The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe

ContentsIntroduction 1

Chapter 1 2 From a pioneering partnership of coal and steel to a mature industrial policy: a 60-year journey

Chapter 2 6 Policies to anticipate global change

Interviews Jorge Pegado Liz – CCMI president 11 Patrizio Pesci – CCMI co-president 12 Göke Daniel Frerichs – EESC president when the CCMI was created 13 Enrico Gibellieri – first co-president of the CCMI 14 Jacques Glorieux – former CCMI co-president 15 Joost van Iersel – former CCMI president 16

Chapter 3 18 Weighing the benefits after a decade

CCMI opinions and reports 24

The

CCM

I: a

deca

de o

f ind

ustr

ial c

hang

e in

Eur

ope

1

IntroductionIf you are responsible for dealing with industrial problems, it is absolutely ne-cessary to talk to the people on the spot who are confronting reality. People speak better about the issues they know. You may not always agree with them, but you need to have their input so as to judge the action needed to improve both the specific and global situation. You cannot work in a vacuum, or on the basis of studies or assessments alone. You need the voice of reality.

The Consultative Commission on Industrial Change (CCMI) has provided that voice. The best evidence of its achievement is that it is still here. The test of usefulness is the capacity, over a period of time, to respond to what your members are looking for.

It was a very fundamental, and at the time quite revolu-tionary concept, to bring together political authorities on one side, and consumers, business, trade unions and other operators on the other. This collective element went beyond the traditional employer-employee relationship. Enabling these stakeholders to be involved in strategy and policy-making in this way, through collective discussion, did not exist before.

The fact that this very far-reaching proposal worked showed that all the parties felt it was in their interests to participate in the debate. Extending the dialogue beyond coal and steel to other areas was common sense.

The CCMI should have an important role to play in the EU 2020 strategy. You can

plan everything, but it will not work unless there is a frame of mind where all the participants seek the best col-lective answers to the challenges confronting them. Jean Monnet was right when he said you cannot have a collective policy if you do not have

a body where the debate can take place; but the debate can only be as

good as the people who participate want it to be.

In the future, the CCMI faces a big challenge. It’s obvious that the crisis has created very significant socio-logical unrest. People feel they have to suffer because of a crisis they did not cause. There is a need to find common ground in a very complex situation where people are full of uncertainty and dissatisfaction.

The assessment of the situation is, unfortunately, straight-forward. What we do about it is more important. The lack of trust is something we have to react to. The only way human beings can restore trust is by working together and ensuring all points of view are taken into account before deciding on the way forward.

Viscount Etienne DavignonFormer European Commissioner for Industrial Affairs

2Th

e CC

MI:

a de

cade

of i

ndus

tria

l cha

nge

in E

urop

e

Chapter 1From a pioneering partnership of coal and steel to a mature industrial policy: a 60-year journey

In the beginning, there was the European Coal and Steel Community. Established by the Treaty of Paris in 1951, it was the first concrete manifestation of the vision of a peaceful and united Europe, which was later to bring about the 1957 Rome Treaties and the creation of the European Community. The French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman, in his famous declaration of 9 May 1950, first proposed that Franco-German coal and steel production be governed by a common High Authority, thus placing the main resources used to wage two world wars under joint control.

The High Authority was to be assisted by a Consulta-tive Committee, made up of producers, workers, and ‘users’ – including retailers and distributors – which met for the first time in Luxembourg in January 1953. But the ECSC Treaty had a finite lifespan of 50 years. In the 1990s, a fierce debate began about the future of the Consultative Committee, with some people urging its early abolition. In the end, it was confirmed that the Committee’s mandate would come to an end in 2002 – half a century after the Treaty entered into force.

As the date approached, the 108 members were deter-mined that the experience and knowledge accumu-lated over five decades should not be lost. They appealed to the European Commission to create a new structure to

continue the work. The Euro-pean Economic and Social Committee (EESC) had already been in place since 1958 as the body representing civil society – including employers and trade unions – within

the EU institutions. So, in May 2000, it was logical for

the Commission to turn to the EESC to help find a format to keep

the group in existence and maintain a structured dialogue in these crucial

industrial sectors. The Council officially sup-ported efforts to preserve the committee’s expertise.

A new perspective

Full integration into the EESC was not possible, since the members were selected in different ways. Individ-uals on the Consultative Committee did not have the same endorsement from national governments and the EU Council that EESC members required. Consequently, in September 2000, the European Commission issued a Communication proposing the creation of a new hybrid body. It drew attention to the ECSC’s unique “experi-ence – notably in the fields of social consensus, industrial restructuring and research”, and called for “a firmly future-based perspective” for the new committee, which would gradually expand to cover all aspects of industrial change in the European Union.

Romano Prodi receives the ECSC flag

The

CCM

I: a

deca

de o

f ind

ustr

ial c

hang

e in

Eur

ope

3

A joint working party was set up to examine the options. On 18 October 2001, the last president of the Consultative Committee, Italian trade unionist Enrico Gibellieri, wrote for-mally to the then EESC president Göke Frerichs, informing him that his members had accepted the negotiators’ pro-posals, and hoping the plan would go ahead as rapidly as possible, in order to secure funds for 2002. As a result, the Council and the European Parliament were able to agree a supplementary budget for the EESC, to enable it to main-tain a structured dialogue on the basis of experience in the coal and steel sector, and take on the challenge of industrial change as part of its permanent work.

And thus the Consultative Commission on Industrial Change came into being – known to this day by its French acronym: CCMI (Commission consultative des mutations industrielles).

The final session of the ECSC Consultative Committee took place in Luxembourg in June 2002. The following month, on 23 July, the Treaty formally expired. At a hand-over cere-mony in Brussels, the flag of the Coal and Steel Community, with its white stars on dark and light blue backgrounds, was lowered and folded. Enrico Gibellieri placed it in the hands of the president of the European Commission, Romano Prodi.

On 24 October 2002, the EESC’s Plenary Assembly formally approved the setting up of the Consultative Commission.

Testing the experiment

The CCMI represents a new kind of model for dialogue and debate between the different actors in European industry, with the aim of drawing up expert ‘opinions’ which are sub-sequently adopted by the full EESC. Today, it is made up of 48 EESC members, and 48 ‘delegates’ coming directly from different industrial sectors and related organisations. In 2002, these were the former members of the Consultative Com-mittee, involved in the coal and steel industries. At that time, there were 24 EESC members and 30 delegates. But the CCMI has grown with each round of EU enlargement and, given the importance of industrial development in the newer Member States, a high proportion of participants come from these countries. Like the EESC members, the delegates are now divided into three groups: employers, employees and various interests.

The new CCMI took a while to settle into its role. At first, some of the former Consultative Committee members were expecting to go on performing the same task as before, regulating the heavy coal and steel industries at the core of the ECSC’s mission. But the legal basis for their work had changed, and they no longer had the power of the High Authority behind them.

“The first assembly which established the tradition of providing a direct voice for industry vis-à-vis European policy-makers was the ECSC Consultative Committee, which provided a forum for the coal and steel industries. The CCMI builds on this experience, providing an important point of dialogue for industry and policy-makers.

“The prosperity of Europe and its people is essentially built on manufacturing industry and its unique value chains, of which the steel industry is one of the backbones. The future of Europe depends on the sound functioning of its industrial value chains, as has been demonstrated by the financial and economic crisis. This is sometimes forgotten by policy-makers. The CCMI gives us a unique opportunity to help make European policies right by delivering advice on policies affecting the development of industry.”

