Promoting Social Inclusion and Mutual Understanding: Intertwined Efforts at Local, National and International Level

Abstract

This chapter considers the European framework of policies for inclusion, illustrating how those are translated into practices a national and local level. It offers a rich and yet necessarily partial appreciation of some of the most highly respect projects funded by the Erasmus+ programme. They read as success stories and a possible path for further developments. Finally, the point of view of local administrators and educators on the possible impact of the policy and resulting project initiatives is presented, proposing a snapshot of lessons learned in the eyes of stakeholders.

1 A Framework for EU Policies of Inclusion

At its dawn, in the period after WWII, and within the framework of the European Economic Community (EEC), scarce reference in the official documents and a lack of institutional means contributed to a situation in which social issues were addressed as a single way to the ultimate end of economic integration of the Member States.

Only during the 1980’s, in the aftermath of the oil crisis and a profound economic recession, and the 1990’s, with the definition of a European Social Model did these issues became central in the European political agenda i.e. there was an interest in considering the spill over effects between the economic and social issues. In this subject, the European Single Act, in 1986, represented a turning point, promoting the need of common European policy and objectives concerning social and economic cohesion and the diminution of regional asymmetries, and the Maastricht Treaty, in 1992, was a milestone of the then recently created European Union, addressing the political and economic integration within the promotion of a social Europe model.

But, mostly, it’s with the Amsterdam Treaty, in 1999, and later the Nice Treaty, that European Union defines as a central goal for its social policies the eradication of social exclusion, to be assumed either by European institutions or at the national level by the Member States.¹

The new century begins with the Lisbon Strategy (2000) asserting that during the next decade Europe should become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge economy of the world, aiming either at a sustainable economic growth and an increasing social cohesion.

Within this framework, benefiting from social dialogue and a wider and stronger participation of civil society through the Open Method of Coordination, it is stressed that employment, social protection, fight against social exclusion, health care and the access to higher levels of qualifications in education and training should constitute a beacon for all European policies, updating what became known as the European Social Model. The inclusion of economic growth and employment within the scope of a knowledge economy has contributed to put education and learning, specifically lifelong learning, in the spotlight of European policies and programs.

In the context of a new global economic recession, the end of the decade sees the emergence of the new European Strategy 2020 with the purpose of boosting a “smart, sustainable and inclusive growth” with a particular focus in employment, poverty reduction and social inclusion, to be achieved through “activation policies” namely involving lifelong education and training processes. The Strategy represented a shift in the way social inclusion (now, an “active inclusion”) policies were addressed by the European institutions, and the citizens’ responsibility and accountability for their “social fate” became a new mantra, while the State role, of each Member State, as a provider and guarantee of social rights faded way.

2 Translating Policies into Action

A specific attention in the EU policies has been devoted to young and young adults. This confirms the primary goal of the EU Youth Strategy 2019–2027,² devoted to create opportunities for participation to young people in the society and labour market. Even if tackling poverty and exclusion deriving from it seems to be the main target of strategies applied at national and local level with specific national youth policies, it is worth considering also the lines of funding in Erasmus+ Key Actions that offer a lively overview of the best experiences at international level. With a budget of EUR 14.7 billion for the period 2014–2020, it provides opportunities for over four million people through formal and non-formal learning, transnational mobility, exchange of good practices, volunteering, and solidarity.³ The actions carried out thanks to E+ funding address issues related to or derived from unemployment, economic and forced migrations, digital divide, climate change consequences, and many more. Specifically, priorities are inclusion and diversity (ranging from disabilities to cultural differences), digital transformation (devoted to the development of a high-performing digital education ecosystem across Europe), the environment and the fight against climate change (promoting the European Green Deal growth strategy) and the participation to democratic life of all its citizens.⁴

Project formats are not limited to mobility, which was in the very original nature of E+, and they include European Voluntary Service, and transnational Youth initiatives, the format of Strategic partnerships, that supports directly the implementation of policies, joining together stakeholders, i.e. experts in the field considered, educational institutions and marginalised target groups. Even if, across European countries, it is frequently the use of combined funding opportunities that can make a difference (e.g. European Social Fund, Regional Operational Programme of the European Regional Development Fund), Erasmus+ programme has gained a prominent position in promoting social inclusion programmes for young people. Thus, it is worth considering which is the impact of E+ project focused on inclusion of those who are socially or economically marginalised on the general topics.

