Short presentation of the workshops conclusions:
Workshop 1 on New technologies and transition: Challenges and opportunities in the future of work:
•The discussion concerned workers’ rights in the context of digitilisation, globalization and demographic change. What rights does platform worker have, for example?
•Professor Alberto Alemanno reminded the audience that, depending on the study you consult, between 9% and 46% of jobs are at risk from automation. The changes are linked to a lot of opportunities but also challenges. Entrepreneurship is a positive option, but new forms of work can lead to precarious employment and lack of social protection.
•The discussion focused on the opportunities, but also the big challenges, the need for skills, decent working conditions and social protection for all, especially for young people. Funding of social security was also discussed.
•The main recommendations from the discussion included:
- There should be more support for young people– specifically through training and education
- That the EU’s Pillar on Social Rights would lead to concrete action from the European Commission to guarantee decent working conditions and social protection for all
- Political populism will only be defeated if the EU strengthens its social dimension and if everyone is included in shaping the future. So a wider consultation is needed of civil society – such as debates and consultations across the EU.
-action should be taken to facilitate transitions between jobs, ensure decent working conditions and social security for all.
Workshop 2 on Rural-Urban dimensions: towards more territorial and social cohesion!
We want a Europe where people living in rural, remote and peri-urban areas are not economically and socially disadvantaged as compared to people living in the cities and towns.
We strive for a Europe where people in rural areas have equal opportunities to live, work and have access to basic services for health, education, transport and communication.
To achieve more territorial and social cohesion,
1) we call for political recognition of rural areas and their needs. We ask the European institutions to come up with a Rural Agenda, i.e. a strategy for the rural areas to reduce the economic and social gap that exists and even widens between rural and urban areas;
2) we call for the Rural Agenda to be implemented at national and regional level through an inter-fund that pools all existing sources of rural development funding to one Rural Fund. So, the call is not for more funds, but more efficient organization of the currently available funds;
3) we call at the local level for the upgrading of rural areas into smart rural areas through the provision of new technologies and infrastructure (such as broadband) and investments into human development and skills through education, training and advisory services.
Workshop 3 on Challenging right-wing populism: The role of civic engagement, education and culture:
In our workshop we focused on challenging right-wing populism in the context of civic engagement, education and culture, with a panel of contributors from Sweden, Spain and Croatia, as well as grassroots practitioners. The session was convened by Volonteurope, European Civic Forum and Culture Action Europe.
We broke into three sub-workshops where we tackled and proposed the following:
• In the subgroup facilitated by the Polish Women's Strike, we concluded about the need to safeguard and develop civic space, and support free and independent media, which is crucial in the coverage of informal citizen mobilization
• In the subgroup facilitated by GemeinsamLeben und Lernen in Europa, from Passau in Bavaria, we concluded about the need to engage refugees in volunteering in their host communities, as soon as possible after their arrival, so that they can be active citizens in their new environments. We also stressed the importance of replicating successful grassroots initiatives which facilitate volunteering for refugees.
• Last but not least, in the subgroup facilitated by ISIS Arts from the UK, we concluded about the need to tap into culture and heritage capacity to ensure open public spaces, which engage citizens in questioning realities. We also addressed the need to develop impact assessment on diverse levels, including well-being and citizenship.
Workshop 4 onNew technologies and transition: What role for civil society in a future of e-democracy?
The online polling showed the top two results:
- As the infrastructure of e-democracy – bridging the gap between politics and citizens, between technology and actual political results
- Digital skills development – provide learning opportunities on digital skills combined with the development of critical thinking
We started with a brief presentation of a study we are conducting on EU online consultations and the role for the EESC and CSOs. Then we proceeded with a panel discussion where the experts all concluded their presentations with a few recommendations. The recommendations were voted upon in the last part of the workshop (after the participants had time to ask questions to the speakers and had a few minutes also to think about their top recommendation). The online polling also included more general questions on the use of ICT to influence decision-making.
Workshop 5 onCountering anti-European populist rhetoric: The use of frames in our communication
The workshop focused on how to counter the toxic anti-European populist discourse that we have been obersving over the last years. We approached this through framing, a method that can shift the way we perceive issues by putting abstract ideas and concepts into certain filters. The EU for example can be framed as a family or as a friendship - implying how we relate to each other, support each other etc.
Two key dynamics struck me: There was a real sense of the opportunity in the room to shift the discourse around Europe, to tell a new and convincing story that we believe in. The other observation was that we tend to think of populist groups as fringe groups of society. However there are also people in the middle of society who have certain legitimate concers around certain issues and with whom this rhetoric resonates.
This is why the key in this workshop was to work out a practical way (based on our own examples) in which we can use frames that best represent the values we and Europe want to stand for as well as how to take such concers on board without falling into the trap of populist rhetoric.
Workshop 6 on Empowering civil society to act and grow in Europe
Summary
•What would be missing for people if civil society organisations would no longer be there”? One participant answered we would have “a big farm with vulnerable sheep's without no watch dogs or protection”, in other words we voice the concerns of people, including those left behind and not heard.
•While civil society space is changing in all countries in the EU, the situation looks different, for some it is shrinking and for others not. The space is changing not only for civil society but also for those supporting us, less resources for government officials, and restrictions or stigmatisation of funders.
•Overall we need alliances and partnership on all levels, with different stakeholders, particularly on local community level to grow and build our joint constituency in favor of the rights we defend, and in support of the people we work for.
One highlighted recommendation per break-out group (see full report)
•A safe environment: Learn from EU external affairs (framework, alert mechanism and crisis response), and from civil society movements inside and outside the EU, how to prevent and protect against intimidation, harassment and violence
•Freedom of assembly: Raise awareness about - often politically motivated - restrictions, and build support with for example parliaments and courts as guardians.
•Freedom of association (focus on funding): Redistribute funds for small NGOs through bigger organisations, and share good practices for engagement with donors.
•Right to participation: Ensure space for civil society and governments to cooperate and exchange, including on civil society's own priorities and concerns.