The competitiveness rationale, sustainable growth and the need for enhanced economic coordination

Intereconomics

Volumn 45, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 136-140

  Bongardt, Annette ^a   Torres, Francisco ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77953785508     PISSN: 00205346     EISSN: 1613964X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10272-010-0332-9     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. European Commission: Europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. COM (2010) 2020 final, Brussels, 3 March 2010.
2. In this respect, the Europe 2020 Strategy, barely presented, already faces the challenge of catching up with events. Given the urgency of avoiding a default in Greece and later on contagion to other eurozone countries, ad hoc coordination between the Commission, the Euro-group and even the IMF took place within the ESM.
3. The Treaty on the Functioning of the EU provides that the Council is to adopt broad economic policy guidelines (Article 121) and employ-ment guidelines (Article 148), specifying that the latter must be con-sistent with the former. The guidelines for employment and economic policies are therefore presented as two distinct (but intrinsically inter-connected) legal instruments: a Council Recommendation on broad guidelines for the economic policies of the member states and of the Union (Part I of the Europe 2020 Integrated Guidelines) and a Council Decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the mem-ber states (Part II of the Europe 2020 Integrated Guidelines). Together these guidelines, implemented by the above-mentioned legal instru-ments, form the integrated guidelines for implementing the Europe 2020 Strategy.
4. European Commission, op. cit.
5. According to schedule (COM (2010) 2020 final, annex 3), the process in 2010 would then continue with European Commission proposals on the Europe 2020 integrated guidelines, the debate in the European Parliament on the strategy and the integrated guidelines, the defini-tion by the Council of Ministers of the key parameters (EU/national ob-jectives, emblematic initiatives and integrated guidelines). In June the European Council would approve the Europe 2020 strategy, validate the EU and national objectives and adopt the integrated guidelines. Thereafter, the European Commission would present practical guide-lines for the subsequent steps of Europe 2020, the Autumn European Council would have an in-depth discussion about a selected topic (for instance research and development and innovation), and the Member States would present their stability and convergence programmes and national reform programmes. In 2011, the European Commis-sion would present its annual report to the Spring European Council, with opinions on the national stability and convergence programmes and proposals for recommendations. The Council of Ministers would analyse the Commission's recommendation proposals in an ECOFIN dedicated to the Stability and Growth Pact. The European Parliament, in a plenary debate, would adopt a resolution. The European Coun-cil would evaluate progress and formulate strategic guidelines. The member states, the European Commission and the Council would fol-low up on the recommendations, implement reforms and elaborate reports. In 2012 there would the same procedure, with particular at-tention to the follow-up of the process.
6. See for instance D. Gros, T. Mayer: Financial Stability beyond Greece: Making the most out of the European Stabilisation Mechanism, VoxEU.org, 11 May 2010.
7. The meaning and the implications of a "European model" under the Lisbon Strategy are discussed in A. Bongardt, F. Torres: Is the EU Model Viable in a Globalized World?, Ch. 12, in: P. Della Posta, A. Verdun, M. Uvalic (eds.): Globalization, Development and Integra-tion - a European Perspective, Basingstoke 2009, pp. 215-231, Palgrave Macmillan.
8. European Commission: Consultation on the Future "EU2020" Strategy, COM (2009) 647 final.
9. Council of the European Union, Presidency Conclusions on the Brus-sels European Council, 10-11 December 2009, http://www.europa-eu-un.org/articles/en/article_9310_en.htm.
10. S. Tilford, P. Whyte: The Lisbon Scorecard X, Brussels 2010, Centre for Economic Reform.
11. C. Wyplosz: The failure of the Lisbon Strategy, VoxEU.org, January 2010.
12. See S. Tilford, P. Whyte, op. cit. Some of the member states most exposed to the sovereign debt crisis (Greece, Portugal, Spain and to a lesser extent Italy) feature a low ranking in the Lisbon Scorecard.