The following paragraph offers an overview of the E+ Strategic Partnership programme (KA2) funded from 2014 to 2020. Following this general framework, few relevant examples of projects undertaken to address issues of social inclusion for vulnerable youth, migrants, women will be analysed in depth in order to consider the quality, the impact and the sustainability of educational interventions, both at informal and non-formal level, on adults and young adults. Finally, reflections on best practices and gaps still to be addressed will be explored.

3 Analysis of the Best Practices from E+ KA2 Projects (Years 2014–2020)

In the general framework of the Erasmus+ programme there are three actions: KA1—Learning mobility, KA2, Cooperation (divided into Partnerships for innovation and Partnerships for exchange of good practices), and KA3—Support for policy reform. Specifically, KA2 has two different approaches: a sectorial one, oriented to specific sectors only, and another cross-sectorial, aimed at fostering cooperation among different kind of institutions and organizations working in the field of education.

Strategic partnerships for exchange of good practices are “dedicated to creating or consolidating networks, to compare ideas, practices and methods” of existing outputs [1], whereas in Strategic partnership for innovation, a specific grant is provided for the realisation of innovative intellectual outputs.

Among the priorities of E+ there the youth policy priority of Social inclusion, promoted both by EU and CoE strategies for sustainable and inclusive growth and the promotion of human rights. Both organizations base their strategies on an appreciation of the multifaceted and complex nature of young people’s social integration, as well as the significant threats that the economic crisis continues to present. Using the capacities of youth research, policy, practice, and young people’s own agency, evidence-based policy can be developed to remove barriers.

From 2014 to 2020 were funded 24,814 projects in KA2 all over Europe and among these, 3645 encompass the word “inclusion” into the topic keywords.⁵ For these projects, EU Grant awarded was on average of 160,300 Euros⁶ and up to a maximum of approximately 450,000 Euros. Among projects on inclusion the predominant coordinating organization countries were Spain, France, Italy, United Kingdom and Germany (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1

E+ KA3 projects on inclusion per coordinating organization’s country. N = 3645 projects

Data available on projects offered also a double indexing: the “good practices production” and the “success stories”. Figure 2 shows the distribution of the projects that led to the production of good practices per typology of coordinating organization. Non-governmental organisation/association/social enterprise was the predominant typology of Coordinating organization, followed by higher education institutions (tertiary level).

Fig. 2

E+ KA3 projects on inclusion per coordinating organization’s typology. N = 3645 projects

Table 1 offers an overview of the projects funded from 2014 to 2019 filtered for the word “inclusion” in the keywords, detailing how many per year were labelled as “success stories”. A total of 24 success stories projects were found.

Table 1 Number of funded projects with results available/success stories that have “inclusion” in the keywords per year

Among these 24 projects, listed in detail in Table 2, 5 were related to a multicultural perspective and particularly relevant for the objectives pursued and the outcome produced. These five projects will be briefly presented and discussed.

Table 2 Success stories among projects with results available that have “inclusion” in the keywords

4 Fives Success Stories and a ‘Legacy’

The following five projects were flagged as “success stories” in the data repository offered by EACEA on the Erasmus+ funded projects from 2014–2020 among those that have already results available. They have different target groups: from adult migrants to their children, to low skilled adults educationally remote to those at risk of unemployment and are briefly presented here.

The Valorize project (2014–1-IT02-KA204–003515) focused on adult migrants with medium-high professional skills that were for various reasons prevented to participate to the Labour Market of a hosting country, or only marginally included in it with low positions and under skilled employments if compared to their qualifications. The project had a double strand of actions: on the one hand, improving the soft skills of migrants in presenting themselves by video CV and e-Portfolios, and on the other hand, assisting professionals, companies and employment agencies in enhancing migrant employability and inclusion. Furthermore, the project provides a guide to assess migrants’ soft skills, i.e.: motivation, time management, managing responsibility, adaptability & flexibility, team-working, service skills, communication skills, conflict management, problem solving, creativity & innovation, critical & structured thinking, and decision making.