Gordon Moffat, Director General, Eurofer – The European Steel Association

4Th

e CC

MI:

a de

cade

of i

ndus

tria

l cha

nge

in E

urop

e

“The ECSC was a very important body – it had the power to impose levies on coal and steel producers, which paid for restructuring of the sector, and an administration to manage it. All that disappeared,” recalls former CCMI presi-dent Joost van Iersel.

External circumstances were not easy, either. The CCMI was not known, even within the EESC, and acceptance was a lengthy process. Many thought industrial policy was already covered by the EESC’s Single Market, Production and Con-sumption section (INT) and could not see the breathing space for a new body.

But the CCMI gradually found its place. Its third meeting in 2003 was in Dublin, where in 2001 the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions had set up its own Monitoring Centre on Change (EMCC). The two bodies started to coordinate activities, although later, the first CCMI president Josly Piette regretted difficulties in maintaining and following up on these relations.

Enlargement over time

In January 2005, following EU enlargement, the CCMI mem-bership was officially broadened to bring in delegates from the industries undergoing change. Of the 45 delegates, one-third came from the former ECSC Consultative Committee, one-third from the 10 new Member States, and the rest from new sectors including textiles, services, shipbuilding and automobiles. Delegates from the ECSC Consultative Com-mittee ‘users’ group were slowly replaced by representatives of ‘various interests’: a list of relevant organisations – like the European consumers’ body BEUC, for example – was drawn up and they were invited to take part. This process con-tinued in 2010.

Whereas the role of the ‘social partners’ – workers and man-agement – on the CCMI was self-evident from the outset, and both sides had an existing commitment to dialogue,

the representatives of ‘various interests’ took a little longer to find their place. But in 2010, the CCMI elected its first president from this group, Jorge Pegado Liz, and civil society organisations were invited to nominate their own repre-sentatives directly. As a consequence, more of them are now involved in proposing and drafting opinions, bringing new perspectives to the CCMI’s work and taking it into areas it has not previously explored.

Outside the European institutions, the CCMI was also an entirely new actor. But its ‘own initiative’ opinions on specific sectors began to arouse interest. The public hearings with

“When I became a member of CCMI, one year ago, it was for me a first contact with this Commission and I was not aware of the vast scope of topics that it has to cover. Although in the beginning, I wondered what could be the added value of my perspective – my field of expertise is consumer law and policy – I was rapidly struck by the high relevance of many of the opinions prepared by the Commission for consumer welfare.

“I quickly started to wish to contribute to the content of the opinions. Having to face the sometimes complicated procedures within the EESC, I could, however, count on the kind flexibility of the members and the delegates, as well as on the very efficient availability and support of the secretariat. I hope to be able to cooperate effect- ively in the future work of the CCMI, with a view of raising awareness that any industrial development policy needs to take account of the consumer perspective in order to be successful.”

Monique Goyens, Director General, BEUC – The European Consumer Organisation

The

CCM

I: a

deca

de o

f ind

ustr

ial c

hang

e in

Eur

ope

5

industry representatives, held regularly while opinions were being drawn up, started to attract a wider audi-ence. Little by little, the CCMI won acceptance not because it was there, but because it did good work.

As it took in delegates from a broader range of sectors and other interested bodies, the CCMI evolved. Coal and steel became individual industries like the others, but the lessons learnt from 50 years of social dialogue were universally relevant.

Despite its bumpy start, there is now an excellent relationship between CCMI members and delegates, says Mr Van Iersel. “More and more EESC members want to be on the CCMI, because it’s very interesting and it’s dynamic, while it focuses on economic progress.”

How it works

The CCMI meets five times a year. Whereas EESC members are nominated and appointed by national governments and the EU Council, delegates are more informally selected, so their rights are different. The president and the rapporteurs of opinions must be EESC members, while the co-president and co-rapporteurs come from the ranks of the delegates. Delegates do not take part in formal votes on opinions, but hold an informal poll beforehand.

Day-to-day decisions between meetings are taken by the six-man bureau comprising president Jorge Pegado Liz,

co-president Patrizio Pesci, Jacques Glorieux, Enrico Gibellieri, Joost

van Iersel, and Claude Rolin.

The CCMI itself selects and examines important topics, through study groups, typ-ically of six members and six delegates, meeting twice to draft an opinion. The majority of

opinions now come from dele- gates’ initiatives. Although they

are identified as co-rapporteurs, the rapporteurs rely on their expert-

ise, and it is this concrete knowledge that is the CCMI’s unique selling point.

“Each time we ask for ideas we get at least 15 very good ones, so we have to choose,” explains Mr Pegado Liz. “We could do much more if we had more time.” The CCMI also responds, through the EESC, to requests for advice from the European Commission, Parliament and Council. He says that the CCMI’s opinions are now “mature”, and well accepted both within the EU institutions and beyond.

Mr Glorieux believes the CCMI should be drawing up at least 10-12 opinions a year, to make the best use of its expertise. Furthermore, whereas only about 40-50 of the 108 members of the ECSC Consultative Committee actively participated in meetings, some 80 % of CCMI members and delegates are active. “That’s meaningful. It shows people feel very involved in what they are doing. We have a very proactive way of working. That’s why I am confident for the future,” he concludes.

New CCMI sectors included shipbuilding

6Th

e CC

MI:

a de

cade

of i

ndus

tria

l cha

nge

in E

urop

e

Chapter 2Policies to anticipate global changeThe development of the Consulta-tive Commission on Industrial Change over the last 10 years is a reflection of the evolution of industry and services at both European and global levels.

The Treaty establishing the Euro-pean Coal and Steel Community was drafted in the early 1950s, but by the end of the century reality had evolved. These two sectors had been protected from the competitive envir-onment, but when the Treaty expired they had to open up to competition in another way. The policy of subsidising sectors that could not survive on their own was abandoned.

Whereas the ECSC represented a serious effort to put coal and steel production in common and to overcome nation-alism, throughout the 20th century industrial policy in other sectors remained very nationalistic. In areas like automobiles and textiles, it was based on supporting national champions. Europe had to move towards a more open and modern industrial policy.

Yet many of those who worked with both the ECSC and the fledgling CCMI testify to reluctance among European leaders at that time to tackle the issue.

At the start of the 21st century, as the CCMI began to develop its expertise in individual indus-trial sectors, it acquired a new authority – able to assess the desirability of regulation and legislation on a case-by-case basis, linked to specific needs

and conditions. Then in 2004, coinciding with Union enlarge-

ment to 10 new countries, a Euro-pean Commission Communication

calling for a new-style industrial policy fostering structural change in an enlarged

Europe vindicated the CCMI’s approach.

“A strong industrial base remains vitally important for a successful European economy, to create jobs, boost productivity and fuel innovation,” declared EU Enterprise Commissioner Erkki Liikanen. “Only a few years ago such a strong affirmation of industry’s role and of the role of industrial policy would have been unthinkable. Indus-trial policy was being written off as a thing of the past. We therefore need to work with individual sectors to under-stand how our policies affect them.”

Thereafter, the CCMI began to develop good relations with the Commission, especially in the areas of enterprise, employment, internal market and research.

The CCMI examined individual industries

The

CCM

I: a

deca

de o

f ind

ustr

ial c

hang

e in

Eur

ope

7

Human capital in first place

The CCMI’s role is to look to the future. Its mandate involves anticipating, pre-empting and analysing developments, so as to ensure positive, common approaches to the man-agement of industrial change from an economic, social, territorial and environmental point of view. It promotes coordination and coherence in European policy and action throughout all 27 Member States, and aims to keep EU industries competitive while at the same time ensuring developments are socially beneficial or at least acceptable. It stresses the fundamental importance of human capital, and creating the conditions for industrial activities to flourish.

