A recent report reveals how Erasmus+ contributes to skills development in the Global South by adapting to local skills challenges.
As EU Member States and the European Parliament are forming their opinions around the new Erasmus+ (E+) programme, one important question revolves around the programme’s global ambitions: E+ is primarily intended for European cooperation, but since its inception in 2014, it has built a legacy of investing in third countries not associated to the programme. A recent report by the European Commission reviews the impact of E+ on skills development in third countries, with a particular focus on Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Pacific and the Middle-East. Based on qualitative desk research and regional case studies, the publication highlights how E+ creates initiatives which are tailored to economic and social context, without losing sight of its overarching objectives.
Overall, the report is framed in the Commission’s current strategic orientation for education initiatives, which is strongly geared towards labour market alignment and preparedness (see SwissCore article). For countries in the Global South, these axes are particularly important, as they link to economic progress and democratic resilience. By promoting targeted outreach to third countries, E+ therefore aims to build local capacity through knowledge exchange, co-creation, and institutional changes. In that way, the programme is aligned with the priorities of many international organisations, including the International Labour Organization (ILO), the OECD, UNESCO, UNICEF and the International Organisation for Migration (IOM). E+ offers opportunities for engagement with third countries through Key Action 1, namely through its International Credit Mobility scheme, as well as through Key Action 2. Under Key Action 2, cooperation initiatives involving partner countries span Capacity Building (CB) in the areas of higher education, vocational education and training (VET) and youth, as well as degree delivery through Erasmus Mundus Joint Masters (EMJM) and Jean Monnet. Within these cooperation activities, consortia work on modernising curricula and digital infrastructure, and transforming local learning and teaching environments.
The report utilises case studies to illustrate how E+ initiatives are adapted to respond to regional contexts with their specific skills challenges. One example is the EU’s collaboration with Asia, where a relatively young population is driving large inflows into the labour market while education and training systems lag behind the economy’s digital transformation. The results are considerable skills shortages, which are exacerbated through a systematic lack of up- and reskilling opportunities. In response, many projects within E+ enable the modernisation of curricula to reflect increasing digitalisation and technological transformation of key industries, such as the textile sector. At the same time, International Credit Mobility has facilitated the mobility of Asian students and staff to Erasmus+ programme countries, allowing them to acquire and subsequently transfer knowledge back to their home institutions. While digital competences, along with skills for the green transition, are shown to be relevant across cooperation with all third countries, the case studies explain how E+ provides tailored initiatives across all regions.
The report further identifies factors contributing to the effectiveness of E+ in third countries. These include mutual trust, shared ownership, alignment with national and regional priorities, promotion of transversal competences (such as green and digital), institutionalisation of outcomes over project-bound delivery, as well as the strategic utilisation of alumni networks. Areas of improvement are equally outlined: Cross-regional cooperation should be strengthened, to enable collaboration between third country regions and benefit best-practice exchange. At the same time, the authors recommend to embed structured approaches to preparedness and inclusiveness in global cooperation under E+, for instance by streamlining measures that address women or learners in rural areas. Taken together, these recommendations may offer a potential venue for discussions around the design of the future E+ programme, particularly on its links to the Global Europe instrument and alignment with the Global Gateway strategy. For those third countries which are considering association to the future E+ programme, it is equally important to understand which international cooperation venues are offered through association.