The Encyclopaedia of migrants (2015–1-FR01-KA204–014905) gave birth to a transnational European cooperation project between nearby countries (Portugal, Spain, France and the British overseas territory Gibraltar) which aimed to combat social exclusion of migrants to the joint aid of skills and experiences of citizens, researchers, educators, artists and local public decision-makers. The idea of producing an encyclopaedia stems from the footsteps of the well-known Diderot and d’Alembert’s one, and it represents an emblematic and political object, intended to promote knowledge and fight obscurantism. However, the contents of this encyclopaedia are a collection of migrants’ stories, sometimes handwritten, other times collected thanks to the art of photography and filming, or by other artistic means and documents that can provide a different narrative and perception in the collective imagination, producing a kaleidoscopic vision of migration. Too often the representations of migrants across Europe suffer from the simplification and repetition of the discourses, and do not allow recipients of these message to consider thoroughly “otherness”. Thus, the Encyclopaedia of migrants is an artistic experimentation project initiated by Paloma Fernández Sobrino which produced an encyclopaedia containing approximately 400 testimonies of the life narratives of migrants based on a network of eight cities of the Atlantic side of Europe.

The WelComm: Communication Skills for Integration of Migrants (2014–1-NL01-KA200–001265) project was aimed at raising awareness of the importance of education for social inclusion of migrants from early age and promoting opportunities for equal start in education for migrant children in pre-primary and primary school age. At the same time, the project intended to raise awareness of the importance of education for social inclusion among migrant parents, reinforcing with innovative tools for non-formal language learning the capacities of migrant organisations and language educators to work with migrants. The project had a follow-up initiative oriented towards young students from 6 to 12 years of age. In this second phase board games and comic books were produced in order to help students to learn more about the history, nature and culture of their new homeland.

The On the move. Best Practice in Outreach Educational Counselling and low-threshold learning opportunities (2014–1-DE02-KA204–001579) project stems from the European Agenda for Adult learning (EAAL) and the comparative research on adult literacy, numeracy and problem-solving skills (OECD PIAAC). Its aim was to enhance low skilled adults’ participation to education opportunities, thanks to educational counselling devoted to reach those educationally remote. The project produced best practice examples, video interviews with staff and experts, oriented toward the implementation of alternative approaches to create a bridge between the educational offer and those in need of it.

The MentorPower: Empowerment and Social Integration of Migrant Youth via Integration into Labor Market Using Engagement Mentoring (2014–2-FR02-KA205–009246) project was aimed to developing a mentoring strategy specifically devoted to target young migrant’s needs. The model of ‘Engagement Mentoring’ offers a 9-month program for migrant youth aged 16–25 to help their integration on the labour market. The mentoring strategy brought mentors from business, local authorities, and the education system, together with migrant youth in an interactive approach that can be transferred to a large number of scenarios and individuals.

Even if from different perspectives and with sensible different outcomes, the projects presented offer a coherent set of tools to support social inclusion at different levels and with various outputs. In this direction it is worth mentioning here also the experience, based on three different funded European projects, that brought to the LIDA project experience: LIBE, ADVENUS and REGAP projects.

The LIBE project (Supporting Lifelong Learning with Inquiry Based Education) was funded within the Lifelong Learning Programme by the European Commission in 2014–2015. The project aimed at designing, developing and trying out, in three different countries in Europe (Italy, Portugal, Norway), an innovative e-learning management system devoted to improving key information processing skills for ICT (literacy, numeracy and problem solving), with an inquiry-based approach to learning. The target group were low educational achievers aged 16–24. Six courses were developed, composed of 32 Multimedia Presentations and 125 Learning Objects.

The Advenus project (Developing On-line Training Resources for Adult Refugees) expanded on the LIBE results by including refugees in its target group and was funded by the Erasmus+ programme. The main goal was to improve and expand the availability of high-quality, culturally sensitive open access e-learning resources to adult refugees, trainers, and teachers in EU countries. The resources were tested and validated to ensure that they were culturally sensitive to the needs of various refugee groups as well as the cultures of the new home countries. As a result, five courses were created and translated into five different languages.

