Bruno Miguel Saraiva (Masters in European Union Law from the School of Law of the University of Minho)
Though the idea that the transformative effects of high technology are sudden and self-imposing is tempting, this truism collapses when confronted with reality. The digital and internet revolutions may have unfolded within a single human lifetime, yet they were fundamentally transgenerational efforts shaped by people with diverse educations and upbringings.
Arriving at the technological landscape we inhabit today required the combined expertise, unique skills, capabilities and opportunities of individuals with remarkably different backgrounds. The major technological shifts of the 19th and 20th century enabled – and accelerated – further technological development through cross-disciplinary exchange.
This is especially visible in the evolution of programming languages. From Assembly to Elixir, new languages emerge regularly. As they rise in popularity, older ones fade as the pool of proficient users shrinks. This cycle is natural, but not without consequences. Legacy systems underpin everything from warehouses to critical infrastructure. Many rely on “outdated” but highly effective languages that excel at specific tasks – languages shaped during moments of generational transition, when the practices of analog-era experts were translated into digital workflows, data processing, and automation.
The Digital Revolution stands on the shoulders of Analog Giants.
Yet as time passes, that foundational expertise disappears. The people who built these systems retire, become unavailable, or pass away. New generations of programmers must decipher not only obsolete languages but also analog-era processes that were digitised but never fully documented.
What if this pattern extends beyond programming languages? What if the digital revolution – like the single market – is not a fait accompli but an unfinished project?
Returning to the idea of the “deep periphery” discussed in our previous post, the same forces of economic and political marginalisation also shape information-technology development. A true digital single market must reach everyone – especially those it has not yet reached – because they stand to gain the most from its benefits.
We propose that, to foster user trust and engagement, the EU’s vocational training programs – drawing on foundational Community-era initiatives such as PETRA and PETRA II – offer an especially strong platform. PETRA, launched in 1988, was a Community action program designed to supplement Member Sate efforts by offering young people extended vocational training opportunities and transnational cooperation in guidance and qualification systems.[1] Its successor, Petra II would continue these efforts into the early 1990s by establishing networks of national coordination units. These would promote research and enhance vocational guidance systems across the Community.[2]
Notably, these initiatives targeted not only the appropriate stakeholders and interest groups but also, more specifically, young people – maximising the formative impact of the provided education. Furthermore, they rest on a robust Treaty and institutional base, benefit from a proven track record, and continue to enjoy broad political appeal. By integrating AI-enabled digital entertainment education into vocational training guidelines, the EU could simultaneously demystify and legitimise digital professions, while promoting AI literacy at a sub-university level. In parallel, European Education Area research grants ensure the development of higher education capacities. Together, these measures form a cohesive, multi-level approach to education that aligns with the principles of social equity.[3]
This approach also organically benefits disadvantaged or marginalised regions; vocational training disproportionally reaches cohesion areas – who are often themselves systemically marginalised. At ground level, it could generate a threefold effect:
- Counteracting perceptions of “cheapness” or falsification often associated with AI-produced digital content – an especially important gain for economically disadvantaged creators – by formally integrating them as stakeholders.
- Democratising access to digital professions, thereby incentivising the valorisation of digital content and consumption within the EU; and
- Through native advertising, unlocking the potential of AI for remote work opportunities, eco-tourism and the documentation and revaluation of local practices.
These dynamics unfold tandem with the EU’s Action Plan commitment on enhancing rail connectivity. Cohesion policies – through the European Regional Development Fund – actively support rail investment under the Trans European Transport Network (TEN-T). This includes links to marginalised regions, seeking to reduce disparities in connectivity and enable more sustainable mobility solutions.[4] These efforts could help diminish the prevalence of “fly-over” zones and better connect systematically overlooked areas in ways that were previously impractical.
Moreover, existing and well-established EU initiatives that benefit local and regional stakeholders provide tangible sub-national incentives for embracing the digital economy, which the EU sees as essential to its future. This trajectory is consistent with the EU’s enduring objective of reducing economic asymmetries though integration – not only between Member States, but also within them.
Circular economy is not merely a rational concept with legislative backing – it is perhaps the only viable pathway to sustainable development and resource preservation in a Europe seeking to avoid further demographic decline. Crucially this transition depends on moderating material consumption. Far from being an aspirational or opportunistic goal, the circular economy has become a lynchpin EU policy, grounded in legislation that promotes decoupling and dematerialisation, and that establishes explicit targets for reducing consumption footprints.[5]
This is articulated in the Commission’s 2023 Circular Economy Action Plan, which builds on the 2020 plan by introducing an additional 35 targeted actions to support the transition to a circular economy – including an aspirational goal double the use circular material use rates by 2030.[6]
However, these actions alone cannot address the need to compensate for the consumption decline inherent in more sustainable models. In a world marked by systemic overconsumption, subsistence must be reframed: from maligned minimum to viable alternative – provided it is properly integrated into policy and social planning. Here, the Union’s powers in educational and vocational training [under Article 165(4) and 166(4) TFEU] can play a pivotal role.
If material consumption decreases, those citizens who would typically participate in affected economic cycles – as producers or consumers – must be provided with alternatives. Critical to this is an effective communication strategy to promote these alternatives.
