Social Policy in the European Union: Genesis, Obstacles and Digital Future

Abstract

The European Union is a process, not an organization, started in the 50s by a groups of visioners who thought of a long term project. The idea of the fathers of Europe, as Jean Monnet, was gradually advance in the integration proves in order to achieve such a level that would make impossible another war between National States of Europe. Economic in tegration has achieved great results and next steps will be social and poli tical in order to attract the loyalty of the citizens to the integration process. Consequently, this research focusses on the necessity of integration, to some extent, the diverse national social policies in the European level, analyzing the necessities and the obstacles. Finally, the research contributes with a deep understanding of the implementation of digital solutions to solve, or avoid, problems integrating social policies within the European Union. Therefore, digitalization and its possibilities to implement a coherent, and minimum cohesive, social policy in the European level. The research in troduces a new instrument, still under development, in the debate about the convenience of a Social Europe within the EU.

Full text

15
Social Policy in the European Union:
Genesis, Obstacles and Digital Future
David Ramiro Troitiño∗
Sanja Ivić∗∗
Ondrej Hamuľák∗∗∗
Alla Fedorova∗∗∗∗
Summary: The European Union is a process, not an organization, started
in the 50s by a groups of visioners who thought of a long term project. The
idea of the fathers of Europe, as Jean Monnet, was gradually advance in
the integration proves in order to achieve such a level that would make
impossible another war between National States of Europe. Economic in-
tegration has achieved great results and next steps will be social and poli-
tical in order to attract the loyalty of the citizens to the integration process.
Consequently, this research focusses on the necessity of integration, to some
extent, the diverse national social policies in the European level, analyzing
the necessities and the obstacles. Finally, the research contributes with
a deep understanding of the implementation of digital solutions to solve,
or avoid, problems integrating social policies within the European Union.
Therefore, digitalization and its possibilities to implement a coherent, and
minimum cohesive, social policy in the European level. The research in-
troduces a new instrument, still under development, in the debate about the
convenience of a Social Europe within the EU.
Keywords: Social Europe, Digital EU, social digital solutions, EU digita-
lization, Digital social systems.
*
David Ramiro Troitiño is a Jean Monnet Professor, Tallinn University of Technology, email:
david.troitino@taltech.ee
** Sanja Ivic is a Research Fellow at the Institute for European Studies, Belgrade, Serbia, email:
sanja_ivic1@yahoo.com
*** Ondrej Hamuľák is a senior researcher at the Faculty of Law, Palacký Univerity Olomouc, Czech
Republic and adjunct professor at Tallinn University of Technology, email: ondrej.hamulak@upol.cz
**** Alla Fedorova is a MSCA4Ukraine postdoctoral fellow at the Faculty of Law, Palacký Univer-
sity Olomouc, Czech Republic under supervision of Ondrej Hamuľák. She contributed to the
research presented in this paper as part of the project titled “The Approximation of Ukrainian
Social and Labour Legislation to EU Law” (ID number 1233330). We extend our gratitude to
the European Commission and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation for their invaluable
support in conducting the research activities associated with this project. The views and opinions
expressed in this paper are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official
policies or positions of the European Commission or the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.

EUROPEAN STUDIES – VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1, 2023
16
Citation: RAMIRO TROITIÑO, D., IVIĆ, S., HAMUĽÁK, O., FEDORO-
VA, A. Social Policy in the European Union: Genesis, Obstacles and Digital
Future. European Studies – the Review of European law, Economics and
Politics. 2023, vol. 10, no. 1, pp.15–32, DOI: 10.2478/eustu-2023-0001.
1. Introduction. Genesis of social policies in Europe
Under the European sphere of influence, in the Old Testament there are numerous
references to poverty, charity and relief of the needy. The Jews, as a Semitic people,
are subject to the requ,irements of patriarchs, kings and prophets, and solidarity
is a primary obligation. Hebrew Laws prescribe the orphans charity, condemn the
exploitation of widows and orphans, humanize slavery through fraternal and fair
treatment, and abhor the abuse of power
1
. These were the same social approach in
the Ancient Greece for the rights of the citizens, because the citizens had to serve
during many years to the Polis mainly in the army, normally until they were 60.
To be a citizen you had to belong to an ethnical, cultural and economic group.
Just citizens could own land, a status of membership of the society. Roman law
is the basis of international law of today. In Roman culture influence emanated
humanistic principles, such as Seneca (man to man is sacred). This leaves out the
slaves, women and children who are under authority of the paterfamilias wing, but
the State provides numerous services to the citizens, with very different phases
due the long centuries of roman rule. Nevertheless, within the last Roman period,
Christianity changed the perception of social justice and common solidarity. As
a contribution of early Christianity, are its teachings about the equality of men.
2
Christianity does not separate morality from religion. For the Hebrews, love your
neighbor was limited to the „chosen people”, Israel, excluding foreigners, but for
new believers, love was extended to all, including foreign infidels.
3
Christianity
was to influenced the development of the European Union and the concept of
solidarity between its members was introduced by Christian democrats.
4
1 FALK, Z. W. Hebrew Law in Biblical Times: An Introduction. Maxwell Institute Publications.
2001, no. 41, pp. 1–144 [online]. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/mi/41
2 HASKINS, Ch. I. Gender Bias in the Roman Catholic Church: Why Can‘t Women be Priests?
University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class. 2003, vol. 3, no. 1,
pp. 99–124 [online]. Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/rrgc/vol3/iss1/4
3
AWTREY, J. D. Jews and the Sources of Religious Freedom in Early Pennsylvania. LSU Doctoral
Dissertations: 2018, no. 4544, pp. 1–373 [online]. Available at: https://repository.lsu.edu/grads
chool_dissertations/4544
4 STJERNØ, S. The idea of solidarity in Europe. European Journal of Social Law. 2011, no. 3,
pp. 156–167 [online]. Available at: https://soc.kuleuven.be/ceso/life-sciences-society-lab/files
/stjerno-the-idea-of-solidarity-in-ejsl-2011-3-b.pdf