The ReGap project (Reducing the Educational Gap for migrants and refugees in EU countries with highly relevant e-learning resources offering strong social belonging) aims to provide adult migrants and refugees of both genders in EU countries with high-quality, culturally sensitive open access e-learning resources. Based on findings from the United States and previous projects, it was clear that closing the education gap for migrants and refugees in European countries will increase their chances of finding work and social inclusion. The access to opportunities of education has be proven particularly challenging for the specific target group, that is highly heterogeneous and needed a clear change in teaching perspective and methods. This requires culturally and gender sensitive online learning activities that support in-person learning activities in the context of each European country.

With slightly different research groups, but based on a real ‘legacy’ of experienced core partner organizations, these projects have a common fil rouge that consist in the production of best practices realized through the systematic consultation of experts, stakeholders, and significant individuals that guided the construction of the outcomes and the pivotal decisions in the development of the activities. These consultations represent a core activity for LIDA project too and in the following paragraphs the voice of the privileged witnesses and leading figures on realizing the inclusion policies at different levels.

5 LIDA’s Multiplier Events

The LIDA project participates in the European challenge to build an inclusive pedagogy that can address our diverse multicultural societies. An education focused on the need to smooth social differences, foster dialogue between cultures and integrate vulnerable minorities in Europe. The LIDA project addresses such a complex purpose from different angles. Its main interlocutors are the “vulnerable adult minorities“—including, but not limited to, migrants, refugees and asylum seekers—but also realities of the third sector—NGOs, Non-Profit, volunteer associations—and the institutions, both at central and local level.

As stated in the Activity Report: “A key premise in LIDA and the participants of IO1 multiplier events is that the accumulated knowledge possessed by different experts, policy makers, education and associated professionals and vulnerable adult minorities is distributed in multiple networks that are not always connected or shared—it can remain invisible and result in intended or unintended (structural) discrimination for those involved. In sum, they constitute a potentially shared fund of knowledge based upon skills and experiences in diverse contexts across different national and international borders and contexts that can be policy, professional, family and community based”. Whereby funds of knowledge is implied: “historically accumulated and culturally developed bodies of knowledge” ([2]: 113) that are essential for individual and social wellbeing. Funds of knowledge imply funds of identity, another closely related working concept, describing how funds of knowledge are appropriated by individuals and communities who use them to “define, consider and express themselves” (Learning inclusion and active citizenship: views from four European countries. A report from the LIDA Erasmus+ project dated 19 April 2022).

LIDA’s first effort has been to build a frame of reference through a number of international Focus Groups. These multiplier events were designed to bring together professionals and institutions operating in the field of intercultural education to engage in an open dialogue on the challenges and opportunities of learning inclusion. The task of the events was to disseminate the LIDA project and stimulate a debate on the main axes of the project’s intervention: vulnerable adult minorities education; active citizenship; digital resources for learning inclusion; digital storytelling.

The focus groups helped to test the objectives of the LIDA Project—until then formulated in general terms—on the concrete national and local contexts, allowing the partners to understand which actions and outputs are primarily useful to the recipients of the project itself, but also to the schools, centres and organizations where they study, live or work. The chance to listen to the experience of those who work in the field was in this sense crucial. An opportunity to share knowledge and gather information that will serve as an operational base on which to structure the actions of the LIDA project, to identify good practices and to develop quality indicators.

6 The Main Questions in the Multiplier Events

The preliminary actions to set up these transnational focus groups started in the kick-off meeting of the project, held online on 18 March 2021. Each partner had the opportunity to choose how to organise the event, if digitally or face-to-face, depending on the development of the COVID-19 pandemic. One common element, the participants were to be selected from three levels: governments and intergovernmental organisations; the education sector and public/private enterprises; educators and students belonging to the vulnerable adult minorities group.

Constituting the first target group of the project, institutional guests and policy makers were selected from the partner’s professional and social networks and through an evaluation of the relevance of professional expertise, trying to ensure the characteristics required. Once invited to the focus group, the guests had to debate a number of core questions designed by the LIDA team as a basis for the data sets.

The first of these questions asked how do intergovernmental organizations and institutions at a local, national and European level support processes of inclusive teaching, intercultural education and active citizenship. Participants were invited to reflect on what kinds of policy debates and issues are the drivers of opportunities in the Partner’s country, and on how is the wellbeing of cultural adult minorities considered in policies. Lastly, they were asked what are important resources to support learning inclusion and citizenship policies.

