Search results

This paper seeks to evaluate the EU's “active ageing” agenda as a governance strategy for the activation of older workers, and its impact on the regulation both of those who make, and those who are the objects of, policy. This case study is used to reflect more broadly on the implications of governance strategies for the regulation of social subjects in the European Union (EU).

The paper adopts a model of governance comprising two dimensions, namely formal policy (policy aims) and operational policy (policy means). This model is used to explain how and to what effect, discourses and institutions interact in EU governance to produce particular forms of social subject regulation; in this case, activation.

For the operational dimension, the paper explores how contradictions and tensions within and between employment, pensions and social inclusion policies are reflected in, and the products of, a re‐allocation of responsibilities between the EU, member states, social partners, and individuals. For the formal dimension, it explains how employment for older workers is constructed as having a different meaning to the employment of other workers, and how EU discourse on active ageing disguises crucial inequalities between groups of older workers, both pre‐ and post‐retirement.

The paper concludes that active ageing policy in the EU institutes a new category of social subject, apparently eliding the former distinction between employment and retirement, namely the “activated retiree”.

The paper demonstrates the efficacy of the two‐dimensional approach to the empirical analysis of governance strategies and identifies how key tensions in the production of EU social policies directly impact on the regulation of social subject categories in the EU.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how CALIMERA set out to help ordinary citizens right across Europe to join e‐Europe through the digital services provided by their local cultural institutions and to extend the European research area by sharing knowledge and exchanging best practice with those countries providing strong potential for beneficial research partnerships with Europe in the local cultural services area.

During its 18‐month duration (December 2003 to May 2005) CALIMERA monitored technical developments and solutions emerging from IST and national research and assessed their potential as widely transferable technologies for use by local institutions and citizens. It also aimed to co‐ordinate and sensitise the stakeholders including professional networks, national and local authorities and solution providers, contributing strongly to increased knowledge and confidence for national strategic bodies in designing and implementing IST strategies for local cultural services.

The results of CALIMERA: portal web site www.calimera.org 42 country reports; state‐of‐the‐art report on national and local policies; policy toolkit for cross‐domain working; best practice guidelines; policy and best practice forum; impact measurement recommendations; business models report; solutions noticeboard http://solutions.calimera.org; training guidelines; research road‐map; community mapping model; usability guidelines. Originality/value – The extensive portfolio of guidance, evidence and tools for policy makers and professional practitioners developed by CALIMERA will contribute to enabling local cultural institutions to play the important role necessary for achieving a new citizen‐centred and culturally aware Europe

Much has been analyzed regarding the origins and the impact of rankings and metrics on policies, behaviors, and missions of universities. Surprisingly, little attention has been allocated to describing and analyzing the emergence of metrics as a new action field. This industry, fueled by the “new public management” policy perspectives that operate at the backstage of the contemporary pervasive “regime of excellence,” still remains a black box worth exploring in depth. This paper intends to fill this loophole. It first sets the stage for this new action field by stressing the differences between the policy fields of higher education in the United States and Europe, as a way to understand the specificities of the use of metrics and rankings on both continents. The second part describes the actors of the field, which productive organizations they build, what skills they combine, which products they put on the market, and their shared norms and audiences.

The paper's aim is to present a critical review of the current European process of co‐operation in VET with a special view to the European Qualification Framework and its competence orientation.

The approach reviews the official documentation and the consultation process and a contrastive analysis of the state of the art of research and developments in VET.

In order to make European VET a direct contribution to the revised Lisbon agenda, a more concise shared vision with regard to the processes and structures of vocational education might be needed.

It does not seem possible logically and pragmatically to fully abstract from the processes in which competence is acquired and in which it is going to be used.

Research and development activities in the European Union should be integrated towards an agenda that covers structures, conditions and processes of learning for the world of work.

Apart from a few other contributions, critical accounts of current policies and its implications for research and practice are scarce.

The Bologna Process is perhaps the most important factor that will shape the higher education landscape in Europe over the coming decades. This article attempts to demonstrate how the process is going to affect the strategic environment in which European universities in general, and British universities in particular, are going to have to operate. It looks first at the relationship between the Bologna Process and the Lisbon Agenda. A number of mechanisms are identified on how higher education can contribute to improved economic performance within Europe. Two factors in particular‐increasing university quality and the contribution to labour mobility‐are identified as having important strategic implications. The article then analyses these two factors from the point of view of British universities, and concludes that there are real threats being posed to the position of British universities as a result of the Bologna Process, due to differing perceptions of quality. Finally an analysis is made of the way in which strategic networks are being developed as a result of Bologna. The conclusion is reached that successful relationships must be built around “clusters of trust” formed by universities of the same “pedigree”.

This chapter presents and discusses the value of cultural political economy (CPE) as a theoretical framework for the analysis of the international governance of education. CPE is situated historically as a contemporary example of attempts within the Marxist tradition to explore the relations between the cultural (the world of discourse and practice), the political (actors and institutions), and the economic. The chapter builds on the developed account of CPE to address the challenges presented by the European Union (EU) as an example of international governance. Established accounts of the development of an EU role in the governance of education since the launch of the Lisbon Strategy in March 2000 are examined so as to establish what a CPE approach can offer to attempts to complement and transcend them. In conclusion, the chapter acknowledges the aspects of CPE that remain undeveloped and problematic as well as underlining the terms upon which the CPE as presented here might need to engage with other theoretical approaches.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the transferability of the intellectual capital approach methodology from the corporate to the national level. Just as financial measures fall short of covering major value drivers at the corporate level, gross national product does not sufficiently reflect future potentials to grow and to contribute to a globalising economy with trans‐national value chains, value cycles and value networks. There have been many efforts to develop core indicators of economic performance, such as ratings of competitiveness, global embeddedness, high‐tech exposure, spending in R&D, competencies to read and calculate of students and many more. The project team concluded that those measures showed two major weaknesses: they lack an overall framework and thus an analysis of their interplay and they overemphasise the reporting in relation to the development or management aspect of the factors considered by the respective approaches.

The team aspired to create a prototype knowledge report for Austria as part of a prototype procedure, the “Agenda Knowledge”, which should fuel efforts of the country to change its role in the emerging knowledge society from imitator to inventor. The endeavour was based on the Lisbon Agenda of the European Union, which integrates economic competitiveness and social cohesion. A trans‐disciplinary design was applied which is best described as action research and makes use of many different methods at different stages of the process; all methods were evaluated in terms of their effectiveness, efficiency and social acceptance.

Results of the pilot project comprise a prototype national knowledge report as part of an overarching prototype procedure which is able to deal with incommensurabilities at the level of visions and ends as well as with different paradigms at the level of end‐mean relations in a political rather than in an academic manner.

First process‐oriented approach to the development and monitoring of intellectual capital at the national level.

The recent failure to deliver the Lisbon agenda has led to much soul-searching within Europe (cf. The Sapir Group, 2005). This failure has enlarged the gulf between the limited number of successful knowledge regions, and those regions for whom globalisation has brought further anxiety, job losses and economic restructuring. More recent Lisbon-inspired policies have therefore attempted to build linkages between successful ‘knowledge islands’ and other, outlying and peripheral places, so that all these areas can benefit from concentrations of European knowledge and innovativeness.