By Iveri Kekenadze Gustafsson
Introduction:
The Erasmus Programme has been a game-changer in the area of education, not only in the European Union (EU) and Erasmus+ Programme countries but also in the broader world. Since the establishment of Erasmus+ as part of the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), the programme has further expanded from a facilitating tool for mobilities for students and staff within the EU to a significant instrument for EU integration and Europeanisation of educational sectors in all beneficiary countries, currently divided into 14 regions.
In this blog article, I will analyse the Erasmus+ programme and, more specifically, International Credit Mobility (ICM) as an instrument to converge the European Education Area. I will provide an overview of how Western Balkan and Neighbourhood East countries progress in their efforts to harmonise their education practices with EU standards. I will conclude the blog by reflecting on the findings and drawing future perspectives.
Merit-based Process: Future Member States on Different Phases
Ten countries currently have EU candidate, potential candidate, or applicant status, and to fulfil the requirements for the alignment with the EU acquis, all of them need to align with, among other things, the education sector. While all candidate and potential candidate countries have joined the Bologna Process and are full members of the European Higher Education Area, more steps are needed for closer alignment with EU practices.
Erasmus+ has been incorporated in the 2021-2027 EU long-term budget; 70% of the funding is directed to mobilities, while 30% is directed towards cooperation projects and policy development activities. The programme guide is divided into several Key Actions, comprising mobilities, development and cooperation projects, as well as promoting European Union study and research as part of Jean Monet Actions. Participation in the Erasmus+ programme has boosted pre-accession countries’ efforts towards harmonisation with EU policies in the sector. However, association with the programme remains a merit-based process; only certain prospective EU Member States have yet to receive the programme-associated status.
Figure 1. Compiled by Author.
The benefits of association to the programme are vast, as it includes establishing one’s own Erasmus+ National Agency and participating in all the opportunities of all Key Actions. Non-associated third countries are not able to get involved in most funding opportunities. Even for those opportunities that they can be a part of, non-associated countries usually are not eligible to coordinate projects and, thus, depend on the programme-country organisations.
All candidate/potential candidate countries are eligible for cooperation within the Erasmus+ programme; however, only some participate with association to the programme. Turkey, Serbia, and North Macedonia, alongside the EEA Member States, are Erasmus+-associated third countries, while none in the Eastern Neighbourhood area have yet joined the programme.
However, their applications have been submitted. Georgia’s National Strategy on Education and Science 2022-2030, for instance, states that due to successful participation and one of the higher numbers of international mobilities and involvement per capita, the country has applied to become “the programme country.” It is worth noting that joining the programme requires substantial financial efforts as well as high-quality indicators. As of yet, all three Association Trio countries are “moderately prepared’” or have achieved “some level of preparation” in the area of education and culture, which indicates the need for further assistance from the EU as well as more proactive steps on the part of individual countries.
International Credit Mobility
International Credit Mobility (ICM) has been established as part of the Erasmus+ global initiative. It includes student mobilities for studies, blended mobility with short-term physical mobilities, short-term doctoral mobility, and mobilities for traineeships. It also includes staff mobility for teaching and training. One of the downsides of the ICM is that the coordinator institution should always be the programme country organisation, which is responsible for grant distribution and other major decision-making. The most considerable amount of funding is allocated to Sub-Saharan Africa, the Western Balkans and the EU’s neighbourhood regions – East and South.
The financial distribution of Erasmus+ funds for ICM indicates the prioritisation of pre-accession countries, especially taken per capita distribution; the Western Balkans and the Neighbourhood East are regions with the most funds received.
Figure 2. International Credit Mobility, Guidebook, 2022. p. 9
While Western Balkan non-programme-associated countries – Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro and Albania – are financed via the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA), Neighbourhood East countries are funded via external policy instruments, such as the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI-Global Europe). The difference can be seen in the scale of participation. Those supported via the IPA can receive BA and MA-level students from the Erasmus+ programme countries as part of the International Credit Mobility. Contrary to that, all Neighbourhood East country institutions depend on the 20% funding allowance from KA131 (Key Action 1 in Higher Education, supported by internal policy funds) to do the same.
Future perspectives:
In the Bertelsmann Stiftung publication “Keeping Friends Closer: Why the EU Should Address New Geoeconomic Realities and Get its Neighbours Back in the Fold”, Grosskreutz and Weiss emphasise that the “EU should consider several steps to further integrate the neighbouring regions into its research networks, thereby facilitating knowledge spillovers.” Full participation and association of those countries to the Erasmus+ programme will benefit the goal of alignment with EU standards and policies in the sector.
The funding and readiness of candidate and potential candidate countries will remain challenging for the foreseeable future; at the same time, the political decision needs to be made by the EU regarding the incorporation of additional participating countries into the Erasmus+ programme. Extra funding for assistance with the aim of full inclusion into the programme will enable pre-accession countries to prepare for greater alignment. The EU should see the benefits of increased investment in the field; after all, it is the younger generation that is most pro-European and who will contribute to bringing their respective countries closer to EU membership in the long-term. As a short-term action, the EU should include more Western Balkan and Association Trio countries as programme-associated members at the start of the new seven-year cycle in 2027.
Iveri Kekenadze Gustafsson (He/Him) is a recent graduate of the MA programme in European Studies at Lund University. He holds a BA in International Relations from Tbilisi State University and another BA degree in Performance Studies (Classical Piano) from Tbilisi State Conservatoire. His research interests include internationalisation, leadership and organisation of Higher Education, European integration, and governance in the EU’s eastern neighbourhood.
European Studies Review 