The overall task of such questions was to understand and assess how education policies changed over time, following the rapid evolution of our societies; what are the concrete supports to lifelong learning for those who live at the margins of society, including the available funds and incentives destined to their education. And, most of all, how effective all these policies are proving themselves to be, and if there is any special advice or any recommendation for the future based on experience.

Based upon these multiplier events, four reports were produced in each of the partner countries, presenting the findings of the transnational focus groups. An overall Report for the Activity summarized those findings through comparing and contrasting. The reflections of the participants and of the LIDA members are highlighted throughout the report and offer the basis to these pages.

7 The First Level Multiplier Events

Italy organized its Focus Groups in three sessions, one per each level. The institutional level meeting was held digitally on May 27, 2021. The participants acknowledged how, in recent years, the issue of social inclusion has posed new challenges to the Italian institutional system. This is particularly evident in the governance of migrations, a complex and shifting reality, whose numbers have grown dramatically. At different levels, the Italian institutional system has adopted policies to promote social inclusion, proposing experimental initiatives which proved themselves effective in various areas sensitive to integration processes. Faced with this complex reality, however, institutions have often responded in an untimely and belated manner. In particular, the participants in the seminar reported a lack of “systemic actions“towards the integration of minorities and the promotion of active citizenship. This follows the indications of UNESCO’s Sustainable Development Goals, which were adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 25th September 2015 [3], and in particular SDG4, with its focus on inclusion, equitable quality and lifelong learning.

In the last 30 years many principles of national legislation have addressed the issue of welcoming and developing good practices of coexistence and integration between different cultures. Truly inclusive education is recognized as an absolute priority in the integration process. Yet policies have not always been able to address satisfactorily the well-being of vulnerable adult minorities. The participants identified what can they described as a counterproductive attitude of the policies dedicated to the issue of migration. These are always characterized by a certain paternalism. In reality, as some participants noted, the very concept of vulnerability, so central to national and European policies, has been questioned and should be substantiated. Italian politics treats with a welfare attitude men and women who often have incredible paths behind them; existential journeys which have led them to develop formal and informal skills that are not even remotely comparable to those of a young Italian. This attitude results in what has been defined as an “inclusive exclusion”, one of the major impediments to the creation of a productive learning environment [4].

The participants agreed that the collaboration between institutions and the territories is fundamental. The educational, training and socio-cultural activities that deal with interculture and social inclusion involve a plurality of promoters: public and private schools; Local communities; non-profit organizations; the private sector. Such a plurality is important, but without a stable and coherent framework of reference, the extremely diverse territorial landscape becomes fragmented. In addition to this are the closely related problems of an excess of bureaucracy and slowness in the elaboration of institutional responses. In a sector such as that of policies for social inclusion, which is in continuous—and often very rapid—transformation, the risk of making interventions late and ineffective is indeed concrete. Another challenge, in Italy, therefore, consists in understanding how to cut the response times of the institutions, without abandoning a solid approach and rigorous controls.

The guests perceived as equally important the need to overcome the quantitative and emergency nature of Italian policies, in an attempt to transform the institutional initiatives into qualitative and structural responses. A qualitative and widespread approach should be stimulated, involving communities at the micro level, which is often the only one capable to create lasting and fruitful relationships between newcomers and inhabitants. It is therefore important to promote a widespread model of hospitality, which builds up communities, relationships and fosters the creation of common memories. It is the concept of a lifewide learning [5], that is to say a learning experience that takes place in various environments and situations both inside and outside the formal education system fostering an approach to learning founded upon connectivity [6].

The Norwegian team set up one single multiplier event to fit all the levels. The meeting was held online on 14 June 2021. All the participants were professionals from the public sector, employment and welfare agencies, local authorities and higher education institutions. When asked about the main debates on learning inclusion, the participants noted how, in the last years, policy debates focused on education and employment among migrants, refugees and asylum seekers flourished. In Norway these categories are widely perceived as the main victims of exclusion from society and therefore the first targets of policies for social inclusion. As the Norwegian report states “over the past decade, statistics show that “employment is distinctly lower for refugees (52,7%) than for the general population (72,7%).” (Learning inclusion and active citizenship: views from four European countries. A report from the LIDA Erasmus+ project dated 19 April 2022).

