In this report, EAPN have set out to evaluate progress made under the ‘light year’ of the Open Method of Coordination (OMC), and in particular on the National Action Plans (NAPs) Inclusion in 2007, and to ask what has been the benefit for the fight against poverty and social exclusion?
Download it: English – French (summary only)
In this report, EAPN have set out to evaluate progress made under the ‘light year’ of the Open Method of Coordination (OMC), and in particular on the National Action Plans (NAPs) Inclusion in 2007, and to ask what has been the benefit for the fight against poverty and social exclusion?
The Commission has emphasized the benefits of the ‘light year’ process as enabling greater in-depth analysis and mutual learning between member states in the priority theme: child poverty.
However, unless this exchange leads to better engagement and better policies which effectively impact on poverty, it could be seen by many as “hard work” (particularly for EAPN networks trying to engage in the process…) rather than “effective delivery”.
EAPN has asked its members to assess the benefits and risks of this approach and whether it has undermined the effectiveness of the process at national level, as well as assess progress on the delivery of the broader objectives and priorities of the Open Method of Coordination – to make significant steps towards the eradication of poverty and social exclusion by 2010.
