On the request of the Commission, this Information Report evaluates the perception and experience of EU civil society organisations (CSO) in the implementation of the Consumer Rights Directive (2011/83/EU). The information gathered and the interesting solutions proposed are the result of questionnaire responses, five fact-finding missions (Riga, Rome, Warsaw, Madrid, Brussels) and an Expert Hearing.
You are here
On the request of the Commission, this Information Report evaluates the perception and experience of EU civil society organisations (CSO) in the implementation of EU Consumer and Marketing Law. The information gathered and the interesting solutions proposed are the result of questionnaire responses, five fact-finding missions (Athens, Vilnius, Paris, Lisbon, Brussels) and an Expert Hearing.
The EESC has been asked by the European Commission to contribute to the EC's mid-term evaluation of the Erasmus+ programme. In this context, two questionnaires were widely disseminated by the EESC in the member states and four fact-finding missions have been organised. The EESC also held an expert hearing to collect the views of specialised civil society organisations. An information report has been drafted containing the results of this exercise, accompanied by a detailed technical appendix containing important data on the awareness and perception of the programme. The aim of this evaluation was to provide information to the EC on the experience of civil society organisations with the enlarged and improved programme.
In its evaluation of the implementation of EU directives on legal migration from the perspective of organised civil society in selected Member States, the EESC considers the impact of these directives to be generally positive, albeit partial and fragmented. It also notes the impact of irregular migration on the directives' applicability.
The EESC provides a series of recommendations, covering the design of wider legal channels for labour migration; the role of the social partners and other organisations in this field; a simplified implementation of the directives and the modification of some of them; fact-based discourse to better inform the general public, integration and the fight against discrimination.
Following a request from the Commission, the information report seeks to provide input for the Commission's interim evaluation of Horizon 2020 and, in addition, of its Science with and for Society (SwafS) sub-programme.
The EESC's recommendations are based on the views of civil society organisations gathered by EESC Members through an online questionnaire and a number of fact-finding missions.
The EESC welcomes the CEF's support for clean, low-carbon transport and sustainable energy structures, as well as the attention given to energy vulnerability. However, the Committee would like to see more financial resources allocated to the CEF.
It will be possible to meet the expectations of city "users" – inhabitants, businesses, visitors and administrators – thanks to digital service ecosystems overlaying high-quality material and immaterial enabling infrastructure. Establishing this infrastructure will also have a significant impact in terms of growth, employment and productivity.
The Mid-term evaluation of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) is one of the evaluations on which the Commission is consulting the EESC.
The CEF was proposed as a financing programme for the completion of trans-European infrastructure networks in the fields of transport, energy and information and communications technology (ICT).
The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) welcomes the opportunity to take part in the evaluation of the CEF programme. Transport, energy and ICT are also the core of the EESC Smart Islands Project. Therefore, the EESC's response is based on the above mentioned project, which analyses primary data collected through fact-finding missions taking place in the EU in the course of 2015 and 2016.
The 7th European Environmental Evaluators Network Forum (2018 EEEN Forum) will bring together evaluation practitioners, academics, policy-makers, representatives of civil society and other users of environmental evaluations to share views, knowledge and experiences about the impact of evaluating environment and climate policies in recent years.