The document discusses how the Lisbon Strategy was coordinated across different geographical scales from the EU to local levels. It analyzes how the strategy's objectives were implemented from the EU to Bilbao, Spain, with a focus on information and communication technologies. The document concludes that the strategy lacked coordination across scales and that regions play a vital role in engaging citizens. It highlights Bilbao's digital agenda as a good practice of multiscale implementation.

1. ssasas
CCHS - Consejo Superior de
Investigaciones Científicas (Spain) ssasas
Universidade do Porto (Portugal)
PLACING LISBON STRATEGY'S OBJECTIVES WITHIN A MULTISCALAR FRAME
Patrícia ROMEIRO
Annual Conference
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium)
6th - 8th April 2009
Fellowship from the Fundação para a Ciência e
Tecnologia/Ministério da Ciência e Ensino Superior
(Portugal)

2. CONTEXT
EU External challenges
• Globalization ( movement of goods, persons and information)
• Communication Revolution (ICT democratization )
• Knowledge Based Society (and economy)
EU Internal challenges
• Economic Performance (USA .. China, India …diverging trends)
• European Social Model (Ageing)
• EU Enlargement (negotiations)
LISBON STRATEGY

3. PRELIMINARY REMARKS AND TABLE OF
CONTENTS
MAIN QUESTION
How the Lisbon Strategy is being coordinated/developed at the different geographical
scales?
PERSPECTIVE
Multiscalar framework (from EU to sub-national level - Basque Country:Bilbao –
an implementation best practice )
STRUCTURE
1. Lisbon Strategy: from 2000 to 2005
2. Lisbon Strategy, a multilevel governance?
3. Lisbon Strategy implementation from the EU to Bilbao: ICT focus
4. Main conclusions and recommendations

4. 1. Lisbon Strategy: from 2000 to 2005
What kind of delivery?
“one size fits all” development strategies … ineffective in an integrated,
globalized world (Pike et al, 2006)
OPEN METHOD OF COORDINATION
A mean to reconciling pursuit of European objectives with respect for national diversity and
subsidiary through iterative benchmarking of progress against common indicators (EC, 2000)
.
i) General guidelines
ii) Quantitative and qualitative indicators and benchmarks
iii) European guidelines adaptation into national and regional policies
iv) Periodic monitoring, evaluation and peer review (EC, 2000)

5. 1. (Cont.)
• 3% growth rate
Lisbon (2000) • 70 % employment rate (50% women workers, 50 %
for older workers)
• 3 % of GDP in R&D
Mixed results … but obvious delays
(Kok, 2004; EC, 2005)
Lisbon Strategy "re-launch“ (2005)
Key elements
More focus (rigorous objectives´ prioritization) Growth and jobs
Simplification Objectives and procedures
More mobilization of all the actors involved A renewed partnership

6. 2. Lisbon Strategy, a multilevel governance?
European Council European Commission Member States
Guide the process Partnership (clear responsibilities, maximising synergies)
Stronger Develop policy and Implement reforms
ensure implementation
Member States level National Reform Plan
Integrated Guidelines (24)
(NRP)
“where messages can be tuned to national concerns and national debates”
Community Lisbon programme
(regulatory actions, financing (COM, 2005)
Mr/Ms Lisbon
actions and policy development)
Permanent Lisbon Unit
Annual Monitoring …
Define New Priorities Annual Progress Report Implementation Report
Country Recomendations (structural indicators) (structural indicators)

7. 2. (Cont.)
Political Sinergy
Priorities
innovation and creativity
European Union dimension
business environment
Member States dimension
caring for people
Regional dimension (?)
caring for the environment

8. 2. (Cont.)
Member States
“must involve all those with a stake in Europe’s success – national parliaments, the
regions, cities and rural communities, as well as civil society” (COM, 2005)
…. nevertheless
All the EU reports mention the lack of regional implication
(EC, COM)
Regions …. key contribution to the Lisbon Strategy's implementation
• Efficacy and efficiency of delivery (highlighted by the EU)
• Some Guidelines are related to regions´ competence
• Way to mobilize local actors

9. 3. Lisbon Strategy implementation from the
EU to Bilbao: ICT focus
EU
Spain
Basque Country
A good implementation
practice! Bilbao

10. 3. (Cont.)
EU Guidelines in the Spanish NRP
EU Guidelines
7 Pillars
Measures

11. 3. (Cont.)
Lisbon Strategy
(24 Guidelines)
Basque Country
Spain
Regional Lisbon Strategy
Plan, Coordinator and Coordinator
Coordination Unit
Regional Reform Plan 2006-2009

12. 3. (Cont.)
EU
Spain Basque Country
Guid.7. To increase
and improve
investment in R&D
Guid.8. To facilitate
PILLAR 4: The R&D&i Strategy
all forms of innovation
Guid.9. To facilitate
the spread and
effective use of ICT
and build a fully Program: INGENIO 2010 Plan:
inclusive information
PESI 2010: Digital
society Sub-Programs/Plans: Agenda to the Basque
• CÉNIT Country
• CONSOLIDER
i2010 (Information
Society) • AVANZ@
3 actions:
Innovation:
•Inclusion
•Better public services •Companies
•Quality of life •eGovernment

13. (Cont.)
PESI 2010: Digital Agenda to the Basque Country
Initiatives Programs
Bilbao
•Local Digital Agendas
Institutional
•International leadership related
Digital to Local Digital Agendas
Agenda •eGovernment 2007-2012

14. (Cont.)
Digital Agenda, Bilbao 2012
Main areas
1. Public services (@Government)
2. Public space
3. Infrastructures and regulations
4. Organizations (training)
5. ICT sector promotion
6. Diffusion
7. Strategic partnerships
8. Cooperation
9. Internal management •Objectives
improvements •Target group Local
•Promoters Benchmarking
= 40 actions •Other participants
•Timing

15. (Cont.)
Some projects 2008
1. Public services (eGovernment)
New administrative services on-line and information www.bilbao.net
(1st Council Transparency Award)
Services catalogue on demand (website, by e-mail or mobile mensajes)
Simultaneous translation web service in all administrative offices
(immigrant population)
ONA card (integrated electronic card for citizen services)
2. Public space
“Bilbao 39.net” (free wi-fi spaces ): 12 new zones (target= 39)
(…)

16. (Cont.)
Projects
INDICATORS
Main
areas

17. 4. MAIN CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS
From 2000 to 2009 … focusing objectives and improving process (Lisbon
Strategy as a political experimentalism - OMC)
Lack of coordination and communication in the Lisbon process (among the
different geographical scales)
Regions play a vital role to support and engage citizens and stakeholders
to the Lisbon Process (Universities, companies, etc.)
Spain – concern to integrate different actors form the beginning (Regions)
… but …unequal regions` participation in L.S. delivery (performances)
Digital Agenda Bilbao 2012 (ICT) a good practice of multiscale Lisbon
Strategy implementation

18. 4. (Cont.)
Lisbon Strategy must focus more in a multiscalar approach (lessons
provided by other EU action programs: RIS, RITT, etc.)
Improve administrative mechanisms to enable effective participation by
regional/local authorities and regional benchmarking
Lisbon Strategy post-2010 under discussion … important to bear in mind
that it is necessary to communicate the project and engage
organizations/citizens (all EU citizens/organizations need to “fall in love
with Lisbon”).

19. Annual Conference
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium)
6th - 8th April 2009
Thank you for your attention!
Patrícia ROMEIRO (patricia.romeiro@cchs.csic.es)
PhD student at the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (Spain) and University of
Oporto (Portugal)