Not all ‘Erasmus’ placements are paid for by the programme ‘Erasmus+’, as some countries have set up their own Erasmus funds so as to increase the number of representatives. What’s more, many investments in higher education have created partnerships, in the EU and the world, with various sister structures, allowing some of them to offer their students far-flung destinations; these partnerships have not necessarily been paid for out of the European pot.
Financial intervention does not cover all costs; it depends on whether the student receives a basic grant or not, the cost of living in the host country and an assessment of the family’s means. An Erasmus bursary in the EU can vary from €300 to €520 per month, to be topped up by parents or a student job. Some universities allow the student’s family to cover all costs on their own, others do not. The same student doing Erasmus twice (in the sixth form and then at postgraduate level, for instance) is possible in some places, but not others.
All of this makes any kind of analysis of total Erasmus student numbers very difficult. The first beneficiaries, back in the academic year 1987-88, numbered 3,244. The milestone of 3 million was reached in 2013, 26 years later, giving an average of 115,000 a year. On top of this, there are 2 million teachers, PhD students, young volunteers, young people in vocational training and apprentices who have benefited from the sister programmes. To date, the total number of beneficiaries of subsidised European mobility is believed to be over 9 million.
But there is no room for complacency: there are more than 20 million young students in higher education in the EU, but less than 5% of them complete part of their course of study elsewhere and even fewer do so using European financing. In certain wealthy countries and in certain circles, ‘doing your Erasmus’ is more or less de rigueur, but that is not at all the case elsewhere. The principal countries of origin, moreover, continue to be France, Germany and Spain and the first two, plus the United Kingdom, the principal countries of destination. There is a definite ‘South-West’ slant in Erasmus in the EU.
In percentage terms, therefore, the number of mobile students is still very low at EU level. Bureaucratic hoops to jump through (not just at European level, but also in the member states and universities) may put many off. In particular, given the cost of travel and of living in the host country, the system is naturally more appealing to students from wealthier backgrounds, even though the grants are means-tested. The fact remains that the most deserving are more likely to be given their first choice of destination; the prospect of Erasmus is therefore an incentive to work hard from day one; upon graduation, it is a definite asset to any CV as proof of openness, ability to adapt to new contexts, which increases the likelihood of graduate employment.
Erasmus students from the same university tend to stick together, at the start of their time abroad at least, rather than mixing with the natives, from a broader range of social backgrounds; but if they do reach out, the cosmopolitan objective is met. Afterwards, they arrange regular meet-ups, joyous reunions. Strong symbiotic relationships tend to stand the test of time and many couples have got together in this context (sadly, I am unable to confirm the figure of 1 million babies born to Erasmus marriages claimed by the Commission!).
Although most students report satisfaction with the experience, particularly at academic level, not all grow up to be militantly pro-European. Yet Erasmus has become a social and cultural phenomenon touching all universities and, beyond them, our societies. In his book ‘Generation Erasmus’ (Plon, 2016), Sandro Gozi, one of the first beneficiaries of a grant to study in Paris (1989), points out that these young people, whom Erasmus fitted for life, are now in positions of influence in government, political parties, parliaments, ‘civil society’, instilling a pioneering vision that is so beneficial to the European project.
The European Parliament has issued a series of criticisms and suggestions, shot through with clear concerns of democratisation and simplification. Its resolution of 14 September 2017 calls for more money for the future programme and a radical expansion of beneficiaries. In its proposals of 2 May 2018 (see EUROPE 12013/1) on the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2021-2027, the Commission doubled the envelope for Erasmus+. In its resolution of 14 November 2018 (see EUROPE 12137/8), the Parliament took issue with the inadequacy of the MFF and set the bar considerably higher, hoping to triple the number of Erasmus bursaries issued over the period 2021-2027.
The proposed regulation on the new programme (COM(2018) 367 final of 30.5.2018) (see EUROPE 12030/16) follows the co-decision procedure. At its meeting on 26 November 2018, the ‘Education and Youth’ Council reached a general agreement on the Commission’s text, give or take a few differences of opinion over social inclusion and the use of delegated acts. For once, the Council was not stingy over the budget called for (see EUROPE 12147/13).
At the Parliament, the report by Milan Zver (EPP, Slovenia) was approved by the committee on culture and education on 20 February 2019 (see 12198/27). It called for an envelope in excess of €46 billion, compared to the €30 billion (current prices) proposed by the Commission. It urged the Commission to create a framework of inclusion measures by 31 March, allowing students from less wealthy backgrounds to take part. On 28 March, the Parliament’s plenary session approved this report (see EUROPE 12224/13). It is now time for the trilogues.
Additionally, the Commission and Council agreed for young Erasmus students who are EU and UK nationals to be able to finish their placements irrespective of Brexit, as long as London keeps to its financial commitments under the 2019 budget (see EUROPE 12183/2). Already, however, fewer and fewer applicants are ticking the ‘United Kingdom’ box for their future trips even though, as we have seen above, the UK has always been extremely sought-after. In the event of a ‘no-deal’, furthermore, its future participation in the Erasmus programme, and many others besides, is anybody’s guess (see EUROPE 12179/3).
Most universities bestow grades on their students along with their diplomas, from satisfactory to distinction (Summa cum laude). By way of taking stock, where would Erasmus sit on a scale of this kind? From an academic and Europeanisation point of view, its results are truly glorious, but looking at democratic and social criteria, as well as the East-West balance, the candidate ‘could do better’, quite clearly. Even if its budget were tripled, which is unlikely, it will not earn its Summa cum laude within the next decade. But persevere it must.
With the European elections fast approaching, very few candidates are calling for Erasmus to be abolished, as this would be political suicide. However, there will be many people, of the type who promise sunlit uplands, who will try to piggyback on Erasmus’s popularity, announcing Erasmus for all – no limits. And there are no limits to where it could end. At this rate, there’ll be an Erasmus for trainee priests, another for prisoners, a third for astrologists and, why not, sex workers, lighthouse keepers and primary school children? That kind of folly justifies no praise – does it, Erasmus?
Renaud Denuit.