The participants were concerned that national policies could not match either local conditions or the needs of refugees, migrants and asylum seekers. As we read in the Activity Report: “adult learners in Norway have often fallen between two stools: the attention to the role of the adults in society and employment on the one hand, and on the other hand attention to the individual, their sense of dignity and acknowledging their background and prior education. In theory, there seems to be a focus on the individual rights and needs of each adult learner, but this may sometimes contrast with the expectations of government plans and practices as regards becoming productive as quick as possible. In other words, there seems to be a discrepancy between intention and practice” (Learning inclusion and active citizenship: views from four European countries”, A report from the LIDA Erasmus+ project dated 19 April 2022).

Upon arrival, these are enrolled into an Introduction Programme, where they are required to follow a language course and courses on other subjects. This is meant to qualify them for further education or employment. As we read from the Norwegian Report: “the law puts a lot of pressure on the adult learners to quickly progress in their learning to prepare them for employment, whilst at the same time balancing their other roles as adults and perhaps not sufficiently regarding their background and mental baggage” (from the LIDA Internal Report of the Norwegian Multiplier Events). From 2017 on, a new reform grounded on module-based learning and a new curriculum was tested in parts of the country, to address the need for more flexibility for adult learners. This project will serve as a basis for a national reform from 2023, to restructure the adults’ learning centres.

The migrants and refugees that arrive in Norway are quickly placed in a system of expectations with regards to the speed at which they should join the work market and be financially autonomous. For this reason, they are appointed a local sponsor from a non-profit organization to work as a mentor. It is nevertheless vital that the professionals from national employment and welfare agency (NAV) are given time to establish close ties to the adult learners, as this will enable them to coordinate and facilitate the integration of the adult learners: “We need an emphatic approach where a safe establishing of relations is the focus. The connection between us in NAV and the users forms an important foundation for how users perceive and relate to the public services in Norway” (from the LIDA Internal Report of the Norwegian Multiplier Events). The effort to increase financial transfers to volunteer organisations, such as the Red Cross, is also perceived as crucial to bolster their ability to play a part in the process, making sure that citizens and newcomers have an incentive to leave their home and participate in social events, helping both the language skills and the growth of a sense of community.

Lastly, the participants in the Norwegian Multiplier Events stressed the importance of digital competency for adult learners. Many refugees arrive in Norway lacking competency in digital technologies, many of them with little or no education in this field. While many Adult Learning Centres teach such courses, still there seems to be a certain difficulty in balancing language learning and social studies with digital competency and educators need more training on how to individually adapt digital learning strategies to the students’ needs.

On June 28th 2021, the Portuguese partner organized the institutional focus group, mixing guests from local city councils with the director of a professional training centre for the textile industry. The discussion started acknowledging the existence of an appropriate legal framework, granted by the democratic Constitution, to foster and support inclusive learning and active citizenship through governmental policies. People belonging to groups which find themselves in situations of vulnerability seem to be effectively granted the necessary political attention. The Portuguese team brings as an example the laws concerning the social inclusion income, unemployment benefits, polices regarding lifelong learning and education, housing or employment. As it is written in the final report: “most of the policies and initiatives regarding social inclusion of all people, defined at the Global, European, National and even local level, look very good on paper”” (Learning inclusion and active citizenship: views from four European countries”, A Report from the LIDA Erasmus+ project dated 19 April 2022).

Yet, as reported, the participants agreed that much remains to be done, for instance, in terms of the concrete implementation of fundamental human rights such as access to good education, health care, employment stability, affordable and decent housing and public transportation or sports and culture. Most of the times the lack of information, the difficulty to access support impedes the vulnerable adult minorities to obtain the needed care. The bureaucracy is also a major obstacle, and the strict criteria of eligibility seem to erect a barrier that separates the potential beneficiaries from most of those policies and initiatives. Lack of support and literacy are still responsible for social exclusion. If the potential beneficiaries are not already included in the networks of non-profit and NGO organizations, that represent the first level of intervention, those policies and initiatives hardly get translated into concrete facts. A mediator between policy makers and vulnerable minorities proves itself crucial to implement the opportunities offered by policies.