SOCIAL POLICY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
17
The medieval times shaped Europe, defining its culture, folks and borders.
The evolution of communal movement was slow, from the growth of the villages
and the formation of guilds and unions.
5
The strength of many guilds, allowed
the implementation of various social and charitable services. So sick union mem-
bers, charged a subsidy to sustain themselves and family. Nevertheless, there was
a key moment in European history, the French revolution. It changed the whole
perspective to social policies due the principles of liberty, equality, fraternity
among the members of the society. There were many outstanding thinkers in this
period, perhaps being Rousseau one of the most representative in this regard. Until
Rousseau’s time, the sovereign in any given society was regarded as the central
authority in that society, responsible for enacting and enforcing all laws. Most
often, the sovereign took the form of an authoritative monarch who possessed
absolute dominion over his or her subjects. In Rousseau’s work, however, sov-
ereignty takes on a different meaning, as sovereignty is said to reside in all the
people of the society as a collective.
6
The people, as a sovereign entity, express
their sovereignty through their general will and must never have their sovereignty
abrogated by anyone or anything outside their collective self. In this regard, sove-
reignty is not identified with the government but is instead opposed against it. The
government’s function is thus only to enforce and respect the sovereign will of the
people and in no way seek to repress or dominate the general will. It clearly opened
the society to social protection of all its members with outstanding improvements
in the following decades. A radical change in the economic model linked with the
industrial revolution, changed the social paradigm as well.
7
Previous traditional
ways of solidarity could not be applied to industrial workers living in large cities,
leaving unprotected a large part of the society. Therefore, the British government
actuated consequently regulating the social protection of its workers, influencing
the rest of the European states and the world. It expanded a social model that was
implemented differently in each country of Europe according to their previous
traditions. During XX century, a time of wars, depravation and unrest, the social
policy became a central part of the European countries, and a pillar of the Euro-
pean society differentiating Europe from the rest of the world, as the USA where
the solidarity is a private initiative rather than communal or public.
8
5 HAFERKAMP, H. and SMELSER, N. J. (eds.). Social Change and Modernity. Berkeley: Uni-
versity of California Press, 1991.
6 ROUSSEAU, J. J. (1762). The Social Contract or Principles of Political Right (Translated by
G. D. H. Cole). Fœderis æquas Dicamus leges. Vergil, Æneid XI, 1762, pp. 1–73 [online]. Avail-
able at: https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/125486/5017_Rousseau_The_Social_Contract.pdf
7 TROITIÑO, D. R. and KERIKMÄE, T. (eds.). Pasado, presente y futuro de la Unión Europea.
Mc Graw Hill Interamericana S. L., 2014.
8
PONTUSSON, J. Inequality and Prosperity: Social Europe vs Liberal America. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Press, 2005. https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501713385

EUROPEAN STUDIES – VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1, 2023
18
2. Social Europe
European civilization is united in the concept of social protection, the welfare
state. It is one of the notions that identify together the European states, as a con-
traposition to other parts of the world. The idea of the social protection of the state
is commonly accepted by the whole society, and even in times of crisis, social
policies are protected by the social actors of each European state.
9
The social
policies can be compared to those of the United States, a country in many senses
similar to Europe, but with big differences, especially in this field.
10
There are
different social models in Western Europe, mainly divided into 4 main groups:
11
■
Nordic model: (Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and Holland) High social protec-
tion, plus universal social services, plus bigger expenditure in active politics of
employment and strong trade unions. It makes inequality of revenues very low.
■ Anglo-Saxon model: (the UK and Ireland) it combines important social pro-
tection in the last instance, especially for people of working age. It is a system
based on incentives to the activity and subsidies for those really looking for
a job. This system plus weak trade unions make for bigger differences in
salaries, and many workers have low salaries.
■ Continental model: (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, and Luxembourg)
A system based on security for the unemployed or people who find no job
and a system of retirement pensions. Trade unions have fewer numbers, but
are still strong, and collective negotiation is respected.
■ Mediterranean model: (Spain, Greece, Italy, and Portugal) Combines social
expenditure in retirement pensions, wide assistance and huge incentives to
early retirement, plus huge protection to jobs with high firing costs, and trade
unions with fewer numbers but strong collective negotiation, which leads to
low disparities in salaries.
These social models are looking for three main objectives: reduction of pover-
ty and inequality of revenues, protection of the labor market, and participation in
the labor market. According to these objectives, we see big differences between
the four main social models of Europe:
1. Inequality of revenue: The following models reduced inequality in the fol-
lowing proportions:
9
ŠIŠKOVÁ, N. Lidskoprávní mechanismy na úrovni EU a otázky související. Praha: Wolters
Kluwer ČR, 2021.
10
ALESINA, A., GLAESER, E. and SACERDOTE, B. Why Doesn’t the United States Have
a European-Style Welfare State? Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. 2001, no. 2, pp. 1–70
[online]. Available at: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/alesina/files/423__0332-alesina11.pdf
11 PÕDER, K., KEREM, K. „Social Models“ in a European Comparison. Eastern European Eco-
nomics. 2011, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 55–74, DOI: 10.2753/EEE0012-8775490503.