Mr Pegado Liz defines its three main functions as promoting the principles of the EU’s founders through its opinions; meeting the challenge of developments such as global-isation, social networking and new working methods; and anticipating and preparing for industrial change and restructuring. He summarises this as: learning from the past, proactive observation of the present, and anticipating the future.

One strand of work is on cross-sectoral topics that affect all sectors of industry, such as education and training. For example, the CCMI produced opinions on IT-supported lifelong learning in 2006, and on matching skills to the needs of industry in 2010. Own initiative cross-cutting opinions covered a wide range of issues including greenhouse gas emissions in 2006, European environmental rules and global trade integration and outsourcing in 2007.

When the European Commission, Council, EU Presidency or Parliament asks the EESC for advice on an industrial policy issue, it is often the CCMI which draws up the draft, for approval by the full Committee. This was the case with three opinions on the EU’s Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in 2006, 2009 and 2011, for example, and on flexicurity and restructuring, in 2009 (referred by the Swedish Presidency).

The second axis is sectoral policies. Here, the CCMI found that focusing on specific industries helped to draw in rele-vant stakeholders, who wanted to have their say, and to create horizontal links between employers, trade unions and other groups organising around individual topics.

“I volunteered to become a member of CCMI because I wanted to contribute the point of view of the European construction industry – Europe’s largest industrial employer generating 10 % of GDP – to the analysis of the past and the preparation of the future. FIEC, the recognised sectoral social partner on the employers’ side, is well equipped for this role. Via its 33 national member federations in 27 countries, it is fully representative of craftsmen, SMEs and large firms, active in all building and civil engineering activities.

“The construction industry, with its qualified workforce, is able to provide solutions for most of the current and future global challenges related to energy saving, CO

2 reduction, decent housing or

infrastructure for energy, drinking water, wastewater, and transport.

“In addition to providing a friendly atmosphere for lively discussions among colleagues, the CCMI has also been a good forum for introducing the construction industry’s views, in particular to the reports on the ‘internationalisation of SMEs’ and ‘access of third country state-owned enterprises to the EU procurement market’. For the future, I hope that the CCMI can spend 100 % of its efforts on the material issues ahead and 0 % on administrative and structural issues.”

Ulrich Paetzold, Director General, FIEC – The European Construction Industry Federation

8Th

e CC

MI:

a de

cade

of i

ndus

tria

l cha

nge

in E

urop

e

Furthermore, faced with the threat of cheap labour and poor working conditions outside Europe undercutting and destroying manufacturing jobs at home, managements and workers began to identify a common ‘enemy’ in countries like China, and to understand the need to cooperate in con-fronting the challenge of delocation.

The new industrial battlefield

The changes affecting European industry have been dra-matic. In Bilbao, in Spain, to take just one example, three-quarters of jobs in steel and coal had disappeared by the end of the 20th century, throwing thousands of people out of work: a process mirrored across the continent.

Globalisation created the dynamic for companies to go abroad or restructure. In 2006, the CCMI produced a key report assessing the sectoral impact of relocation. “To date, there has been no attempt by public or private institutions in Europe to undertake a comprehensive survey… dedicated exclusively to the issue of relocation from a sectoral point of view,” it found.

“We were at the front of developments, and try to remain so,” confirms rapporteur Mr Van Iersel. As technology and research became increasingly important, the CCMI focused on ICT and services: sectors where Europe was lagging behind. “That’s the new battlefield, where we need to keep in front of China and India,” he adds. “We are more sophisti-cated than them. We say that economies must be sustained by services, otherwise we will fall behind in five to 10 years.

The agricultural vehicle trade fair in Bologna

The

CCM

I: a

deca

de o

f ind

ustr

ial c

hang

e in

Eur

ope

9

The strategy is well founded. We are working closely with the European Commission and we are on the right track.”

Mr Glorieux agrees. Dealing with closure and delocation may seem negative, “but they exist”, he points out. “At the same time, we want to keep the brains in Europe. We know that China has its own limits, and they will still need us. There are a lot of new technologies based on coal, like carbon capture and storage, for example, and Europe is active in these areas. It’s not all about the past.”

Influencing the EU institutions

In turn, the European Commission became more and more attentive to the differences between sectors, and the way workers needed to change their attitudes and skills. In the European Parliament, too, awareness of sectoral issues expanded, as the impact of the economic crisis moved MEPs’ attention away from merely passing legislation.

Inevitably, extending the CCMI’s mandate led to a debate about what ‘industry’ covers, with the growing realisation that a long list of subjects affect industrial development, including employment, social and structural policy, aid and competition rules, research and technology, environmental and sustainable development, energy policy and trade.

The CCMI also had to confront problems such as how to approach overlapping sectors – concluding that some over-lapping was inevitable. “We talk more and more about value chains, which are breaking through sectors and creating a totally new picture,” explains Mr Van Iersel. “The interfaces between sectors create new phenomena. In effect, you can’t speak any longer about simple sectors. Nowadays, living net-works and production plants within large corporations are closely connected with middle-sized and smaller companies in the supply chain. Value chains are strengthened by out-sourcing and external suppliers.”

In an opinion on ‘Value and supply chain development’ in 2007, the CCMI warned of the emergence of “a host of eco-nomic, industrial and social issues – including, for example, outsourcing, employability, and re-skilling, product label-ling and origin, [and] impact on the transport sector”, and called for a new policy towards ‘IICs’ (initial and intermediate companies).

In the EU, more than 85 % of firms are SMEs or micro-enter-prises. There is a widespread belief that smaller companies are the real technical and technological pioneers, and key to job creation. “We are very strong advocates of SMEs, and that is now very popular,” says Mr Van Iersel. “For example, in the modern car, motors do not make the real difference. That is seen in the electronics, design, and gadgets. The car industry is also a major client for textiles. Every vehicle has thousands of parts, and they are not all mechanical.”

“ In my opinion, a European industrial policy should involve:

• A major research effort focused on innovative sectors;

• A policy of internal and public markets oriented towards the emergence of European industrial groups;

• A harmonised fiscal regime ensuring tax equality between companies, whatever their size;

• The launch of large infrastructure and development projects, especially in energy;

• A fair and efficient education and training system in all Member States.”

Josly Piette, First President of the CCMI

10Th

e CC

MI:

a de

cade

of i

ndus

tria

l cha

nge

in E

urop

e

Implementing the EU 2020 strategy

One of the CCMI’s current priorities is improving the eco-nomic, financial and social environment, battered by the economic crisis, within the framework of the EU 2020 strategy. Because it has already focused for 10 years on industrial policy, which is a more recent priority for the Euro-pean Commission, the CCMI has an especially important role in its implementation.

When the Commission launched the strategy, it invited the EESC’s opinion on one of the seven flagship initiatives, focused on “An industrial policy for the globalisation era to improve the business environment, notably for SMEs, and to support the development of a strong and sustainable industrial base able to compete globally”. In May 2011, the EESC adopted three different opinions. ‘An industrial policy for the globalised era – putting competitiveness and sustain-ability at centre stage’ proposed the streamlining of EU and bilateral coordination, and for the Council and Commission to draw up a series of priorities and time frames.

The second opinion, ‘The external dimension of European industrial policy – is the EU’s trade policy really taking the interests of European industry into account?’ called for jointly agreed rules to enable companies to compete under fair conditions. Finally, the opinion on ‘Third country state-owned enterprises in EU public procurement markets’ wel-comed the World Trade Organisation Agreement on Govern-ment Procurement, but urged the EU to defend the interests of European companies in both internal and international markets.

