The CCMI: a decade

of industrial change in Europe

Contents
Introduction 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

Introduction
If 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 CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
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 Davignon
Former European Commissioner for Industrial Affairs
1
 Chapter 1
From 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-
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
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
2
Romano Prodi receives the ECSC flag
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.
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 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
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
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
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.
3
 “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 CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
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,
4
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.
“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
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
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,
New CCMI sectors included shipbuilding
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
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
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.
5
 Chapter 2
Policies to anticipate global
change
The 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.
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
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.
6
The CCMI examined individual industries
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.
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, CO2 reduction, decent housing or
infrastructure for energy, drinking water, wastewater,
and transport.
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
“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
7
 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.
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
The agricultural vehicle trade fair in Bologna
8
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 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;
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
• 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
9

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 CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
10
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
Interviews
Jorge 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-
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
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.”
11
 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.”
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
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
12
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
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.”
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
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.
13
 “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
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
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
14
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.”
Looking back at the European Coal and Steel Community, Jacques Glorieux
Mr Gibellieri recalls that Europe has enjoyed over 60 years of
former CCMI co-president
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
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.

The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe

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.”
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

15
 sections of the EESC. Some are so busy it’s hard to get them Mr Glorieux believes the CCMI does have influence. “We are
around the table.” Thus, one of his tasks is to bring people working on that, and we have had positive reactions. We are
together. more flexible than other EU bodies, and use less budget. We
have grown more efficient in the last five years, but that’s
The effort has been more than worth it, he believes. “Struc- because we had to fight to achieve recognition. Now that
tural dialogue is brilliant: it’s a constructive way to work we have it, it’s helping us to have closer contact with people.
together. We don’t agree on positions from time to time, but I am confident we will continue in that direction.”
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. Joost van Iersel
former CCMI president
“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.
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe

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 had a difficult start. There was resistance towards the
CCMI within the EESC, because the groups saw it as a threat.”
“We have plenty still to achieve,” admits Mr Glorieux, including
further strengthening links with the European Commission Joost van Iersel was a Christian Democrat MP in the Dutch
and Parliament, and monitoring follow-up of opinions. But Parliament until 1994. “I was very interested in industrial
he sees the CCMI as “the human side” of the EU – “that may policy, and by coincidence my first EESC opinion was on this
be one of our strengths”. For example, it takes account of the topic, although I was not a member of the CCMI at the time,”
social aspects of closures and delocation. And as big enter- he says. He drew up the CCMI’s first real policy statement,
prises are dismantled, it is ever more important to generate on ‘Industrial change: current situation and prospects’, as a
jobs in SMEs.
16
‘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 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.”

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

The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe

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.

17
 Chapter 3
Weighing 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
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
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.
18
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
A new industrial era Kronospan in the Czech Republic

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.

The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe

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.

19
 “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.
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
20
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
In all, the review showed that the European
Commission used three opinions to The CCMI likes to ‘go local’
prepare its own policy documents,
four contributed to national or
local programmes or pilot pro- It concluded that there was no
jects, 18 were accompanied agreed definition of relocation
by hearings, conferences or and no comparable data,
seminars, and six generated making it impossible to pre-
media attention. sent a true picture across
Europe.
Although the EESC’s Single
Market, Production and So the CCMI commis-
Consumption section (INT) sioned experts to carry
also prepares opinions on out statistical research,
industrial policy, the CCMI which did much to alert
presents its findings in a more the European Commission to
dynamic and proactive way, the gravity of the situation. It
focusing always on the drive for attracted widespread attention.
change. As one observer puts it:
“INT deals more with rules, whereas In 2008, the CCMI held three public
the CCMI deals with dynamics.” hearings in Ljubljana, Budapest and Sofia,
to examine economic development in the
10 new Member States, resulting in the publication
The way to do it of a ‘Comparison of industrial transformation models’. In
the same year, it published findings on ‘The future of the
The variety of ways in which the CCMI works is one of its textile, clothing and footwear sectors in Europe’, following

The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe

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”.
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.

21
 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.
“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

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
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe

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. The CCMI studied restructuring in China
22
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.
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
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
23
 CCMI OPINIONS AND REPORTS
CCMI/001 – Annual statistics on steel 2003-2009 – 26/03/2003
CCMI/002 – Industrial change: current situation and prospects – 24/09/2003
CCMI/005 – E uropean defence – Industrial and market issues – 24/09/2003
CCMI/006 – E conomic diversification in the acceding countries – the role
of SMEs and social economy enterprises – 31/03/2004
CCMI/007 – T he repercussions of trade policy on industrial change, with
special reference to the steel sector – 28/04/2004
CCMI/008 – O
 n the road to sustainable production – Progress in
implementing integrated pollution prevention and control
– 10/12/2003
CCMI/009 – T he future of the textiles and clothing sector in the enlarged
EU – 30/06/2004
CCMI/010 – T he implications of proposed chemicals legislation (REACH)
– 10/02/2005
CCMI/011 – L eaderSHIP 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 – S cope and effects of company relocations – 14/07/2005
CCMI/015 – S cience and technology, the key to Europe’s future
– 15/12/2004
The CCMI: a decade of industrial change in Europe
CCMI/017 – F ostering structural change: an industrial policy for an enlarged
Europe – 15/12/2004
CCMI/018 – T he Perspectives of European Coal and Steel Research
– 13/07/2005
CCMI/019 – S ocial 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 – T he management of industrial change in cross-border regions
following EU enlargement – 21/04/2006
24
CCMI/024 – T he effects of international agreements to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions on the industrial change processes in Europe
– 20/04/2006
CCMI/025 – T he role of technology parks in the industrial transformation
of the new EU Member States – 14/12/2005
CCMI/027 – R
 estructuring and employment – 14/12/2005
CCMI/028 – R
 isks and problems associated with the supply of raw materials
to European industry – 05/07/2006
CCMI/029 – S ustainable development and industrial change – 14/09/2006
CCMI/030 – A
 sectoral survey of relocation – 14/09/2006
CCMI/031 – T erritorial governance of industrial change – 13/09/2006
CCMI/032 – M
 odern industrial policy – a sectoral approach 13/12/2006
CCMI/034 – T he contribution of IT-supported lifelong learning to European
competitiveness, industrial change and social capital
development – 13/09/2006
CCMI/035 – S ervices and European manufacturing industries – 13/09/2006
CCMI/036 – E stablishing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund
– 13/09/2006
CCMI/037 – V
 alue 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 – T he development of the European chemical industry
– 26/09/2007
CCMI/040 – D
 evelopments in the European cement industry – 13/12/2007
CCMI/041 – T he development of the European textile and footwear
industry – 13/02/2008
CCMI/042 – S implification of the regulatory framework applicable to the
industry sub-sector of machines – 26/09/2007
CCMI/043 – G
 lobal 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 – T he European aeronautics industry – 03/12/2008
CCMI/048 – E uropean space policy – 13/02/2008
CCMI/049 – Impact of private equity, hedge and sovereign wealth-funds
on industrial change – 05/11/2009
CCMI/050 – D
 evelopments in the retail industry – 03/12/2008
CCMI/051 – P
 erspectives 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 – S tructural and conceptual change as a prerequisite for
a globally competitive knowledge and research-based
European industrial construct – 22/10/2008
CCMI/054 – T he 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 – N
 on-energy mining industry in Europe – 09/07/2008
CCMI/057 – C
 ompetitiveness of the metals industries – 03/12/2008
CCMI/058 – Innovative and sustainable forest-based industries – 03/12/2008
CCMI/059 – T he components and downstream markets of the automotive
sector – 16/07/2009
CCMI/060 – T he 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 – E uropean Globalisation Adjustment Fund – 24/03/2009
CCMI/064 – H
 ow to support SMEs in adapting to global market changes
– 16/12/2009
CCMI/065 – T he impact of the global crisis on the main European
manufacturing and services sectors – 30/09/2009
CCMI/066 – H
 ow flexicurity could be used in the restructuring connected
to global development – 01/10/2009
CCMI/067 – R
 esponding to the crisis in the European automotive industry
– 13/05/2009
CCMI/068 – M
 atching skills to the needs of industry and evolving services
– 17/02/2010
CCMI/069 – E uropean shipbuilding industry – 29/04/2010
CCMI/070 – Industrial change and prospects for the motorcycle industry
in Europe – 18/03/2010
CCMI/071 – E uropean aviation relief programme – 17/12/2009
CCMI/072 – E uropean technology, industrial and science parks – 14/07/2010
CCMI/073 – T owards an EU policy to rationalise the web offset and
rotogravure printing industry in Europe – 14/07/2010
CCMI/074 – U
 nlocking the potential of cultural and creative industries
– 21/10/2010
CCMI/075 – C
 hanges and prospects for the metalworking industries
– 21/10/2010
CCMI/076 – C
 hanges and prospects for the textile services sub-sector
in Europe – 14/07/2010
CCMI/077 – T he employment impact of industrial change caused by
ecological, energy and climate-related challenges – 15/07/2010
CCMI/078 – A
 ccess to secondary raw materials – 16/02/2011
CCMI/079 – E U crisis exit strategies and industrial change – 13/07/2011
CCMI/080 – A
 gricultural machinery, construction and handling equipment
– 04/05/2011
CCMI/081 – T he external dimension of European industrial policy
– 04/05/2011
CCMI/082 – T hird country state-owned enterprises in EU public
procurement markets – 04/05/2011
CCMI/083 – A
 n industrial policy for the globalised era – 04/05/2011
CCMI/084 – C
 ouncil Regulation on State aid to facilitate the closure
of uncompetitive coal mines – 08/12/2010
CCMI/085 – S tate aid to shipbuilding – 13/07/2011
CCMI/086 – T he 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 – T he processing and exploitation, for economic and
environmental purposes, of the industrial and mining waste
deposits from EU – 26/10/2011
CCMI/088 – O
 pportunities and challenges for a more competitive European
woodworking and furniture sector – 26/10/2011
CCMI/089 – T he 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 – T ackling the challenges in commodity markets and
on raw materials – 14/07/2011
CCMI/092 – P
 ublishing ‘on the move’ – 25/04/2012
CCMI/093 – C
 ooperatives and restructuring – 25/04/2012
CCMI/096 – E uropean Globalisation Adjustment Fund – 21/09/2011
CCMI/097 – E uropean Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014-2020)
– 22/02/2012
CCMI/098 – C
 reative Europe Programme – 28/03/2012
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.

The EESC is on-line:

www.eesc.europa.eu
Anna Maria Darmanin
www.eesc.europa.eu/facebook/ www.eesc.europa.eu/anna-maria-darmanin/
President’s Comment
www.eesc.europa.eu/twitter/ www.eesc.europa.eu/staffan-nilssons-comment/

www.eesc.europa.eu/youtube/

For more information: Rue Belliard/Belliardstraat 99 Published by:

ccmi2@eesc.europa.eu 1040 Bruxelles/Brussel “Visits and Publications” Unit
Tel. +32 25469389 BELGIQUE/BELGIË EESC-2012-26-EN
Fax +32 25469938 www.eesc.europa.eu
© European Union, 2012
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

QE-31-12-667-EN-C
ISBN 978-92-830-1877-3

EN
REG.NO. BE - BXL - 27

doi:10.2864/6370