SOCIAL POLICY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
19
■ Nordic reduction of 42%
■ Continental reduction of 40%
■ Anglo-Saxon reduction of 39%
■ Mediterranean reduction of 35%
2. Reduction of poverty: People who live under 60% of the average income.
■ Nordic 11%
■ Continental 13%
■ Anglo-Saxon 19%
■ Mediterranean 20%
3.
There are two ways of protecting jobs: first protecting existing jobs with
high firing costs; by doing so you elude paying big unemployment subsi-
dies. Second, generous subsidies to unemployed people paid with taxes of
workers. Again, it is an issue of outsiders versus insiders and the importance
of the trade unions.
■ The Mediterranean model has a high level of protection of existing jobs,
less generous unemployment payments.
■
The Nordic model has more flexibility to fire workers (less cost) and
bigger subsidies for the unemployed.
■
The Continental model has high protection of existing jobs and high
subsidies.
■ The Anglo-Saxon system protects the existing jobs less but offers subsi-
dies almost as high as the Nordic and Continental.
4. Participation in the labor market. Per cent of the population of working age
doing any economic activity:
■ Nordic 73%
■ Anglo-Saxon 70%
■ Continental 64%
■ Mediterranean 63%
The comparison of these social models in terms of efficiency and equality
also shows big differences. Efficiency is the ability to create a high and stable
employment rate, and equality is linked to keeping the poverty risk rate low
12
.
So, according to these two concepts, the European social models will rank as
follows:
■ Nordic model 1 efficiency, 1 equality
■
Continental 3 efficiency, 2 equality (Exception of Austria)
■ Anglo-Saxon 2 efficiency, 3 equality
■ Mediterranean 4 efficiency, 4 equality
12 LEIBFRIED, S. and PIERSON, P. (1992). Prospects for social Europe. Politics & Society. 1992,
vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 333–366. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/003232929202000305.

EUROPEAN STUDIES – VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1, 2023
20
The general rank according to the countries includes as the top states Denmark,
the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, and Austria, and the lower states are Greece,
Italy, Spain, Ireland, and Portugal. The countries where the equality is higher are
Sweden, Luxembourg, Finland, Denmark, the Netherlands, and France, and the
countries with less equality are Greece and Ireland. On efficiency we see on the
top Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden and the UK, and on the bottom Italy and
Greece.
13
Efficiency is negative for a high level of protection of jobs because with
lower protection the employment rate is higher, and the other way around, with
higher protection the employment rate is lower. Generosity in subsidies is not so
important in terms of efficiency because it has little influence on the employment
level and provides adaptability to the work force to new situations, as globaliza-
tion. The risk of poverty or equality is strongly linked with the level of education.
The population between 25 and 64 years with secondary or higher studies is more
unlikely to live in poverty. It means that the people with less education have a big-
ger risk of poverty. The population with these studies in the different models is:
■ Nordic 75%
■ Continental 67%
■ Anglo-Saxon 60%
■ Mediterranean 40%
It clearly shows that the Nordic countries are less likely to increase their people
living in poverty as their educational rate is higher than in the other models. It also
shows the problems of the Mediterranean area, where just 40% of the population
between 25 and 64 have an education that could keep them away from poverty.
14
3. Obstacles and challenges
The analysis of the main European social models leads to different long-term
possibilities accepting the following premises:
■
If a model is not efficient it is not sustainable in the long term. There are
no new revenues, or they are too expensive for the tax system. Sweden and
Holland changed their models in the ‘70s. An older population, new tech-
nology, and globalization are other factors that make a model not sustainable
in the long term.
■ More equitable models can last longer in terms of democracy. If there are
too many poor, the voters will choose a government that will reduce poverty.
13
ANDERSON, K. M. Social policy in the European Union. London: Bloomsbury Publishing,
2015.
14 FERRERA, M. The ‘Southern model’ of welfare in social Europe. Journal of European social
policy. 1996, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 17–37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/095892879600600

SOCIAL POLICY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
21
Even if the model can last politically, in the economic sense it needs enough
money to pay health care and retirement pensions. So, if a state gets relevant
incomes from taxes (as for example, high employment rate), it can econom-
ically afford their social system.
The two European models with less efficiency and with a lower employment
rate, the Mediterranean and the Continental, normally have higher public debt,
the Mediterranean with 80% of its GDP and growing, the Continental with 71%.
On the other hand, the Anglo-Saxon 36% and the Nordic 49% are more efficient.
It means fewer possibilities of financing the model for the areas more needed, as
the Mediterranean countries. The negative perception of globalization in terms of
employment is higher in the less efficient models: Mediterranean 52%, Continen-
tal 42%, Anglo-Saxon 36%, and Nordic 37%. This leads to the question of why
the voters of the less efficient states did not want a change. The answer is that
most of the unemployed are outsiders, the young, women and immigrants, but
now the situation is changing with a bigger risk of losing one’s job. Therefore, it
is a real possibility that the Mediterranean model gets closer to the Anglo-Saxon
and the Continental to the Nordic.
15
The Working Group on Aging Population (AWG) made different reports
supported by ECOFIN about the aging of the European population and its con-
sequences on public expenditure on pensions, health care, and subsidies for
the unemployed. For 2004-2050 the public expenditure will grow more in the
Mediterranean model. The first option to pay these expenditures could be public
debt, but it means bigger taxes for the future to be paid by future generations
that will not enjoy the social benefits because the GDP will not grow as much as
the social expenditure. The economic crisis also makes this option unlikely, as
more countries are under pressure from the markets because of their high public
debt. In addition, the public debt in the countries more in need of extra funding
already have high rates of debt, so their possibilities of increasing it are really
reduced. A second option could be increasing indirect taxes, like a social VAT.
The problem is the more modest people are the ones that consume a higher part
of their rent income, so they will pay more, increasing the inequality of the social
models. On the other hand, globalization makes it impossible to increase direct
taxes because of the high mobility of capital. A third option is increasing the
number of people of working age and get them jobs, because their contributions
will increase the revenues of the state. It can be done by:
■ Immigrants with jobs. They pay taxes, but this is a temporary solution be-
cause they will also retire.
15
WALLACE, H., POLLACK, M. A., ROEDERER-RYNNING, C. and YOUNG, A. R. Poli-
cy-making in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.