“EU 2020 is very important for our industrial future,” insists Mr Van Iersel, who chairs the EESC’s EU 2020 Steering Committee. “We have 27 different industrial plans in the EU, so how can we create a level playing field? We need EU 2020 to point these policies in the same direction.”

The CCMI is trying to apply this principle to concrete cases. Every European country has its own defence policy, for example, leading to fragmentation, duplication and over-production and lack of interoperability in the defence industry.

National governments need to realise that they can make more progress together – and that applies to all industrial sectors. Now, at last, with the support of the CCMI, more Member States are developing a budding convergence.

Looking forwards: the birth of the CCMI

The

CCM

I: a

deca

de o

f ind

ustr

ial c

hang

e in

Eur

ope

11

InterviewsJorge Pegado Liz CCMI president

“On this 10th anniversary, we are not looking at the past, although we have the lessons, and we use them,” says the cur-rent CCMI president, Jorge Pegado Liz, a former member of both the European and Portuguese parliaments.

He is also a lawyer and expert on con-sumer protection, with experience in dif-ferent sectors including insurance, media and town planning. “We want this to be the moment to reflect on what we should do in the future.”

He pays tribute to his predecessors, who as presidents and co-presidents over the last decade have watched over the CCMI’s “heritage” and established its reputation. “We tried to continue in the same spirit as the Schuman Declaration: adopting a ‘step-by-step’ approach to building Europe.”

The CCMI’s aims, he adds, are to encourage enterprises to expand and modernise, improve working conditions, promote the rational use of natural resources and develop equitable international trade.

“But we don’t do general themes. In each opinion we approach a very concrete case or sector and its problems. We leave the theories to academics. And we try to get as large a consensus as possible between different groups.

“The composition of the CCMI is very special. Half the participants are delegates, who

make all the difference, because they are the direct representatives of the

stakeholders. They come from industry and are directly involved in workplaces. This is our inher-itance from the European Coal and Steel Community Consul-tative Committee, and the real added value of the CCMI.”

Mr Pegado Liz points out that he is the first CCMI president to come

from a professional rather than an industrial background, and to represent

consumers. This symbolises the expansion of the body to cover a wider range of topics, including

SMEs, research and development, environmental protec-tion, and more. Furthermore, it has brought in a larger pro-portion of women: for the first time, a recent CCMI opinion had a female rapporteur and co-rapporteur.

“We also enlarged our notion of industry, for example to banking, creative work and publishing, although we con-tinue to look at heavy industries, like shipyards, coal mines and steel.

“Little by little, as president, I have come to understand the real value of the CCMI, which is not very well known by many EESC members,” he concludes. “I am very much in favour of keeping the CCMI in the Committee and reinforcing its powers. I think we should be proud of it.”

12Th

e CC

MI:

a de

cade

of i

ndus

tria

l cha

nge

in E

urop

e

After 10 years, says Mr Pegado Liz, the CCMI is at a turning point. “That is why we have been asking EU institutions, stake-holders and Member States to share with us their experi- ence and advise us on the best way of proceeding in the future. My objective, for the rest of my mandate, is to con-vince my colleagues that the CCMI is necessary and useful, and should be supported in doing even better work.”

Patrizio Pesci CCMI co-president

“When I arrived at the CCMI for the first time I noticed they made very general opinions, which didn’t have a strong impact on the European Commission,” recalls Patrizio Pesci.

A former EESC member, he has been a CCMI delegate since 2008, with more than 25 years’ experience working with the Italian employers’ association Confindustria in Brussels. “Through my contacts in industry, I started to promote initiatives in individual sectors that needed support.”

Mr Pesci believes he is the only CCMI delegate nomin-ated and sponsored by three associations: the European Confederation of Woodworking Industries, Orgalime (Euro-pean Engineering Industries Association), and Acembike (European Motorbike Industry).

His experience demonstrates the growing success of the CCMI in addressing the problems facing specific industries in crisis, especially when timed to coincide with publication of European Commission proposals or Communications.

“I remember that at the beginning of the 1990s, Europe’s motorcycle sector was completely abandoned by the

European Commission,” he recalls. “They realised it could not compete with the challenge from Japanese and other manufacturers, so they asked us to make a study to see if the industry could be saved.” Up to that time, the CCMI had only focused on car manufacturing. “Two-wheelers were a vital sector, providing employment in many Member States including Italy, Poland and Romania,” points out Mr Pesci.

“But it had big problems.

”The outcome was a double success. The CCMI finally approved the opinion on

‘Industrial change and prospects for the motorcycle industry in

Europe’ in February 2010, putting forward concrete recommen-dations for reviving the sector through training, restructuring and partnerships.

But in advance of that, in November 2009, a hearing took

place at the international trade fair in Milan – the most important motor-

cycle trade event in Europe.

“All the actors were there: parts manufacturers, trade unions, international and trade press… when you target such an important event you get the real protagonists,” explains Mr Pesci. “It was so successful that the following year the organisers invited me to come back and explain the opinion in front of the same audience. It is very important to have follow-up. It’s no use adopting opinions and leaving them in a drawer.”

As a consequence, the CCMI initiated similar action in other sectors, including agricultural and construction vehicles, and woodworking.

In April 2011, an opinion on ‘Agricultural machinery and construction equipment’ followed a hearing at the tractor

The

CCM

I: a

deca

de o

f ind

ustr

ial c

hang

e in

Eur

ope

13

trade fair in Bologna in November 2010. Even Chinese manufacturers were there, and it became clear that they were making copies of European models and selling them in Europe. “We realised that import controls were not adequate,” explains Mr Pesci.

“I am very proud of these initiatives,” he concludes. “It is important to focus on specific areas – to meet the actors and investigate the problems. I come from a practical back-ground, and I want the CCMI to be practical too.”

Göke Daniel Frerichs EESC president when the CCMI was created

“The core of the concept of this new working body is to continue the great tradition of the economic and social partners’ involvement in the building of Europe,” said the then EESC presi-dent Göke Frerichs in 2002, at the launch of the CCMI.

As the members of the Consultative Com-mittee gathered to commemorate the end of the Coal and Steel Community, Mr Frerichs assured them that as delegates in the newly formed CCMI, they would continue to be involved in European pol-icy-making. “It was a great moment for European unity,” he remembers.

After 21 years as an EESC member, the former businessman and German Bundestag parliamentarian has as much experi-ence of that principle of European cooperation as anybody. Just as the EU was founded in the wake of the Second World War, he says, the CCMI is also a symbol of peace.

“Cooperation is vital at all levels: economic, social, industrial; between trade unions, employers, and consumers. They must work together – that is the only way Europe can sur-vive and grow.

“The creation of the CCMI opened up new avenues: for the first time, an EESC working group was responsible for drawing up opinions as part of a direct structured dialogue between EESC members and representatives of sectors and interest groups affected by industrial change. This allowed the problems to be examined in all their complexity – not

only the economic outcome but also the social and environmental impact – and solutions to be

incorporated in the decision-making pro-cess of the EU,” he explains.

“The main point was not only to concentrate on steel and coal, but on the whole industrial landscape. Were we successful? Yes, abso-lutely! That is reflected in the pres-ence of delegates from the paper industry, car manufacturing, fish-

eries, food, ports and shipping… a broad range of sectors.”

Mr Frerichs is convinced that the CCMI has a strong and positive influence on EU

industrial policy formation, although there are still problems to overcome.

One significant obstacle is persistent rivalry between Member States, particularly as EU enlargement has brought in new national industries. He points to a number of sectors, including shipbuilding and port services, where interests conflict.

