DignityFIRM contributes to improving conditions of irregular migrants (IM) working in Farm to Fork (F2F) labour markets in four EU member states (IT, NL, PL, SP) and two associated countries (MO, UA). To derive structural recommendations for improvements, we analyze regulatory infrastructures that govern these conditions distinguishing five influential spheres of stakeholders at the EU, national, and local levels, and at the level of employers and IM themselves. The focus on IM in F2F labour markets is timely given the instrumental role of these industries in securing EU livelihoods, the high systemic dependency on IM that coincides with persistent group vulnerabilities. By providing knowledge and innovative tools to improve regulatory infrastructures, this project enhances IM’s access to basic rights and services, and improves their precarious working conditions. Doing so, we contribute to systemic resilience of F2F industries and the EU’s ambitions for social and economic transformation. Our project adopts a mixed-method research approach, that includes a special focus on the division of labour in F2F markets with respect to gender, ethnicity, socio-economic status, health and safety. Doing so, we provide new knowledge on 1) the multidimensional regulatory infrastructure and the conditions of IM therein, 2) their access to basic rights and social services, and 3) employer reliance on IMs. We build on our analysis of the current situation, and work towards innovative solutions by developing Dignity tools in co-creation with stakeholders across the five stakeholder spheres. We propose group sensitive policy measures at EU, national, and local level, across four policy domains: migration management, EU pillar social rights, labour market sustainability and corporate social responsibility. Doing so, we create a pathway for impact towards upholding IMs’ access to rights and services and simultaneously addressing labour market needs and wellbeing of host communities.

The evolution of the EU’s politics and policies has demonstrated that differentiation can no longer be treated as an anomaly in the integration process, posing a key set of questions to academic and policy-makers alike: whether, how much and what form of differentiation is not only compatible with but also conducive to a more effective, cohesive and democratic EU. The project’s name – EU IDEA – Integration and Differentiation for Effectiveness and Accountability – captures these key questions. The basic claim underpinning our proposal is that differentiation is not only necessary to address current challenges more effectively, by making the Union more resilient and responsive to citizens. Differentiation is also desirable, by introducing a useful degree of flexibility in the complex EU machinery, so long as such flexibility is compatible with the core principles of the EU’s constitutionalism and identity, sustainable in terms of governance, and acceptable to EU citizens, Member States and affected third partners. In line with these premises and objectives, EU IDEA will conduct an historical and philosophical investigation of the origins of differentiation, within and outside the EU (WP 1); analyse differentiation – in relation to issues of governance and accountability (WP 2) and narratives on EU constitutionalism and identity (WP 3); investigate the practice of differentiation in key policy areas (WPs 4-5-6) and in light of the prospects for Brexit (WP 7); and assess the political and public preferences at national level (WP 8). The findings of our analysis will be instrumental to defining the criteria – at institutional, policy and societal levels – to assess future scenarios of differentiation as a tool of integration (or disintegration) and to develop policy recommendations for EU and national policy-makers with an aim to a more effective and accountable Union (WP 9).

Culminating more than a decade of crisis in Europe, the Covid-19 pandemic has opened an unprecedented window of opportunity for institutional and policy change, not only at the “reactive” level of emergency responses, but also to tackle more broadly the many socio-political challenges caused or exacerbated by Covid-19. Building on this premise, REGROUP (Rebuilding governance and resilience out of the pandemic) aims to: 1) provide the European Union with a body of actionable advice on how to rebuild post-pandemic governance and public policies in an effective and democratic way; anchored to 2) a map of the socio-political dynamics and consequences of Covid-19; and 3) an empirically-informed normative evaluation of the pandemic. REGROUP pursues this threefold objective via a multi-level (national, supranational, international) and multi-sphere (political, societal, ideational, digital) research approach, and guided by three overarching analytical themes: “reordering”; “risk”; “resilience”. We operate in nine collaborative work packages—grouped in three blocks: “diagnosis”, “evaluation”, and “prescription”—bringing together expertise and methods from a range of social sciences and humanities. Doing so, we advance the state of the art conceptually, theoretically, and methodologically. REGROUP is conducted by a consortium of 13 internationally renowned institutions, committed to scholarly excellence, inclusiveness, and open science. The project is designed to achieve a high degree of policy, societal, and scientific impact, which it will achieve via a multi-pronged dissemination and communication strategy. This includes links to some of the EU’s main debates and events, such as the Health Union, the Green Deal, the Digital Decade, the Economic Governance Review, the Conference on the Future of Europe, and the 2024 European Parliament elections.

Delivering Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) requires researchers and research agencies to balance many political, institutional and professional contradictions and constraints. These are as difficult and demanding in non-medical fields as in biomedical research. Researchers, reviewers, regulators and policymakers are tested by the diverse codes of ethical practice and regulations, by the complexities of relevant data protection legislation, by inconsistencies in the applications of regulations and by the practical professional pressures of acting in diverse non-medical research fields. To use research effectively policy makers need to trust in the validity and reliability of research findings. PRO-RES will address these constraints by delivering a supported guidance framework that is comprehensive, flexible and durable, covers the spectrum of non-medical sciences and offers practical solutions for all stakeholders that will comply with the highest standards of research ethics and integrity. This framework will take into account previous examples of good work and best practice, and drive to deliver a set of pragmatic solutions building on previous work and creating strong links with ongoing projects. In terms of post-2020 European strategic funding policy this will offer a strong and sustainable contribution to RRI via a comprehensive ethics and integrity framework similar to Oviedo/Helsinki which will have been constructed in negotiation with relevant stakeholders and so will be acceptable to and accessible by all stakeholders. The proposed set of solutions will promote an ethics framework for research and innovation, help promote more responsible research engagements and enable policymakers to make more effective use of non-medical scientific research information.