As in every other aspect of public and social life, the COVID-19 pandemic has aggravated the situation. The local and territorial initiatives get closer to reality, and the professionals working with people in situations of vulnerability always play a key role in translating guidelines into facts. The participants noted how teachers and professionals working with people in vulnerable situations also play a critical role in helping them to develop cultural and gender sensitivity, resilience, and advocacy. This is the reason why a “proximal and integrated approach driven by local actors and professionals is necessary to scaffold empowerment and to guarantee decent living standards for all”.

The British multiplier events took place 4 and 11 October 2021. They spread in six different sessions held online. For what concerns the institutional level, the British team first identified the key policy debates in Britain, concentrating on those around racism and Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic groups (BAME) experiences, disability and health related inequalities, socio-economic factors, equal access to technology, COVID-19 pandemic, gender and mental health.

In relation to such problems, the participants note that there has been a high number of dedicated policies, whose limit is nevertheless of being delivered with a top-down attitude. The participants agreed on the need to reverse such trend and include people from the start. It was also interestingly noted that there is a tendency to assume shared understanding of terms like inclusion/exclusion, but actually the view may differ from country to country. Currently the UK is struggling with the post-Brexit effects, that put the issue of inclusion to a difficult test. Racism and exclusion are still daily experiences in the UK and the inclusion and wellbeing of minorities must be a priority for British policy makers. As we can read in the report: “There is a discrepancy between how policies include people; and how people want to be included. In the UK we are struggling with our post-Brexit British identity, and whether/how we include people. Although in theory inclusion policies are advanced in UK, racism and exclusion is still a personal experience. The challenge is how to include minorities from within the UK as well as minorities from other countries” (Learning inclusion and active citizenship: views from four European countries”, A Report from the LIDA Erasmus+ project dated 19 April 2022).

The concept of wellbeing is instinctively related to health issues, but education is a key element of wellbeing, and a major driver of inclusion. Paradoxically, the pandemic has increased our awareness of wellbeing in its broadest sense, fostering a wider discussion. The participants agree that understanding what is meant by ‘wellbeing’ is also crucial. An individualistic interpretation, focused on the wellbeing of the self and not on that of the community, may end up leaving vulnerable groups are even more stranded and isolated. The importance of wellbeing as a relational concept must therefore be stressed.

Another pressing issue is that of digital inclusion. Again, the pandemic helped UK institutions and policy makers understand how pressing the issue of access and digital divide is. Too many continue to be digital bystanders. Digital technologies can “foster the idea of sharing, reaching out and gaining the attention of a wider audience, facilitating the blending one culture with another. They can also bring a non-geographical community to dispersed minority groups, facilitating the sharing of cultural inheritance and traditions”. The LIDA Project recognizes the ability to develop individual and shared voices through digital storytelling as key empowerment tool in a learning environment. Access was therefore recognized as a major issue by the participants, who agreed that European institutions must face the challenge of overcoming geographical as well as social and financial barriers to the reach of digital technologies.

8 Lessons Learned from the Stakeholders

The LIDA international multiplier events hosted lively and dense discussions. As we read in the report, the views shared by participants in the multiplier events “are in no way meant to suggest that specific views can be connected with the views of a whole country, culture or a group. Moreover, it is not always clear that a statement belongs to a specific participant in a country, culture or group and this is deliberate in order to maintain anonymity. In terms of methodology there has been no attempt to recruit multiplier participants as part of a randomised sample” (Learning inclusion and active citizenship: views from four European countries”, A Report from the LIDA Erasmus+ project dated 19 April 2022). Yet they offer a record of impressions by groups of established professionals, and therefore they significantly helped putting the LIDA project on track.

Nearly all the participants emphasize that in a changing Europe, there is a need for focusing on and firmly establishing inclusion and citizenship for marginalized groups. Language, culture, digitization, health and socio-economic factors are some of the areas in which exclusion happens and where inclusion can and should happen—given well-targeted and designed policies, initiatives, tools and cooperation on the three levels of authorities and transnational organisations, education sector and private enterprises and vulnerable adult learners and their educators. In order to bridge the divide that seems to exist between vulnerable groups and society at large, the systems that are in place to aid and assist need a greater level of efficiency and less bureaucracy. Moreover, the need for general public access to technology and the Internet may be considered a human right and must therefore be a focal point in the setting up and implementation of national policies.