“We must cooperate more, in order to face the challenge from countries like China and the USA,” he insists. “A European industrial policy is not yet in place.

14Th

e CC

MI:

a de

cade

of i

ndus

tria

l cha

nge

in E

urop

e

“The CCMI’s main mission should be to foster cooperation, but we have not yet done enough to get this problem under control.”

But Mr Frerichs remains optimistic. One of the CCMI’s main successes has been to foster partnership between workers and employers. “We need a social market economy that takes full account of social aspects,” he explains. “Industrial policy is a question of destiny for Europe. We don’t want to just buy. We need to produce, in order to create and keep jobs.”

Enrico Gibellieri first co-president of the CCMI

With a 40-year career as a chemical engin-eer and expert in steel manufacture at the Centro Sviluppo Materiali (CSM), Italy’s main industrial materials research centre, coupled with a voluntary com-mitment to the Italian, European and international trade union movements, Enrico Gibellieri has never lost his close links with the shop floor. “I had the chance to combine the technical and social aspects of my work in a way that few people can do,” he points out.

A member of the ECSC Consultative Committee since the 1980s, and its last president in 2002, he worked with former European Commission president Romano Prodi to close the coal and steel treaty and pave the way for a new evolution in EU industrial policy-making. He remains a member of the six-man CCMI bureau.

At the final session of the ECSC Consultative Committee in Luxembourg in June 2002, Mr Gibellieri paid tribute to the 262 miners – 136 of them Italian – who died in the Bois du

Cazier colliery fire in Marcinelle, Belgium, in 1956, and to all other workers who had lost their lives in Europe’s industries.

As well as supporting research, the ESCS Treaty contained powerful social provisions offering protection and training for workers, and hundreds of thousands of new homes, he recalls. “The people who wrote the Treaty had a vision – it was not just about creating a single market.”

The mandate of the new CCMI was to take this legacy and bring it up to date, and he believes it has succeeded in making the transition while preserving half a century of experience. “We have already produced over 100 opinions,

and they are all related to real issues. But it has not been an easy task.

“The new CCMI was not immedi-ately accepted. Its delegates did

not have the same status as EESC members and the CCMI still has only five plenary sessions a year. The most important innovation was that we introduced the sec-toral dimension, with delegates from both trade unions and

employers.

“Previously, within the main Euro-pean industrial sectors, the EESC was

perceived as a body working on general and transversal issues and policies,” he continues.

“That is why our point of view was considered to be very different. In the beginning this was seen as a problem, not an opportunity.

But we made important progress and stabilised our struc-ture. Now our role is widely appreciated, both inside and outside the EESC, and the CCMI’s own work made this big change possible.”

The

CCM

I: a

deca

de o

f ind

ustr

ial c

hang

e in

Eur

ope

15

Looking back at the European Coal and Steel Community, Mr Gibellieri recalls that Europe has enjoyed over 60 years of peace. “Why does that matter? The people who signed that Treaty knew that there were only 20 years between the First and Second World Wars; and that weapons and energy were among the main reasons countries fought. Robert Schu-man’s idea of putting these two vital sectors together was simple but effective.”

He recalls speaking to Romano Prodi after the European Commission issued its first Communication on industrial competitiveness in December 2002. “The very day of the presentation of the Communication in Brussels, he said to me: ‘Are you satisfied that we are starting to talk about industrial policy again?’ Now, with Europe 2020, it is at the top of the EU agenda.”

Mr Gibellieri draws comparisons between the current eco-nomic crisis, and the crisis in the coal and steel industry in the 1970s and 80s. “That was managed in a very different way. Decisions were taken at EU level to reduce the over-production of steel. But now each Member State has its own recovery plan, often in conflict with others.

“We have pushed to give importance to manufacturing sec-tors because it is good from both the economic and social point of view, although naturally we need research and sub-stantial innovation to reduce their environmental impact. But we cannot live only on financial transactions.

“We should be proud to be connected to the very first Euro-pean organisation, and at the same time have the capacity to act now with an eye to the future. Following the thinking of Enrico Berlinguer, General Secretary of the PCI (Italian Communist Party) in the 1980s, we should be, at one and the same time, both conservative and revolutionary. We are the inheritors of this legacy, and after 10 years it is time for renewed reflection on whether we are succeeding in ful-filling our mandate.”

Jacques Glorieux former CCMI co-president

Jacques Glorieux is one of the two remaining CCMI dele-gates who also sat on the ECSC Consultative Committee. In the 1990s, EU coal consumption overtook production, and the 15 Member States were increasing coal imports from countries like Poland.

As a Belgian coal trader he found himself in the committee’s importers and consumers (users) group, predecessor of the CCMI’s various interests group.

Mr Glorieux was CCMI co-president from 2004-06, and is coordinator of his group. Besides the heterogeneous nature of the membership itself, ranging from SMEs to consumers and NGOs, there is also a difference of approach between members and delegates.

“Since delegates are only concerned with CCMI activities, they are probably more dedicated to it, whereas members are involved in the CCMI on top of their work for other

16Th

e CC

MI:

a de

cade

of i

ndus

tria

l cha

nge

in E

urop

e

sections of the EESC. Some are so busy it’s hard to get them around the table.” Thus, one of his tasks is to bring people together.

The effort has been more than worth it, he believes. “Struc-tural dialogue is brilliant: it’s a constructive way to work together. We don’t agree on positions from time to time, but debate takes place in a positive manner. The ECSC was the beginning of Europe, and when it ended, everyone would have been sad to lose this form of dialogue.

“What I appreciate is the opportunity to talk to people socially, outside the meeting rooms. Networking is very important. People get to know each other better, and that has created a very good spirit.” It took time, especially within the various interests group, for people to find their feet.

“We had to develop our professionalism. But I think we have gained good acceptance and recognition. We try to look ahead and see what problems are coming up, and ensure topics are relevant to the mandate of the CCMI,” explains Mr Glorieux. It is more efficient to produce an opinion when a decision is about to be taken, and the European Commis-sion has come to recognise the CCMI as a valuable source of knowledge.

He was part of a delegation that visited China in 2004. “We had fantastic contact with these people and were very well received,” he remembers. In return, a Chinese delegation came to Europe, to study in particular the way regions are regenerated after mine closures.

“We have plenty still to achieve,” admits Mr Glorieux, including further strengthening links with the European Commission and Parliament, and monitoring follow-up of opinions. But he sees the CCMI as “the human side” of the EU – “that may be one of our strengths”. For example, it takes account of the social aspects of closures and delocation. And as big enter-prises are dismantled, it is ever more important to generate jobs in SMEs.

Mr Glorieux believes the CCMI does have influence. “We are working on that, and we have had positive reactions. We are more flexible than other EU bodies, and use less budget. We have grown more efficient in the last five years, but that’s because we had to fight to achieve recognition. Now that we have it, it’s helping us to have closer contact with people. I am confident we will continue in that direction.”

Joost van Iersel former CCMI president

“We had a difficult start. There was resistance towards the CCMI within the EESC, because the groups saw it as a threat.”

Joost van Iersel was a Christian Democrat MP in the Dutch Parliament until 1994. “I was very interested in industrial policy, and by coincidence my first EESC opinion was on this topic, although I was not a member of the CCMI at the time,” he says. He drew up the CCMI’s first real policy statement, on ‘Industrial change: current situation and prospects’, as a

The

CCM

I: a

deca

de o

f ind

ustr

ial c

hang

e in

Eur

ope

17

‘visiting card’ for the new body, because “nobody knew what it was going to do”.