EUROPEAN STUDIES – VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1, 2023
22
■ Increase the age of retirement, adapting it to life expectancy (longer now) as
Germany and other European countries are doing, from 65 to 67 years old.
It means fewer pensioners and more taxpayers.
A fourth option is decreasing the welfare state, less social security health
care, or increasing the years needed to get them. As the European population is
becoming older, more voters will be older, and they will reject this option. The
European problem is that the work market is still national, but the goods and
services markets are European. The reform of those, especially services (just 20%
of services trade is European) will force the states to change their work markets.
The future scenario for a common social policy will be easier as the Mediter-
ranean system will converge with the Anglo-Saxon system, and the continental
and Scandinavian systems will merge. It gives us two different social systems,
easier to integrate. Also, the influence of the social systems in the economies
of the member states of the European Union is an important factor for creating
a common policy, because in a common market the countries with less efficient
social systems will be at a disadvantage for their companies, with the consequent
loss of market share. In order to compete on equal terms in a common market,
a common social policy is needed.
16
Nevertheless, it seems that the countries
with more efficient and equal systems are not going to be willing to change their
models in a convergence with the average of the European states. It is more likely
that European social policy will start its development with minimum standards,
allowing more progressive legislation in the field, and hence the disparities be-
tween systems, but at the same time reducing them.
European Commission defined “Social Innovation” as: “The development
and implementation of new ideas (products, services and models) to meet social
needs and create new social relationships or collaboration. It represents new
responses to pressing social demands, which affect the process of social interac-
tions. It aims to improve human well-being. Social innovation is an innovation
that is social in both its ends and its means. It is an innovation that is not only
good for society but also enhances individuals’ capacity to act”. In other defi-
nitions there is an accent on the way to proceed: social innovation “as a new
combination or new configuration of social practices in certain areas of action
or social contexts” (European Commission, 2020).
17
16
VASILESCU, M. D., SERBAN, A. C., DIMIAN, G. C., ACELEANU, M. I. and PICATOS-
TE, X. Digital divide, skills and perceptions on digitalisation in the European Union –Towards
a smart labour market. PLoS ONE. 2020, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 1–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371
/journal.pone.0232032.
17 European Commission. Social innovation: inspirational practices supporting people throughout
their lives, 2020 [online]. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/european-social-fund-plus/en/pub
lications/social-innovation-inspirational-practices-supporting-people-throughout-their-lives

SOCIAL POLICY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
23
According to this definition, the European Social Policy should focus on
addressing the most urgent necessities of the European society, common to all
the Member States, regardless their respective social models and traditions. The
current globalization inducted by borderless digital transformation of the society
is increasing the necessity for common responses to issues as raising poverty
rates.
18
The creation of markets beyond the national limits provides relevant
benefits to those adapted to the new situation, but increase the inequality in the
society as the business benefits do not contribute to the national wealth redis-
tribution as their nature is multinational. Therefore, a supranational authority as
the European Union, seems appropriate to lead a new common policy to address
effectively this issue.
Migratory flows need the attention from a common frame as it is affecting
the whole European Union. The free movement of people, the abolishment of
internal borders and the increasing migration to Europe are stressing the social
system as new necessities need to be covered in order to integrate and protect
the new arrivals as, in most of the cases, lower part of the society increasing
the inequality. As previously exposed, migration is a temporal solution to aging
population, another common trend within Europe that is affecting the social sys-
tems of all the Member States.
19
Therefore, a more stable and long-term solution
should be found to reassure the sustainability of the social systems threated by
the higher costs.
The social composition of Europe is not only affected by aging population,
as changing family structures is transforming the European society. New models
of families and social organization required a new approach that often faces tra-
ditional barriers complicated. It is a process affecting all Europe due the current
harmonization of modern societies impacted by global tendencies. Therefore,
the EU can face this challenge from a new perspective because the organiza-
tion works for the citizens of Europe without the restrictions of national social
traditions.
The social challenges are often linked with the market, as inequality and
social exclusion, inadequate supply of jobs or p roblems of labour market. The In-
ternal Market is a highly integrated market ruled by European Union le gis lation.
The problem of social integration has been already discussed in this research,
18
AFONASOVA, M. A., PANFILOVA, E. E., GALICHKINA, M. A. and ŚLUSARCZYK, B.
Digitalization in economy and innovation: The effect on social and economic processes. Polish
journal of management studies. 2019, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 22–32, DOI: https://doi.org/10.17512
/pjms.2019.19.2.02
19 ŠIŠKOVÁ, N. The EU concept of the rule of law and the procedures de lege lata and de lege
ferenda for its protection. International and Comparative Law Review. 2019, vol. 19, no. 2,
pp. 116–130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/iclr-2019-0017