Digital entertainment emerges as one such solution. Social media content creators – “influencers” – can promote regional tourism or cultural practices through decentralised digital production, provided they operate within fair and equitable frameworks. This raises potential policy innovations like a digital minimum wage and a stricter legal framework for gig economy workers, although the limited scope of Directive (EU) 2022/2041 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on adequate minimum wages highlights the challenges in pursuing such regulation.
Furthermore, while the establishment of two European Digital Infrastructure Consortia (EDICs) has been proposed, we argue that a rural-focused EDIC, modelled on CitiVERSE but focused on rural mapping and management, would yield a more compelling use case. Such a consortium could support circular economy goals by identifying undervalued or overlooked economic activities, regions and even microclimates – granting them visibility, legitimacy and viability.[7]
Furthermore, aligning European Digital Innovation Hubs (EDIHs)[8] with vocational training centres creates an opportunity to tap directly into the professionals who form the backbone of small and medium-sized enterprises. By integrating not only AI education but also AI development into these settings – closer to the material needs of emerging or overlooked industries – we can begin to close the digital single market gap. This transition provides alternative, economically and socially equitable criteria for determining where regional research and development should take place, while preserving the advantages of a pan-European network.
Embedding technical expertise, testing, and conceptualisation within educational environments also makes “testing before investing” not an aspiration but a practical outcome of classroom-based practice. Existing structures and initiatives already supply essential services – financing advice, training, and skills development – central to successful digital transformation. These benefits are especially valuable in regions that stand to gain the most from digital technologies supporting sustainability and circularity, helping to protect environmental balances that technological shifts might otherwise disrupt.
We therefore hold that the European Green Deal’s new Circular Economy Action Plan,[9] European AI Innovation Ecosystem,[10] and the European Data Union Strategy[11] should be aligned with cohesion policy mechanisms. Meanwhile, the European Education Area Strategic Framework, which supports vocational training with nearly €99.3 billion allocated for 2021-2027, provides a much-needed education and social counterpart to these initiatives.
We believe the guidance document currently being developed to outline good practices for connecting EDIHs with other networks[12] – such as EEN, EIC, and Start-up Europe – should intentionally anchor these links in local and regional ecosystems through established and trusted educational institutions. Doing so would both accelerate innovation and strengthen its foundations.
In this reforged European Union, power would not stem from creating new cycles of high-tech consumption and investment alone, but from using technology to reveal the people, places, and practices that have long remained invisible. This genuine integration – one that systematically seeks political, economic, and identity-based redress – could help restore the demographic balance that Europe direly, yet silently, struggles with, paving the way for a truly closer, richer, and more resilient Union.
[1] PETRA I, Council Decision 87/569/EEC (1987), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/petra-i.html.
[2] PETRA II, Council Decision 91/387/EEC (1991), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/petra-ii.html.
[3] Although the contemporary Vocational Education & Training Framework anchored in the 2002 Copenhagen process continues to develop the European Educational Area, the 2020 Osnabrück Declaration for 2021/2025, despite emphasising digitalisation, does not establish the explicit connection between emerging technologies and green transitions. See “Vocational Education and Training Initiatives – European Education Area,” August 31, 2023, https://education.ec.europa.eu/education-levels/vocational-education-and-training/about-vocational-education-and-training.
[4] See European Commission, “Cohesion Policy Investments on Track for Rail Transport,” accessed September 3, 2025, https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/newsroom/panorama/2021/03/03-12-2021-cohesion-policy-investments-on-track-for-rail-transport; Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy – Putting European Transport on Track for the Future, COM(2020) 789 final (2020).
[5] As can be seen in the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – A New Circular Economy Action Plan For a Cleaner and More Competitive Europe, COM/2020/98 final (2020), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52020DC0098.
[6] We use the term “aspirational” conscientiously, as a special report by the European Court of Auditors puts it “(…) despite EU legislation incentivising EU funding for the circular economy, the circularity rate increased only by 0.4 percentage points between 2015 and 2021. Moreover, progress varied substantially among member states. Against this background, the EU ambition to double the circularity rate by 2030 looks very challenging (see paragraphs 23-28).”, European Court of Auditors (ed.), Circular Economy: Slow Transition by Member States despite EU Action; Special Report 17, 2023 (Publications Office, 2023), 43, https://doi.org/10.2865/36180.
[7] European Digital Infrastructure Consortia are an EU legal instrument designed to facilitate multi‑country digital projects, as introduced under the Digital Decade Policy Programme. See “European Digital Infrastructure Consortium – EDIC | Shaping Europe’s Digital Future,” accessed September 4, 2025, https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/edic.
[8] “European Digital Innovation Hubs | Shaping Europe’s Digital Future,” accessed November 17, 2025, https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/edihs.
[9] Public consultation on the upcoming Circular Economy Act has been launched in August 2025, see “Circular Economy Action Plan – European Commission,” June 18, 2025, https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/circular-economy-action-plan_en.
[10] “European AI Innovation Ecosystem | European Digital Innovation Hubs Network,” accessed November 18, 2025, https://european-digital-innovation-hubs.ec.europa.eu/knowledge-hub/european-ai-innovation-ecosystem.
[11] “European Data Union Strategy | Shaping Europe’s Digital Future,” accessed November 18, 2025, https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/data-union.
[12] “European Digital Innovation Hubs | Shaping Europe’s Digital Future.”
Picture credit: by Ron Lach on pexels.com.
Author: UNIO-EU Law Journal (Source: https://officialblogofunio.com/2025/12/04/education-and-circular-economy-europe-of-the-regions-revived/)
