Team of Specialists on Forest Products Markets and Marketing, Geneva 11-12/10/2007 “REPORT ON THE EU WORKSHOP ON INNOVATION, EDUCATION AND TRAINING FOR.

Team of Specialists on Forest Products Markets and Marketing,

Geneva 11-12/10/2007

“REPORT ON THE EU WORKSHOP ON INNOVATION, EDUCATION AND TRAINING FOR THE EU WOODWORKING INDUSTRIES

AND KEY, LINKED OCCUPATIONS.” Jeremy Wall

DG Enterprise & IndustryDirectorate G, Unit 4

Textiles, Fashions & Forest-based Industries

Enterprise and Industry Directorate-General European Commission

Communication on implementing the Lisbon Agenda

(COM (2005) 474): sectorial file - EU forest-based industries

woodworking, pulp & paper (mfg. & converting); printing):

- 340 Bn € turnover p.a.(8% of EU manufacturing added value),

- 1.25 - 2. 5 M jobs (9 % of EU manufacturing jobs)

- growing export markets for paper and structural timbers

- 90 % (315 M m³) wood used from SFM in EU forests 55% NAI

Therefore the competitiveness of the EU forest-based sector

must be maintained and enhanced

products > jobs > wealth > growth

BUT: e.g. woodworking industries (WWI):

- mostly small & medium firms (SMEs) & micro firms; - low capacity for investment in R&D & education

(49% unskilled, 41% low skilled); - high costs for labour, energy and wood; >> risk of relocation outside the EU Background to the EU education & training (E&T) survey: needs for improved education, training and skills development for the EU woodworking industries were first identified in the 1999 sectorial competitiveness study (DG ENTR & CEI-Bois)

From 2001-2005 the Enhanced Use of Wood Working Group (EUW WG) identified four types of barriers to the enhanced use of wood, including: technical; financial; legal & institutional; information & knowledge transfer.

In 2003, a “barriers” study, in concert with the CEI-Bois “Road Map 2010” initiative, identified a need to deepen knowledge & understanding of education & training, both in the wood sector and in key, linked occupations. Further EUW work identified a likely mismatch of E&T supply and demand. In 2005, a DG ENTR survey was launched for:- mapping the EU supply & demand of education - therefrom deriving remedies to the assumed current and on-going mismatch of the supply of and demand for educational and training services and facilities within and related to the EU wood sector.

Survey scope: EU-27 (EU-25 + Bu & Ro) woodworking industries and key, linked occupations (KLO).Survey documents defined WWI (as per NACE Ch. 20) & KLO

Target groups: Supply side: government, academia: (availability of courses)

Demand side: E&T and skills needs perceived by industry

For each target group, questions were focused on:- wood-related & other E&T for those in WWI- wood-related E&T for key related occupations,

at three levels: operative, technical & tertiary (ISCED-based), taking into account both initial and continuing learning and seeking a maximum of information in a “one-off” opportunity

DG ENTR - project phases:1. Survey by DG ENTR of EU supply (govt.) and

demand (industry) sides of wood-sector and related education & training (launched 08/2005)

2. Reception of responses (09/2005 – 03/2006)3. Consultants (hired under public tender):

- analysis of survey responses (01-06/2006)- interim report (07/2006) assessing the availability of education and training courses and facilities in the EU pertinent to the EU wood sector, compared with the needs of the EU woodworking industries

4. Preparation (12/06) of EU workshop 03/075. final report (conclusions, recommendations) end

20076. Implementation? MS authorities? academia?

Industry?

Survey 1 – preparatory work Review of studies, presentations & initiatives:

(De, F, Hu, Sw, UK + Bologna, InnovaWood, Road Map, Forest-based Sector Technology Platform): - WWI sector not attractive for careers- needs for E&T well recognised, but not well defined- need identified for links between government, industry, academia, (others?) at all levels, whereas currently focus is on tertiary level only- new, closer links should include those between new sectorial training & national programmes- EU-level schemes take more a/c of sectorial needs

Survey 2 - main direct results: - 20/27 countries responded (71 replies + CH, Croatia)

- more from supply side than demand side (25 -10; 18 both)

(+ supplementary results from InterFob)

- industry sector and E&T supply structures confirmed

- main KLOs (ranked): 1. architects,civil & structural engineers 2. designers (incl. interior), specifiers 3. construction firms, builders, insurers 4. legislators, regulators, planners 5. end-users (DIY, individuals)

Survey 3 - supply side 1:- courses exist at all three levels (operative, technical & tertiary), but in many cases course contents are not identified

- course satisfaction: these factors are ranked by importance: relevance>length>cost>career prospects

- course attractiveness: lowest for operatives but for all three:image<career + salary structures<opportunites<working. env.

- % females taking courses: +/- 20% at 3 levels

- job opportunities vary: 3rd>tech>op

- but: more course applicants than places: op>tech>3rd (?!)