Taking his inspiration from the innovative Swedish former CEO of Volvo, Pehr Gyllenhammar, Mr Van Iersel set out an agenda for dealing with industrial change. “Until 10 years ago, the European Commission was not interested in indus-trial policy. The emphasis was on monetary union and macroeconomic policies. At the time there was not much interest in sectoral change or value chains. Originally, the Commission was primarily a legislative body,” he explains. Rules were generally applied across sectors, regardless of different conditions.

But with the advent of the 21st century, change became a dominant issue anyway. “We started our work gradually. We got very few official requests from the Commission. It was a permanent, up-hill fight,” he recalls.

In 2006, Mr Van Iersel became president, and kept up the momentum of reform. The CCMI became increasingly active in launching its own initiatives. “We identified issues, and our strategy was to fill the policy gaps. And the reputation of the CCMI changed,” he notes.

“The members like the work because it is very concrete. It’s not abstract. It speaks about developments on the shop floor, in factories and laboratories and the world at large.”

The CCMI is more “businesslike” than its parent body, and looks less political, claims Mr Van Iersel. “We work consensu-ally. And at industrial-sector level, as in companies, getting agreement between management and workers is the best way. They both share an interest in issues like R&D and devel-opment, earning capacity, and skills and training. I am far from the rather outmoded views on the opposition between workers and employers.

“In the new, very dynamic world, all layers of manage-ment and employees are dependent on each other. They necessarily need to improve conditions for working together. Our point of view is that change is the rule of the day. Therefore, legislation should be focused on change.

“It is paramount to keep a healthy future for industry, ser-vices and value chains. We try to sustain the Commission and Council in taking the right direction, based on a continuous cycle of change. That’s the only way for Europe to survive in a world that’s very competitive on production, technology, skills and quality.

“The CCMI remains a little bit of a strange animal in Brussels, but strange in a very positive way.”

18Th

e CC

MI:

a de

cade

of i

ndus

tria

l cha

nge

in E

urop

e

Chapter 3Weighing the benefits after a decade

The CCMI’s approach is “forward-looking, integrated and dynamic”, aiming to bring different actors together to pro-mote sustainable industrial change without damage to any part of society.

Its philosophy is summed up in a 2005 opinion on ‘Restruc-turing and employment’: “The Commission firmly believes that restructuring must not be synonymous with social decline and a loss of economic substance. On the contrary, restructuring can underpin economic and social progress – but only if such measures are correctly anticipated…”

Over the last decade, the CCMI has fulfilled a useful role: raising awareness of the need to preserve a sound industrial base in Europe, and to anticipate change so that it is less painful for individuals and communities. Indeed, some say the difference between restructuring and industrial change is that whereas the first is an unstoppable train that ‘runs you over’, the second can be planned and managed, for example through social dialogue. In particular, the CCMI has succeeded in highlighting import-ant sectors that were being neglected by the European Commission, says Mr Gibellieri, such as the metalworking industry, which was “not a priority” for the EU. “We helped it to emerge,” he says. In 2008, a CCMI opinion on ‘Competi-tiveness of the metals industries’ pointed out that this sector played an important role in the value chain of much Euro-pean manufacturing, and urged investment in innovation while, at the same time, taking care of environmental and social impacts.

Focusing on the ‘Metalworking industry’ in 2010, the CCMI drew attention to the 400 000 SMEs that made up the sector. “Because of this structure, the European Commission was not very attentive,” agrees Mr Van Iersel. “But we got it to set up a high-level group on the metal industry. It was very much appreciated by ORGALIME (the European Engineering Industries Association).” The Commission also launched an action plan to promote metalworking and the metal articles industries.

“The most important aspect of the CCMI’s development over the last 10 years is its growing recognition as a serious partner in the development of industrial policy. Its greatest success has been to reaffirm the importance of a sectoral approach to industrial policy, demonstrated by its work in the automobile sector, for instance – to name merely the most emblematic example because of its importance.

“In addition, enlargement in 2004 allowed for an exchange of experience between the old and new Member States on industrial restructuring.

“As president, I recall in particular the excellent relations with the former members of the ECSC Consultative Committee during the negotiations to bring them into the EESC and when the CCMI completed its mission of integrating them into the EESC’s overall industrial policy activities.”

Josly Piette, First President of the CCMI

The

CCM

I: a

deca

de o

f ind

ustr

ial c

hang

e in

Eur

ope

19

A new industrial era

The changing industrial framework gen-erated crisis in traditional industries like shipbuilding, where the end of national subsidies led to the clos-ure of many companies. The era of support for failing sectors was over, and the CCMI was looking to bring about a new era, more open to the rest of the world. In a 2010 opinion on the ‘Euro-pean shipbuilding industry’ it proposed the use of European Investment Bank funds to pro-mote green technologies and clean transport in the sector. This was supplemented in 2011 by an additional opinion on ‘State aid to shipbuilding’.

The CCMI has turned its attention to a wide range of other sectors, including ser-vices, cement, household appliances, retail, and glass and ceramics.

In 2010, it published an opinion on the printing industry, followed up by the ‘Publishing on the Move’ conference in November 2011. The creative industries came under scrutiny at a public hearing in Valencia, Spain, followed by an opinion. In December 2011, it was the turn of banking, with a public hearing, a study examining ‘What changes for Europe’s banking sector with the new financial rules?’ and an opinion in April 2012. The future of book publishing is the latest subject on the CCMI agenda.

Aviation is another important and topical sector where the CCMI can have influence. A public hearing on air transport took place in April 2012.

One industry that caught Patrizio Pesci’s attention was the ‘European woodworking and furniture sector’. A 2011 opinion was coupled with a hearing in Prague. Austrian company Kronospan is the largest manufacturer of wood panels in the world, employing 11 000 people, with several sites in Eastern Europe. The European Parliament’s ‘Club du Bois’, made up of MEPs and industry representatives, welcomed the opinion and promised to use it as a base for action. Now, plans are in hand for a major event, also involving European Industry Commissioner Antonio Tajani, to be held at the EESC in October 2012, in preparation for an EU Communication on the woodworking industry by the end of the year.

Kronospan in the Czech Republic

20Th

e CC

MI:

a de

cade

of i

ndus

tria

l cha

nge

in E

urop

e

“We are looking at new sectors: IT, electrical cars, chemical industries…” says Mr Glorieux. “There are some sectors that people believe are just for fun, like motorcycles. But Europe has a good position, and we need to keep these industries in Europe. We cannot retain all the heavy industry, but as far as new technologies are concerned, they are of great importance.”

In April, the CCMI completed a new opinion on coopera-tives, and will hold a conference in Cyprus to coincide with the 2012 United Nations International Year of Cooperatives. Mr Pegado Liz points out that cooperatives have been hit less hard by the crisis, and the social economy may offer worthwhile solutions for the future. It is also an example of how the CCMI is trying to broaden the traditional relation-ship between workers and employers in a positive way.

Having an impact

An evaluation of the impact of 25 ‘own-initiative’ opinions from 2008 to 2011 clearly demonstrated how the European Commission and other bodies pay attention to the CCMI’s recommendations in pursuing their own political policy-making. For example, the 2007 opinion on the ‘Evolution of the automotive sector’ was the basis for the Commission’s document on dealing with change in the car industry, and preparations for the mid-term review of the CARS 21 pro-gramme, aimed at saving Europe’s crucial motor industry, in 2009.

In 2008, an opinion on ‘Developments in the retail industry and the impact on suppliers and consumers’ had a wide impact, taken up by many EU departments and sectoral stakeholders, including Euratex, the European Apparel and Textile Organisation.

