A model in which difference is the key
1. Equivalent variations occur at the regional and local level within each EU member state
2. The variations become even more extreme when including the applicant states of Central and Eastern Europe
Notes:
And here are some other differences. In this snapshot I’m sticking with simple numbers because of time, there are also many many other factors that would need a lot more time to explain and discuss.
This chart shows, for some relevant factors, the European Union’s highest and lowest scoring countries. High doesn’t mean good and low doesn’t mean bad, these are simply facts. And its not the same countries, I’ve shown the highest and lowest for each individual factor.
Look at agriculture. The information society just simply cannot mean the same thing in two countries with respectively 2 per cent and 20 per cent of the population working in agriculture. By the way, the 2 % produces much more than the 20 per cent and uses a lot more PCs and telecommunications!
The same applies to the labour market and to the expectations of people. People in country where fewer than one in ten workers are self employed have quite different experiences and expectations than in one where self-employment has become mainstream. The countries need different labour market policies and different approaches to telework.
The most obvious category - information workers - speaks for itself. All along the line these differences are not marginal; they determine the nature of the economy and therefore they should determine that economy’s response to the idea of an information society.
And two further points should be noted. First that within each country similar variations apply, pointing the need for differentiated regional and local strategies. Second, with the accession of the new member states, differences between countries increase by - in most cases - an order of magnitude.