- most courses lead to (vocational) qualifications but many of these face low acceptance: op>tech>3rd

Survey 4 - supply side 2:

- most qualified students find jobs within two years: 3rd > tech > op

- age: three levels: most jobs between 40-60 yrs. old, inflow: 3rd > tech.> operative

- responsibility for courses: ministries > agencies > industry fed.s > firms

- who pays for courses?: op > tech > 3rd (no specific WWI grants)

- paid how?:pvt >grant/scholarship>bursary>tax credit

- vocational training?: op > tech > 3rd

Demand side: competencies (ranked for 3 levels):1. technical knowledge2. ability to adapt (NB 6th for 3rd)3. ICT skills4. management skills5. inter-personal skills6. entrepreneurship7. communication – mother tongue8. communication – other languages

- do firms find qualified staff? 50:50 – mostly national- satisfaction with E&T?: op & tech NO; 3rd mixed- finance new initiatives?: no reply>yes>noneNew EU Member States: many more applicants than places (more than KLOs), despite unattractive/out-dated courses & political priorites for services

Overall conclusions: no overall conclusions about mismatch of supply/demand, but match better in countries with strong wood-using traditionsChanges in 5-10 years?: no very common patterns:- supply side: « Bologna » main driver but progress slow- demand side: indust. wants more wood-specific courses- both: EU-level co-operation seen as importantRecommendations:- forward-looking strategic partnership with industry leading academia, to address skills shortages through:- common courses/modules, based on market needs but also looking out of the « wooden box » e.g. environment- partnered sponsorship for students (industry +? EU?)- life-long learning packages e.g. free on-line knowledge- best practices (e.g. exchanges) should be identified, co-ordinated at EU level and disseminated (- promotion campaigns addressing the sector’s image)

Follow-up 1: Survey refinement & additions: - further contacts with existing survey respondents, - contacts with missing countries- further inputs from: INTERFOB,

Trade Unions, CEDEFOP workshop expert panel (18/12/2006)

- develop working summary document (+ national summaries?)

Industry (including trades unions):- map sectorial national initiatives under Road Map et al.- identify European-level initiatives (e.g. E-learning)- identify non-sectorial (KLO) initiatives and needs

Academia:- identify specific national and EU-level initiatves

Follow-up 2: Objectives of workshop:1. to present to Member State authorities, industry, academia and Commission services the results of the survey on education and training in the EU woodworking sector, carried out by DG ENTR; 2. on the basis of complementary expert presentations on specific issues arising both from the survey and the sector as a whole and its linkages, to stimulate discussion on the challenges and priorities for remedial action in innovation, education and training for the EU WWI sector over the coming decades;3. to discuss the results of the survey and then to gather inputs from delegates in reaction to the working document and the expert presentations as a basis for making a final report of the survey exercise, including concrete conclusions and recommendations for follow-up, identifying the actors necessary as appropriate.

Challenges for workshop:- most decisions affecting wood sector are made elsewhere KLO: architects, designers, specifiers, planners (public?)- is the WWI sector’s image of itself correct? (e.g. E&T needs)- how to address EU WWI compeptitiveness vis-a-vis competition from 3rd countries?- focus on workers only? e.g. labour productivity & profitability?

- or also on other levels (tech.; 3rd)?- how to encourage entrepreneurial attitudes at all three levels?- need for package of measures? (institutional and policy frameworks, business models, finance)

- how/who to initiate change? Should industry take the lead (alone)? Who else?

- «action grid - who should do what? (govt./industry/academia)- priorities and means to attain them?

Follow-up: CIP I (Competitiveness & Innovation Programme) complementing RTD FP 7

NB POVISIONAL ONLYTechnical & management support to enhance the sustainable competitiveness of SMEs in the EU forest-based industries through sectorial measures, including: i) development of education & training course elements for managers & other professionals in SMEs of the WWI & KLO:

– improving general management capacity in WWI SMEs;– sectorially adapted "non-wood" modules for WWI specialists; – modules on wood for non-specialists such as architects, designers, planners, etc.;– specific E&T needs for SMEs in New Member States and candidate countries.

Follow-up: CIP 2 NB PROVISIONAL ONLY ii) systems for knowledge transfer about solutions concerning innovative wood-related products, processes and services development and application. Emphasis on wood and composite materials, in particular those with potential for combining technical performance with safety and environmental compatibility (e.g. thermal efficiency, prolonged working life, recoverability & recyclability);

iii) Better information and know-how on wood materials relating to the above actions, including: written & on-line didactic materials, workshops, etc.

Preliminary workshop conclusions 1- also E&T for kids and consumers, + other KLOs - 90% jobs in knowledge scetors- LLL vital, but USA > EU- University courses based on history- mismatch of operative profiles + training- same problems for skilled/unskilled- need to focus on output of E&T- low attractiveness + poor image of sector- industry not investing in E&T- need for inter-disciplinary formats- industry should link with academia on course design

Preliminary conclusions 2- avoid barriers between Bachelors/Masters- facilitate student & teacher mobility (e.g. Europass;NB Bologna very slow)- focus on quality not quantity of wood- identify & exchange best practices- to teach we need to learn (e.g. Japan)- use existing systems, adapting modules, - architects key, but 50+% work is renovation- wood complex, but high-tech material but which meets needs of Climate Change etc.- mixed/composite use of wood

Follow-up:- complete and complement survey results- make comprehensive results available incl.

up-dateable national summaries- identify network from survey + workshop- identify existing actions(mapping) to find best practices and gaps – fill them- develop e-learning- co-ordination??- roles of industry, academia, EC, others?

Many thanks!

European Commission,DG Enterprise and IndustryTextiles, fashions &Forest-based Industries’ Unit (DG ENTR/G/4)

E-mail: [email protected]

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/forest_based/index_en.html