Aviation is an important sector

The

CCM

I: a

deca

de o

f ind

ustr

ial c

hang

e in

Eur

ope

21

In all, the review showed that the European Commission used three opinions to prepare its own policy documents, four contributed to national or local programmes or pilot pro-jects, 18 were accompanied by hearings, conferences or seminars, and six generated media attention.

Although the EESC’s Single Market, Production and Consumption section (INT) also prepares opinions on industrial policy, the CCMI presents its findings in a more dynamic and proactive way, focusing always on the drive for change. As one observer puts it: “INT deals more with rules, whereas the CCMI deals with dynamics.”

The way to do it

The variety of ways in which the CCMI works is one of its strengths. On some occasions it makes use of studies car-ried out by outside experts, with a short paper drawing conclusions.

“That puts us in a strong position, because we are basing our opinions on research. This is a very good method, and helps the EESC to reinforce its position in the EU institutions,” says Mr Van Iersel.

In 2005, for example, the CCMI published an information report on the EU’s new chemicals legislation known by its acronym REACH. In September 2006, an important report focused on relocation which was, at that time, as Mr Piette pointed out, “a highly charged, often emotive issue”.

It concluded that there was no agreed definition of relocation

and no comparable data, making it impossible to pre-sent a true picture across Europe.

So the CCMI commis-sioned experts to carry out statistical research,

which did much to alert the European Commission to

the gravity of the situation. It attracted widespread attention.

In 2008, the CCMI held three public hearings in Ljubljana, Budapest and Sofia,

to examine economic development in the 10 new Member States, resulting in the publication

of a ‘Comparison of industrial transformation models’. In the same year, it published findings on ‘The future of the textile, clothing and footwear sectors in Europe’, following on from an opinion on the textile and clothing industry in 2004. This important sector had suffered a damaging decline in Europe due partly to the import of cheap clothing from the Far East and elsewhere. The report offered real pro-spects for change and renewal.

Almost all opinions are preceded by hearings or seminars where stakeholders are invited to give their views. Numerous meetings have taken place in Brussels and in towns and cities around the EU. Study group meetings on specific sec-tors also take place in Member States. The CCMI dedicates much of its time to following up opinions, through round tables and other events, often in partnership with the EU Presidency country.

The CCMI likes to ‘go local’

22Th

e CC

MI:

a de

cade

of i

ndus

tria

l cha

nge

in E

urop

e

CCMI materials are translated into all EU languages and dis-tributed through sectoral organisations, where they not only demonstrate the benefits of discussion and compromise, but also have an educational role.

Exchange of ideas

Because the EESC and CCMI are less formal bodies, they can do things the European Commission cannot. People feel more at ease and are more ready to discuss their ideas and exchange views freely and spontaneously.

For example, within the framework of its ‘Going local’ follow-up to the EU 2020 strategy, the CCMI took part in two fact-finding missions: to Warsaw, Poland in June 2011 and Madrid, Spain in October 2011. In Warsaw, activities centred on a one-and-a-half day round table, to gather the views of local industrial policy stakeholders.

The resulting report examined in detail the main features of the Polish economy and industry, covering issues like social dialogue, regional growth, foreign investment, R&D and innovation, energy policy, labour productivity and SMEs, with succinct conclusions. “The EU 2020 strategy is some-times seen as an alien paper coming from ‘Brussels’ and not enough as a joint endeavour of the EU,” it warned.

In Spain, the CCMI found a country “particularly hard hit by the fallout from the economic crisis”. A questionnaire was sent out in advance of a second round table to assess the reform process. The debate covered recent developments in economic and industrial policy, plus foreign investment, access to markets, SMEs, infrastructure and human capital. “All stakeholders … especially businesses, have proved their full support for European values and interests and their com-mitment to the goals of competitiveness and growth for Spanish industry, in line with the objectives of the EU 2020 strategy,” reported the CCMI delegation.

“As regards industrial restructuring,” recalls Mr Piette, “the CCMI, early in its existence, established relations with China which paved the way for a large delegation to undertake an intensive and fruitful study visit focusing on steel making, fol-lowed the next year by the arrival of a Chinese delegation in Europe.”

Indeed, bilateral cooperation got under way in July 2002, and the visit took place in September-October 2004, travel-ling to Beijing, Liaoning Province and Shanghai. The 12-man CCMI delegation, led by Mr Piette, studied how China’s cen-tralised economic planning responded to the challenges of

The CCMI studied restructuring in China

The

CCM

I: a

deca

de o

f ind

ustr

ial c

hang

e in

Eur

ope

23

industrial restructuring and modernisation, environmental protection and social welfare. It concluded that both sides were committed to implementing change in a socially acceptable way.

Delivering a better future

The CCMI was also quick to appreciate the environmental impact of industry, and this aspect is covered in many of its opinions. “The history of the CCMI coincides with that of the European project,” points out Claude Rolin, Secretary-General

of the Belgian trade union federation the CSC and a member of the CCMI bureau. “Tomorrow’s industries will be greener and more low-carbon. It is more essential than ever to pre-pare for this change. The CCMI must be able to contribute through identifying the paths to take towards a better future – a future that will enable generations to come to feel fully and collectively European.”

Mr Pegado Liz, re-emphasising the crucial role of the CCMI, adds that some operational improvements could be made, to enable it to respond even better to the expect- ations of both EU institutions and stakeholders and part-ners throughout industry. “But we intend to do that in a very participative way, starting from very concrete examples and a very pragmatic, not theoretical approach.”

A decade ago, industry seemed to be a thing of the past. But throughout the economic crisis, countries with a more solid industrial base, like Germany, have suffered less, while those with service-based economies have struggled. The lesson suggests that the EU should not neglect the indus-try’s importance in sustaining well-being in society. Now, as it applies that lesson, the CCMI is more important than ever in helping to transform Europe into a dynamic, modern and high-skilled industrial society.

Photo credits

Page 1 Viscount Davignon

Pages 2, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 19, 20, 21, 22-23 European Economic and Social Committee

Pages 11, 13, 14, 16 Kate Holman

24Th

e CC

MI:

a de

cade

of i

ndus

tria

l cha

nge

in E

urop

e

CCMI OPINIONS AND REPORTSCCMI/001 – Annual statistics on steel 2003-2009 – 26/03/2003

CCMI/002 – Industrial change: current situation and prospects – 24/09/2003

CCMI/005 – European defence – Industrial and market issues – 24/09/2003

CCMI/006 – Economic diversification in the acceding countries – the role

of SMEs and social economy enterprises – 31/03/2004

CCMI/007 – The repercussions of trade policy on industrial change, with

special reference to the steel sector – 28/04/2004

CCMI/008 – On the road to sustainable production – Progress in

implementing integrated pollution prevention and control

– 10/12/2003

CCMI/009 – The future of the textiles and clothing sector in the enlarged

EU – 30/06/2004

CCMI/010 – The implications of proposed chemicals legislation (REACH)