EUROPEAN STUDIES – VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1, 2023
24
nevertheless, it is a fact that market necessities need to be address effectively in
order to keep the social balance of the European Union as a whole. The Com-
mon Market has generated relevant benefits to the European economic agents
increasing the economic performance and European trade. On the other hand, it
generated new problems that before did not exist, as social cohesion in a terri-
tory without a common social policy. The current digital transformation of the
society allows to solve some of these problems from a new approach without
major collision with national traditions.
20
The European Union, a supranational organization dealing with communal
problems beyond national borders creating a new level of sovereignty beyond the
national level.
21
Therefore, the problems affecting Europe cannot be solved in the
national level and should be part of the framework of the Union. A clear example,
is environment or digital space as it goes beyond political borders.
22
The pollution
spreads from one country to the other making ineffective divergence national
solutions to the problem, just a common approach will deal properly with envi-
ronmental issues. As a clear example, pollution in Finish lakes is strongly link
with emissions in Polish industry. A high level of protection in Finland cannot
protect the finish lakes unless the origin of the emissions, Poland, implement
effective measures. Therefore, the European Union is dealing with environmental
policy as a part of the common frame. From the social perspective, environmental
degradation has become a priority in XXI century.
23
Following the same pattern,
national states cannot prevent, neither effectively address, this social risk. Just
a common action linking social and environmental protection will dismiss the
social impact of environmental problems.
Most of these challenges are weakening the traditional welfare policies of
the European States, an important part of the European identity as the national
actors lack the proper tools to fights against a combination of factors as ageing
population, decrease of financial resources, maintenance of welfare standards
20
HAMUĽÁK, O., TROITIÑO, D. R. and CHOCHIA, A. La carta de los derechos fundamentales
de la union europea y los derechos sociales. Estudios constitucionales. 2018, vol. 16, no. 1,
pp. 167–186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-52002018000100167
21
HAMUĽÁK, O. Lessons from the “Constitutional Mythology” or How to Reconcile the Concept
of State Sovereignty with European Integration. Danube: Law and Economics Review. 2015,
vol.. 6, no. 2, pp. 75–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/danb-2015-0005
22
GÁBRIŠ, T., HAMUĽÁK, O. Pandemics in Cyberspace – Empire in Search of a Sovereign?
Baltic Journal of Law and Politics. 2021, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 103–123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24
78/bjlp-2021-0005 or GÁBRIŠ, T., HAMUĽÁK, O. 5G and Digital Sovereignty of the EU: The
Slovak Way. Taltech Journal of European Studies. 2021, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 25–47. DOI: https://
doi.org/10.2478/bjes-2021-0013
23
EVANGELISTA, R., GUERRIERI, P. and MELICIANI, V. The economic impact of digital
technologies in Europe. Economics of Innovation and new technology. 2014, vol. 23, no. 8,
pp. 802–824. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2014.918438

SOCIAL POLICY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
25
and impact on the social groups of traditional users and the new users. In terms
of digitalization, four different sources that provide protection for specific risks,
market, state or other public authorities, civil society-family and personal ini-
tiatives.
Market can generate new jobs in orientated internet business, family faces
new ways of interaction, new problems and new solutions. Civic society has
witnessed a new communication system allowing the participation of all citizens
regardless their social condition, physical location or any other previous precon-
dition. It has fostered the civic participation to levels previously unknown. At the
individual level, digitalization provides individual empowerment and inclusion,
stimulates individualism and supports own identity and decreases the barrier to
access and usage. These impacts on market, society and individuals need to be
taking into consideration by the public authorities dealing with social problems. If
the European Union is going to be deeper involved in social affairs from a digital
perspective should promoted common social values, as professionalism, efficien-
cy, service and engagement, EU taxes on digital multinationals (incoming digital
services tax proposed by the European Union) and common actions addressing
the growing problem of concentration of wealth.
4. Impact of digitalization in welfare policies in the EU
Digitalization offers new solutions to old and new social problems, but faces threats
as “e-Governance paradox” where States are able to gather unprecedented amounts
of information but prove unable to turn the information into effective policy ac-
tions.
24
In order to be effective is required an impact analysis of welfare services
at systemic level. It means finding the right technological solutions as the success
tool for obtaining more efficient and cost-effective digital services. In addition, it
is very important to include the concept of public values as the differ from private
initiative inductors for social action. The public service does not focus on economic
profit but social benefits. Nevertheless, the targets should be achieved from the
most effective perspective avoiding wasting money from the citizens.
25
The European Union, a union of States with a common body of citizens repre-
sented in the European Parliament, needs to involve several agents in the digital
24 SAVOLDELLI, A., CODAGNONE, C. and MISURACA, G. Understanding the e-government
paradox: Learning from literature and practice on barriers to adoption. Government Information
Quarterly. 2014, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 63–71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2014.01.008
25
KWILINSKI, A., VYSHNEVSKYI, O. and DZWIGOL, H. Digitalization of the EU econo-
mies and people at risk of poverty or social exclusion. Journal of Risk and Financial Manage-
ment. 2020, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13070142

