Introduction
The Netherlands' Presidency of the European Union:
Modernising Social Europe
Paul de Beer, Erik de Gier, and Kees Vos*
During six months, from 1 July 2004, The Netherlands holds the presidency of the Eur opean Union. As in 1991 and 1997, the editorial board of the Dutch-Flemish Tijdschrift voor A rbeidsvraagstu kken (Journal of Labour Stu dies) would like to commemorate this with a special issue. The previous special issues were in Dutch only. This time it seems appropriate to underline the growing significance of Eur opeanisation with an English issue. We expect it to provide an opportunity to discuss social policy issues and priorities in a broader Eur opean context.
When addressing the social policy issues and priorities one can say without exaggera tion that nowadays the European policy agenda is largely dominated by the Lisbon strategy. At the Lisbon Summit in 2000, the European am bition for the year 2010 was 'to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge- based economy in the world, capable of sus tainable economic growth with more and bet ter jobs and greater social cohesion'. More or less mid-way the Lisbon strategy now, Europe is facing the kind of severe social and econom ic challenges such as increasing budget defi cits, an ageing workforce, stagnant economic and employment growth that might endanger the Lisbon objectives. How to support innova tion and the transformation into a knowledge society under these social and economic con ditions? How to create more and better jobs
when economic growth is far from sustain able? How to enhance social cohesion in a Eur opean Union with more diversity than ever as a consequence of the recent enlargement? In other words, how to combine innovation, en largement and social cohesion in such a way that we can still hope to realise the Lisbon ob jectives by 2010?
These are some of the questions the Nether lands will have to address during its presi dency. This is underlined by Frank Vanden- broucke, the Belgian Minister of Labour and Pensions, who asks in his column in this issue for a blueprint of European social policy for the next few years to make the enlargement a so cio-economic success. In another column, Aart-Jan de Geus, the Dutch Minister of Social Affairs and Employment, presents his ideas on this kind of blueprint by stating his presidency ambition to contribute towards shaping a mod ern and activating social policy. In this context he cites the priorities of improving the adapt ability and flexibility of the labour market, tak ing into account modern forms of work orga nisation and a growing diversity in labour sup ply and working and living patterns, modernis ing social protection systems, and advancing the knowledge economy by investing in hu man capital and improving labour productiv ity. This also alludes to some of the topics of this special issue.
With respect to social protection, Kees Gouds waard and Bart van Riel conclude that the * Prof. P.T. de Beer is Professor of Labour Relations at the University of Amsterdam, affiliated with the Amsterdam
Institute of Advanced Labour Studies (AIAS) and De Burcht (Dutch Trade Union Museum), and a member of the editorial board of this journal.
Prof. H.G. de Gier is Professor of Social Policy at the University of Amsterdam, Director of SISWO/Social Policy Research, and guest editor of this issue.
Dr. C.J. Vos works at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, Directorate for International Affairs, and is a member of the editorial board of this journal. E-mail: cvos@minszw.nl.
The Netherlands' Presidency of the European Union Member States face the common challenge of
making their social systems more sustainable. In their view, an implementation of the neces sary reforms can be supported by the method of open co-ordination. Co-ordination is also addressed in the article by Maroesjka Versant- voort, Marjolein Peters, and Ilse Vossen. Com paring the forms of policy co-ordination in Australia, Canada and the US, they argue that arrangements with leeway for greater differen tiation could yield more effective co-ordina tion. As regards labour and social protection legislation, Manfred Weiss notes that there is still a considerable gap between theory and practice in the new Member States. From his point of view, this will challenge the EU to build up an integrated system of industrial re lations.
As regards work organisation and quality, in his article on work in the twenty-seven Eur opean countries, Peter Smulders presents a more or less differentiated view on the north- south divide in Europe. Another labour market question frequently posed in connection with the enlargement pertains to the extent of po tential migration from the accession and can didate countries to the EU. Hubert Krieger and Bertrand Maitre conclude that limited but highly qualified migration is the most likely. Koen Breedveld and Loek Groot describe new forms of life course arrangements as important instruments for combining work and unpaid activities such as child care, all the while sti
mulating labour participation.
Referring to the knowledge society in his column, Willy Buschak, Acting Director of the Dublin Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, notes another European divide. Research conducted by his in stitute reveals a significant north-south divide on knowledge society indicators. This finding is further elaborated upon by Mika Nauma- nen, who shows that as precondition for a competitive and knowledge-based Europe, in novation is very complex, since countries might lead in one dimension and lag behind in another.
The enlargement has obviously vastly al tered Europe's social portrait. In many ways Europe is now not only faced with a north- south divide but an east-west one as well. Sur prisingly, as Willy Buschak observes, the values and priorities of Europe's citizens are not that divergent. On both sides of the great divide, la bour and social protection are considered es sential components of a good life. Apparently greater diversity in structure and more unifor mity in values can coincide. This leads to a question on the future of social Europe. Will conflicting forces of convergence and diver gence still result in something of a European social model? Or will the modernisation of so cial Europe inevitably support a multi-speed Europe? These questions are discussed in the concluding article by the editors of this special issue of the Tijdschrift v oor A rbeidsvraagstuk ken .