– 10/02/2005

CCMI/011 – LeaderSHIP 2015 – Defining the Future of the European

Shipbuilding and Repair Industry – 30/06/2004

CCMI/012 – Industrial change and state aid in the iron and steel sector

– 27/10/2004

CCMI/013 – Industrial change and economic, social and territorial cohesion

– 30/06/2004

CCMI/014 – Scope and effects of company relocations – 14/07/2005

CCMI/015 – Science and technology, the key to Europe’s future

– 15/12/2004

CCMI/017 – Fostering structural change: an industrial policy for an enlarged

Europe – 15/12/2004

CCMI/018 – The Perspectives of European Coal and Steel Research

– 13/07/2005

CCMI/019 – Social dialogue and employee participation – 29/09/2005

CCMI/020 – Industrial change in the mechanical engineering sector

– 11/05/2005

CCMI/021 – Industrial change in the EU and China – lessons learnt from the

cooperation between the EESC and its Chinese counterpart

– 09/02/2005

CCMI/023 – The management of industrial change in cross-border regions

following EU enlargement – 21/04/2006

CCMI/024 – The effects of international agreements to reduce greenhouse

gas emissions on the industrial change processes in Europe

– 20/04/2006

CCMI/025 – The role of technology parks in the industrial transformation

of the new EU Member States – 14/12/2005

CCMI/027 – Restructuring and employment – 14/12/2005

CCMI/028 – Risks and problems associated with the supply of raw materials

to European industry – 05/07/2006

CCMI/029 – Sustainable development and industrial change – 14/09/2006

CCMI/030 – A sectoral survey of relocation – 14/09/2006

CCMI/031 – Territorial governance of industrial change – 13/09/2006

CCMI/032 – Modern industrial policy – a sectoral approach 13/12/2006

CCMI/034 – The contribution of IT-supported lifelong learning to European

competitiveness, industrial change and social capital

development – 13/09/2006

CCMI/035 – Services and European manufacturing industries – 13/09/2006

CCMI/036 – Establishing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund

– 13/09/2006

CCMI/037 – Value and supply chain trends in a European and global

context – 25/04/2007

CCMI/038 – Innovation: Impact on industrial change and the role of EIB

– 11/07/2007

CCMI/039 – The development of the European chemical industry

– 26/09/2007

CCMI/040 – Developments in the European cement industry – 13/12/2007

CCMI/041 – The development of the European textile and footwear

industry – 13/02/2008

CCMI/042 – Simplification of the regulatory framework applicable to the

industry sub-sector of machines – 26/09/2007

CCMI/043 – Global trade integration and outsourcing – 26/09/2007

CCMI/044 – Impact of the territoriality of tax law on industrial change

– 13/12/2007

CCMI/045 – Impact of European environmental rules on industrial change

– 12/12/2007

CCMI/046 – A Competitive Automotive Regulatory Framework for the

21st Century – 13/12/2007

CCMI/047 – The European aeronautics industry – 03/12/2008

CCMI/048 – European space policy – 13/02/2008

CCMI/049 – Impact of private equity, hedge and sovereign wealth-funds

on industrial change – 05/11/2009

CCMI/050 – Developments in the retail industry – 03/12/2008

CCMI/051 – Perspectives of European Coal and Steel Research – 13/02/2008

CCMI/052 – Impact of the ongoing development of energy markets

on industrial value chains in Europe – 18/09/2008

CCMI/053 – Structural and conceptual change as a prerequisite for

a globally competitive knowledge and research-based

European industrial construct – 22/10/2008

CCMI/054 – The restructuring and evolution of the household appliance

industry – 22/10/2008

CCMI/055 – Industrial change, territorial development and corporate

responsibility – 03/12/2008

CCMI/056 – Non-energy mining industry in Europe – 09/07/2008

CCMI/057 – Competitiveness of the metals industries – 03/12/2008

CCMI/058 – Innovative and sustainable forest-based industries – 03/12/2008

CCMI/059 – The components and downstream markets of the automotive

sector – 16/07/2009

CCMI/060 – The raw materials initiative – 13/05/2009

CCMI/062 – Impact of the climate and energy package on selected

European Union industries – 16/07/2009

CCMI/063 – European Globalisation Adjustment Fund – 24/03/2009

CCMI/064 – How to support SMEs in adapting to global market changes

– 16/12/2009

CCMI/065 – The impact of the global crisis on the main European

manufacturing and services sectors – 30/09/2009

CCMI/066 – How flexicurity could be used in the restructuring connected

to global development – 01/10/2009

CCMI/067 – Responding to the crisis in the European automotive industry

– 13/05/2009

CCMI/068 – Matching skills to the needs of industry and evolving services

– 17/02/2010

CCMI/069 – European shipbuilding industry – 29/04/2010

CCMI/070 – Industrial change and prospects for the motorcycle industry

in Europe – 18/03/2010

CCMI/071 – European aviation relief programme – 17/12/2009

CCMI/072 – European technology, industrial and science parks – 14/07/2010

CCMI/073 – Towards an EU policy to rationalise the web offset and

rotogravure printing industry in Europe – 14/07/2010

CCMI/074 – Unlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries

– 21/10/2010

CCMI/075 – Changes and prospects for the metalworking industries

– 21/10/2010

CCMI/076 – Changes and prospects for the textile services sub-sector

in Europe – 14/07/2010

CCMI/077 – The employment impact of industrial change caused by

ecological, energy and climate-related challenges – 15/07/2010

CCMI/078 – Access to secondary raw materials – 16/02/2011

CCMI/079 – EU crisis exit strategies and industrial change – 13/07/2011

CCMI/080 – Agricultural machinery, construction and handling equipment

– 04/05/2011

CCMI/081 – The external dimension of European industrial policy

– 04/05/2011

CCMI/082 – Third country state-owned enterprises in EU public

procurement markets – 04/05/2011

CCMI/083 – An industrial policy for the globalised era – 04/05/2011

CCMI/084 – Council Regulation on State aid to facilitate the closure

of uncompetitive coal mines – 08/12/2010

CCMI/085 – State aid to shipbuilding – 13/07/2011

CCMI/086 – The effect of the financial and economic crisis on the

distribution of labour force among the productive sectors,

with a special regard to SMEs – 04/05/2011

CCMI/087 – The processing and exploitation, for economic and

environmental purposes, of the industrial and mining waste

deposits from EU – 26/10/2011

CCMI/088 – Opportunities and challenges for a more competitive European

woodworking and furniture sector – 26/10/2011

CCMI/089 – The perspectives for sustainable employment in rail, rolling

stock and infra producers – 27/10/2011

CCMI/090 – Industrial change to build sustainable Energy Intensive

Industries – 08/12/2011

CCMI/091 – Tackling the challenges in commodity markets and

on raw materials – 14/07/2011

CCMI/092 – Publishing ‘on the move’ – 25/04/2012

CCMI/093 – Cooperatives and restructuring – 25/04/2012

CCMI/096 – European Globalisation Adjustment Fund – 21/09/2011

CCMI/097 – European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014-2020)

– 22/02/2012

CCMI/098 – Creative Europe Programme – 28/03/2012

© European Union, 2012 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Published by: “Visits and Publications” Unit

EESC-2012-26-EN

For more information: ccmi2@eesc.europa.euTel. +32 25469389Fax +32 25469938

This brochure, published by the Consultative Commission on Industrial Change (CCMI) of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC), on the occasion of the CCMI’s 10th anniversary, is a contribution to the reflection on current developments and future trends in European industry. It also helps to improve working methods aimed at anticipating changes in European industry, and to respond to the social, economic and environmental challenges it faces.

Rue Belliard/Belliardstraat 991040 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

www.eesc.europa.eu

ENQE-31-12-667-EN-C

ISBN 978-92-830-1877-3

REG.NO. BE - BXL - 27

The EESC is on-line:www.eesc.europa.eu

www.eesc.europa.eu/facebook/

www.eesc.europa.eu/twitter/

www.eesc.europa.eu/youtube/

Anna Maria Darmanin www.eesc.europa.eu/anna-maria-darmanin/

President’s Commentwww.eesc.europa.eu/staffan-nilssons-comment/

doi:10.2864/6370