EUROPEAN STUDIES – VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1, 2023
26
social change, as experts (represented by the European Commission), Member
States (present in the Council), citizens and social movements. The digitalization
of the European society opens a new world for interaction between the European
institutions and the civic organizations, allowing a flexible and more effective
European social policy.
26
It is important the EU connects with the society and its
representatives to allow a social development with a positive effect on the soci-
ety. It is crucial because without the support of the citizens and their solidarity
at European level, the credibility of any action would be stigmatized by those
supporting national sovereignty as the last level of governance. Therefore, the
digital world offers alternatives to the European Union to implement, in a fluid
relation with the civic society, a credible social change improving the life of the
European citizens. Most of the successful initiatives have been design in a local
level, it is the duty of the European legislators to translate it to the European
level effectively.
The actions of the EU in the field of common social policy should have two
differentiated natures, applying specific solutions to specific problems. Issues
affecting a relevant part of Europe, need clear solutions from the EU. It means,
all the national social problems should be addressed by the national authorities,
following the principle of subsidiarity where the most effective level of decision
making to solve a problem would be in charge of the solution. Obviously, the
European problems (already mentioned in this research) can be just effectively
solved in the European level. On the other hand, the EU should foster a proactive
approach for social developments improving the connection between the different
level of decision making, including citizens.
27
Social innovators are keen to move
forward in the implementation of new solutions for social problems, therefore,
digitalization is mainly foster by those willing to implement innovative approa-
ches. Nevertheless, in general, the public authorities are reluctant to implement
proposals because the analysis on cost-benefits are insufficient.
The idea of a collaborative design and implementation of common reforms
with several actors and levels involved, will foster social innovation in the Eu-
ropean Union. Therefore, the European Union needs to respect subsidiarity and
promote collaboration to reach an innovative approach effective in social policy.
28
26 RAMIRO TROITIÑO, D., KERIKMÄE, T., HAMUĽÁK, O. (eds.). Digital Development of the
European Union. Cham: Springer, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-27312-4_1
27
CUERVO, M. R. V. and MENÉNDEZ, A. J. L. A multivariate framework for the analysis of the
digital divide: Evidence for the European Union-15. Information & Management. 2006, vol. 43,
no. 6, pp. 756–766. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2006.05.001
28 CRESPY, A. and MENZ, G. Commission entrepreneurship and the debasing of social Europe
before and after the Eurocrisis. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. 2015, vol. 53, no. 4,
pp. 753–768. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12241

SOCIAL POLICY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
27
The Union is facing the problem of transforming local initiatives to continen-
tal policies. Most of digital social actions start at the local level to solve specific
issues. Nevertheless, even if successful, the transition to higher levels of public
domain is complicated. It normally leads to the end of these initiatives within the
first years of implementation.
29
The EU needs to analyze why digital solutions
successfully implemented cannot be upgraded to address the problems of larger
groups of citizens. If the reasons are understood, the Union will make a great
step forward for the digitalization of the European social policy.
In addition, the European Union needs to enlarge the focus from single digital
social services to reconfiguration of existing economic and social structures. The
European Union represents a complex social ecosystem, as previously explained
in this research. Therefore, different models of social frames need minimum
standards allowing more progressive social policies. The digital solutions need
to adapt to this scheme in order to be successfully implemented in the European
level.
30
Funding of digital social solutions is a must for the Union as the model
of internet, widely dominated by high technological companies located in the
United States of America, respond to market stimulus and monetary benefits.
31
The social model of USA is radically different from the models implemented in
Europe, as it is based on a privatization of most of social protection initiatives.
Therefore, there is not research, neither solution, from companies founded in
a different social environment with different social priorities. The social benefits
are difficult to monetarize in a free market economy with a predominant role of
the public institutions in the welfare policies. Consequently, there is no motiva-
tion for private companies to invest and innovate in the field unless they have
an external stimulus. In addition, other public authorities and civic organizations
do not have the require financial resources for implementing digital solutions to
their social problems.
32
They need support from higher, and economically more
29 TROITIÑO, D. R. and KERIKMÄE, T. Europe facing the digital challenge: obstacles and solu-
tions. IDP. Revista de Internet, Derecho y Política. 2021, no. 34, pp. 1–3. DOI: https://doi.org
/10.7238/idp.v0i34.393310
30 PINK, S., FERGUSON, H. and KELLY, L. (2022). Digital social work: Conceptualising a hybrid
anticipatory practice. Qualitative Social Work. 2022, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 413–430. DOI: https://
doi.org/10.1177/14733250211003647
31
VARDANYAN, L. and KOCHARYAN, H. Critical views on the phenomenon of EU digital
sovereignty through the prism of global data governance reality: main obstacles and challenges.
European Studies: the Review of European law, Politics and Economics. 2022, vol. 9, no. 2,
pp. 110–132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/eustu-2022-0016
32 TROITIÑO, D. R. La Unión Europea y el Reino Unido. Divergencia histórica y miopismo con-
temporáneo. Tempo Exterior. 2020, vol. XX, no. 40, pp. 61–73 [online]. Available at: https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/344241840_La_Union_Europea_y_el_Reino_Unido_Diver
gencia_historica_y_miopismo_contemporaneo

EUROPEAN STUDIES – VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1, 2023
28
powerful, institutions. The European Union is very active in the field, supporting
local, civic and private initiatives with a relevant impact on the social aspects
of the society. Therefore, the EU is following the right path, but funding fatigue
could curb the financial possibilities. New initiatives are required, and a more
visibility for those successful digital social solutions is a must to popularize them
and prevent shortcuts in future financing.
5. Conclusions
The European Union is a social experiment initiated by brave men willing to cre-
ate a stable peace system in Europe. The so called, father of Europe, understood
the dangers of nationalism fostering conflicts within the continent. Therefore,
they designed a system with shared sovereignty promoting common management
over national control. The implementation of the project was complicated and
faced endless obstacles generated by the fierce resistance of nationalism against
supranationalism. Consequently, they designed a complex roadmap to implement
a unique social, political and economic common system in the world; step by step
building a common house cornering nationalism in the cultural sphere.
In addition, the creation of a common European frame required the imple-
mentation of solidarity between its members in order to reduce or dismiss the
negative effects of the integration, reduce inequalities and promote communality.
Therefore, the European Comminutes established the internal concept of help
between the Member States, that later on, following the progressive pattern
of integration, extended to solidarity between regions and European citizens.
Consequently, originally, there was no necessity for a common social policy
as the solidarity was between States and was properly implemented with the
European policies and several structural funds. The expansion of the solidarity
targets generated the necessity of common management between EU citizens and
the implementation of a common frame, the European social policy aiming to
promote employment, improve living and working conditions, provide adequate
social protection and combat social exclusion. These policies are generally the
competence and responsibility of the EU Member States but the European Pillar
of Social Rights gives new momentum to initiatives at European level. Moreover,
the current social revolution foster by digitalization have changed the traditional
social paradigms, necessities and priorities. It is time for the European Union to
introduce improvements and advances in social terms for a common manage-
ment of the social solidarity between the European citizens. The national states
cannot provide social solutions to their citizens as the globalization of the digital
world has generated a new really beyond political borders of States. Currently,