Debating the effectiveness of European policies, they nearly everywhere agreed that though they all point to the right direction, nevertheless still share the same danger: to be administered with a top-down attitude. And a consequent challenge: to give a voice to the voiceless recipients of those policies. A bottom-up attitude must therefore be promoted in order to balance the vertical nature of those policies, offering a chance for the fulfilment of their potential. This means fostering an idea of learning based on co-developing patterns of knowledge [7] and on a co-creative pedagogy seen as “advancing the mutual exchange of knowledge between various actors in an educational setting” [8].

Many strategies were suggested by the professionals involved in the debates. The first was the need to value the past of the socially excluded. This is particularly evident in the case of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. From the point of view of education, the growing presence of adults and young adults who have a direct or family history of migration is a common fact of our schools, both public and private. Upon arrival, migrants, refugees and asylum seekers are treated with a welfare attitude and sent to undertake language courses as the first step of the social integration process. And yet these students don’t just have different language backgrounds, but also different cultural backgrounds which must be considered and assigned a value. And, most importantly, they have different education, formal and informal knowledge and skills that should indeed be recognized.

Another challenge consists in overcoming what has been defined as the paternalistic nature of European policies. An attitude whose traces may be retrieved in the very concept of vulnerability, that assumes the passive nature of the subject. Policy makers should never assume the inability to act and to choose of the subjects to whom their policies apply. It is important to consider these subjects as capable of proposing solutions in their turn, that is as “actors”, actively contributing to the co-construction of the learning experience. If we want to talk about inclusion, we should give migrants a voice and begin to understand and put to value the wealth of knowledge and experience they have accumulated before and on their journey to Europe. Giving full consideration to the guidelines proposed by UNESCO’s Sustainable Development Goal n. 4 on inclusive education and lifelong learning United Nations [3].

In a complex landscape, filled with growing barriers, the COVID-19 emergency has further complicated things, imposing accelerations and recalibrations at the institutional level. In particular regarding digital access. Technology, though not comparable to direct face to face interaction, has proven itself essential to keep bonds alive during the health emergency. As noted above, the health emergency has intensified what was already occurring: the weaving of digital technologies into every fibre of our existence. Social and digital inclusion can and must go hand in hand with empowerment and active citizenship and the digital divide, engine of social exclusion, represents another frontier on which institutions must continue to invest, for the sake of social inclusion in general.

Lastly, all the reports stress the importance of a virtuous collaboration between institutions and the territories, as well as the importance of the human, empathetic factor in fostering inclusive education. It is at the local level that policies and recipients finally meet. A crucial level, managed by the realities of the third sector—NGOs, non-profit and volunteer associations—who work in direct contact with the local communities. These are often small realities, that carry on with their hard work within complicated regulatory systems, despite the lack of systemic policies and the general excess of bureaucracy. This is where things start to turn for the vulnerable adult: the contact is less cold and life begins to change thanks to empathy as well as to various initiatives that affect everyday life, providing practical answers with a pragmatic attitude. This is where the learning experience gets activated, and its actors can be involved in a life wide experience that ultimately fostering autonomy and wellbeing.

9 Conclusion

In spite of being extremely difficult to grasp the complexity of the issues that Europe is facing and at the same time, taking into account the strategies put in place to face them, it is possible anyway to draw some preliminary conclusions on the basis of the data presented in this chapter, related to the comparison between policy level, projects funding level and with respect to the opinions and beliefs of the stakeholders and operators involved in the actions.

The projects and experiences presented shows a wide variety of methodological approaches to carry out different activities at the global and the local context at the same time. However, the frailty and specificity of certain contexts and issues appears to be better tackled with qualitative research methods and related interventions, or at least with a mixed approach.

Valuing the past of the learners, especially when they came from a disadvantaged group, represents the keystone and the starting point not only for successful trainings, but also for a more conscious consideration of learners’ individuality, with a specific reference to a culturally responsive teaching [9]. This constitutes the unavoidable assumption of a “circular pedagogy”, that includes both the hosted and the hosting, creating a loophole and reinforcing opportunities to access and growth of different target groups.

Inclusion of marginalized group appears to be a high priority in EU, and this is strongly reaffirmed at every level presented in this contribution. Nevertheless, the idea that a significant change can be produced only concentrating on the disadvantaged groups is limited, as the possibility to produce a significant improvement is linked to the involvement of all the actors, to rebuild a sense of belonging in evolving contexts.