the consequences of the introduction of new LLL policies in advance, as well as its effective application, testing different scenarios.

Limitations
This study has some limitations, such as the presence of researches with different approaches in the vast area of lifelong learning. Indeed, lifelong learning policies could be applied to very specific fields, such as computer science or medical professions, to extreme generic jobs. Moreover, approaches of such studies present methodological differences among them, which make comparisons hard to establish. Many of these studies are based on descriptive and narrative experiences related to EU projects developed, whereas just a limited portion of them regard quantitative studies. Finally, some of European countries, such as Slovenia, do not present any study in relation to the experience of LLL policies in the past ten years.

Conclusion
The aim of this contribution was to deal with and then report about, the education policies aimed at increasing employability applied across Europe, through a comparative review of adult education and LLL. Such a recognition allows unearthing successful programmes applied by countries that tackled the unemployment raising of the past years more efficiently than others, confining the damages arose by social exclusion and inequality. This promises a potential for a stronger strategic focus, greater synergies and sharing best practices, simplification of the structure with fewer actions, as well as changes that are in line with the proposed recommendations for a provision of more inclusive and accessible opportunities. Perhaps most significantly, the new education and training programmes bring about a positive change to the legal framework of the programme, committing the Commission and Member States to ensure particular efforts to facilitate the participation of people with difficulties for educational, social, gender, physical, psychological, geographical, economic and cultural reasons (Kapoor et al., 2017). This is a significant step in the process and represents a unique opportunity to implement LLL for all.
On the other hand, this contribution aimed at proposing a tool to support policy-making, which can be constituted by an intelligent DSS that would facilitate the institutions' decision processes and its policy-making. In particular, a DSS can show which education policy is needed, preventing future labour crisis and the formation of more NEET individuals. The creation of such an intelligent DSS could have implications on the whole of the European community, especially for policymakers as a guideline in the process of decision making for identifying appropriate measures for supporting young people and adults, taking into account diversity issues that represent risks of social exclusion and deepening the analysis of several labour market policies to capitalize on existing knowledge. Note 1. Horizon 2020 is the biggest EU Research and Innovation programme ever with nearly e80bn of funding available over seven years (2014 to 2020)in addition to the private investment that this money will attract. Horizon 2020 is the financial instrument implementing the Innovation Union, Reviewing twenty years of LLL policies a Europe 2020 flagship initiative aimed at securing Europe's global competitiveness. Seen as a means to drive economic growth and create jobs, Horizon 2020 has the political backing of Europe's leaders and the Members of the European Parliament. They agreed that research is an investment in our future and so put it at the heart of the EU's blueprint for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth and jobs.