SOCIAL POLICY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
29
just world powers as USA or China have enough muscle to control the big high-
tech companies operating in the world, generating works and wealth, but also
inequalities and distortions in the social solidarity. The European Union could
face these challenges if operating together under a common umbrella of common
solidarity; common problems will be solved more effectively in common.
The European Union needs to establish common standards in digital social
policies, first creating a compatible digital frame between all the Member States.
The generation of data is the future for social digital initiatives, but we need to be
able to use this data in the European level. Otherwise, without a real compatibility
the generation of data will be useless for institutional used. The management
of data as basic step that also requires a clear policy on data protection. The
European Union is taking the issue very seriously because of the privacy of its
citizens and the influence data collection has on digital solutions, especially in
the field of Artificial Intelligence. Machine learning is based on the amount of
data available. The European Union is in a privileged position because of its
capacity to access data from European users, but in an open system, this data will
be used by USA or China to build their alternative AI following their respective
national interest. Therefore, if the EU wants to create a common digital frame,
influence the welfare innovation and promote European AI solutions, needs to
protect the data and promote a common frame to implement common solutions
based on the necessities and capabilities of the European users.
The second logical step, will be the implementation of common minimum
standards where the European Union will guarantee a minimum social protection
of its citizens, but allowing additional rights coming from the Member States
focus on their respective nationals. This action will help to the foundation of
a common social frame, a first stage in the convergence of the different social
models implemented within the European Union members. Digital possibili-
ties can increase the convergence applying common protocols to access the
information and provide the services. Therefore, it is fundamental to implement
a common platform compatible all over the territory of the Union to start with
a basic common approach to digital social issues.
On the field of civic engagement, the European Union is aware of their im-
portance for the digitalization of the welfare policies. Most of the innovations
come from the local level, and require the adequate support to impact the whole
Union. In addition, the current digitalization allows a more active and effective
civic participation in the public life of private citizens. Therefore, combining
civic participation with welfare policies via digital platforms will increase the
democratic support for a common European house. The concept of common
sovereignty is fundamental for the implementation of a functional organization
in the European level; attracting the loyalty of the European citizens by their

EUROPEAN STUDIES – VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1, 2023
30
active participation in the European public life and by providing them European
answers to their social necessities, will increase the direct support from citizens
to the European Union. It is a process that requires time, but fundamental for the
political development of the organization. Consequently, digital social policies
and civic engagement are crucial for the development of the European Union.
Parallel, this research outlined the importance of public funding for the devel-
opment of effective digital solutions for social policies. These public investments
address the lack of private funds influenced by the American model of internet
focus on economic benefits. It is a complete legit target, but the European society
aims for s different social model. Therefore, the private companies lack the mo-
tivation to focus on social development if they cannot monetarize their achieve-
ments. In addition, the problem of ownership of a product does not apply to most
of the digital solutions of welfare policies, reducing even more the incentives for
private companies to invest large amounts of funds on research and innovation
on digital social aspects. If Europe wishes to keep (updated) its characteristic and
unique social model, a large public funding is required to promote research and
innovation. The benefits will be social, with a more equal and balance society, but
also economic for the public administrations with a most effective use of public
social funds thanks to the possibilities offered by a digital society.
List of references
AFONASOVA, M. A., PANFILOVA, E. E., GALICHKINA, M. A. and ŚLUSARCZYK, B.
Digitalization in economy and innovation: The effect on social and economic processes.
Polish journal of management studies. 2019, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 22–32, DOI: https://doi
.org/10.17512/pjms.2019.19.2.02
ALESINA, A., GLAESER, E. and SACERDOTE, B. Why Doesn’t the United States Have
a European-Style Welfare State? Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. 2001, no. 2,
pp. 1–70 [online]. Available at: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/alesina/files/423__0
332-alesina11.pdf
ANDERSON, K. M. Social policy in the European Union. London: Bloomsbury Publi-
shing, 2015.
AWTREY, J. D. Jews and the Sources of Religious Freedom in Early Pennsylvania. LSU
Doctoral Dissertations. 2018, no. 4544, pp. 1–373 [online]. Available at: https://repos
itory.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/4544
CRESPY, A. and MENZ, G. Commission entrepreneurship and the debasing of social Eu-
rope before and after the Eurocrisis. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. 2015,
vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 753–768. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12241
CUERVO, M. R. V. and MENÉNDEZ, A. J. L. A multivariate framework for the analysis
of the digital divide: Evidence for the European Union-15. Information & Management.
2006, vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 756–766. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2006.05.001

SOCIAL POLICY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
31
European Commission. Social innovation: inspirational practices supporting people
throughout their lives, 2020 [online]. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/european-so
cial-fund-plus/en/publications/social-innovation-inspirational-practices-supporting-pe
ople-throughout-their-lives
EVANGELISTA, R., GUERRIERI, P. and MELICIANI, V. The economic impact of digital
technologies in Europe. Economics of Innovation and new technology. 2014, vol. 23,
no. 8, pp. 802–824. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2014.918438
FALK, Z. W. Hebrew Law in Biblical Times: An Introduction. Maxwell Institute Publica-
tions. 2001, no. 41, pp. 1–144 [online]. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu
/mi/41
FERRERA, M. The ‘Southern model’ of welfare in social Europe. Journal of European
social policy. 1996, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 17–37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/095892879
600600
GÁBRIŠ, T., HAMUĽÁK, O. Pandemics in Cyberspace – Empire in Search of a Sover-
eign?. Baltic Journal of Law and Politics. 2021, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 103–123. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2021-0005
GÁBRIŠ, T., HAMUĽÁK, O. 5G and Digital Sovereignty of the EU: The Slovak Way.
Taltech Journal of European Studies. 2021, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 25–47. DOI: https://doi
.org/10.2478/bjes-2021-0013
HAFERKAMP, H. and SMELSER, N. J. (eds.). Social Change and Modernity. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1991.
HAMUĽÁK, O. Lessons from the “Constitutional Mythology” or How to Reconcile the
Concept of State Sovereignty with European Integration. Danube: Law and Economics
Review. 2015, vol.. 6, no. 2, pp. 75–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/danb-2015-0005.
HAMUĽÁK, O., TROITIÑO, D. R. and CHOCHIA, A. La carta de los derechos funda-
mentales de la union europea y los derechos sociales. Estudios constitucionales. 2018,
vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 167–186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-52002018000100167
HASKINS, Ch. I. Gender Bias in the Roman Catholic Church: Why Can‘t Women be
Priests? University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class.
2003, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 99–124 [online]. Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.uma
ryland.edu/rrgc/vol3/iss1/4
KWILINSKI, A., VYSHNEVSKYI, O. and DZWIGOL, H. Digitalization of the EU eco-
nomies and people at risk of poverty or social exclusion. Journal of Risk and Financial
Management. 2020, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13070142
LEIBFRIED, S. and PIERSON, P. (1992). Prospects for social Europe. Politics & Society.
1992, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 333–366. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/003232929202000305
PINK, S., FERGUSON, H. and KELLY, L. (2022). Digital social work: Conceptualising
a hybrid anticipatory practice. Qualitative Social Work. 2022, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 413–
430. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14733250211003647
PÕDER, K., KEREM, K. “Social Models” in a European Comparison. Eastern European
Economics. 2011, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 55–74, DOI: 10.2753/EEE0012-8775490503
PONTUSSON, J. Inequality and Prosperity: Social Europe vs Liberal America. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Press, 2005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501713385.

EUROPEAN STUDIES – VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1, 2023
32
ROUSSEAU, J. J. (1762). The Social Contract or Principles of Political Right (Translated
by G. D. H. Cole). Fœderis æquas Dicamus leges. Vergil, Æneid XI, 1762, pp. 1–73
[online]. Available at: https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/125486/5017_Rousseau_The_So
cial_Contract.pdf
SAVOLDELLI, A., CODAGNONE, C. and MISURACA, G. Understanding the e-go-
vernment paradox: Learning from literature and practice on barriers to adoption. Go-
vernment Information Quarterly. 2014, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 63–71. DOI: https://doi.org
/10.1016/j.giq.2014.01.008
STJERNØ, S. The idea of solidarity in Europe. European Journal of Social Law. 2011, no. 3,
pp. 156–167 [online]. Available at: https://soc.kuleuven.be/ceso/life-sciences-society
-lab/files/stjerno-the-idea-of-solidarity-in-ejsl-2011-3-b.pdf
ŠIŠKOVÁ, N. Lidskoprávní mechanismy na úrovni EU a otázky související. Praha: Wolters
Kluwer ČR, 2021.
ŠIŠKOVÁ, N. The EU concept of the rule of law and the procedures de lege lata and de lege
ferenda for its protection. International and Comparative Law Review. 2019, vol. 19,
no. 2, pp. 116–130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/iclr-2019-0017
TROITIÑO, D. R., KERIKMÄE, T., HAMUĽÁK, O. (eds.). Digital Development of the
European Union. Cham: Springer, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-
27312-4
TROITIÑO, D. R. and KERIKMÄE, T. (eds.). Pasado, presente y futuro de la Unión Eu-
ropea. Mc Graw Hill Interamericana S. L., 2014.
TROITIÑO, D. R. and KERIKMÄE, T. Europe facing the digital challenge: obstacles and
solutions. IDP. Revista de Internet, Derecho y Política. 2021, no. 34, pp. 1–3. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7238/idp.v0i34.393310
TROITIÑO, D. R. La Unión Europea y el Reino Unido. Divergencia histórica y miopismo
contemporáneo. Tempo Exterior. 2020, vol. XX, no. 40, pp. 61–73 [Online]. Available
at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344241840_La_Union_Europea_y_el_Re
ino_Unido_Divergencia_historica_y_miopismo_contemporaneo
VARDANYAN, L. and KOCHARYAN, H. Critical views on the phenomenon of EU digital
sovereignty through the prism of global data governance reality: main obstacles and
challenges. European Studies: the Review of European law, Politics and Economics.
2022, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 110–132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/eustu-2022-0016
VASILESCU, M. D., SERBAN, A. C., DIMIAN, G. C., ACELEANU, M. I. and PICA-
TOSTE, X. Digital divide, skills and perceptions on digitalisation in the European
Union – Towards a smart labour market. PLoS ONE. 2020, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 1–39.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232032
WALLACE, H., POLLACK, M. A., ROEDERER-RYNNING, C. and YOUNG, A. R. Po-
licy-making in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.