While knowing no one before in Málaga the first day, Leonie volunteered at a marathon a few weeks later. She also did a campfire in the deserts of Morocco on a trip with her new friends. And, obviously, she studied at the University of Málaga because she did an Erasmus+ Exchange Semester in 2024. (1) The program that got her there is changing now.
A little bit of background
Complicated paperwork, which is often not fully done when already sitting in the airplane, frightening warnings about apartment search as much as friendships and stories that last for a lifetime – many students who did an Erasmus Semester can agree on all these things. Established in 1987, “Erasmus” was initially only the name for a student-exchange program across the EU. Over the years, it had expanded to include sports, the youth, and many other kinds of education beyond academia. Because of the widely known popularity and trust in the “Erasmus” title, the program added the “+”. (2)
These days, Erasmus+ not only includes the “learning mobility of individuals and groups”, which is considered “Key Action 1”. It also funds a diverse range of projects in all Member States and supports various cooperations and partnerships between organizations of civil society, education institutions, and bodies of the EU. In concrete terms, this means that the EU has financed a project with 195,745.00 Euro from 2021 to 2023, where an organization enabled women to conceptualize solutions for the sustainability crisis in the fashion industry. This includes presenting their ideas and multiplying their competences in Spain, Greece, Belgium, Italy, and Sweden. (3) This was adult education and inter-European cooperation, but also Erasmus+. Many more examples of these projects can be found on the Dissemination Platform.
Proposed changes within the next Multinational Financial Framework (MFF 2028-2034)
1. Eliminating the specialised youth chapter
Firstly, according to the European Youth Forum, the last Erasmus+ program included a specific chapter for “youth actions” with a 10.3 % funding, which is eliminated in the new one. (4) Without that, an increased competition for grants between youth-led (often voluntarily) and professional-led (often full-time) organizations is very likely. To ensure equitable participation, the EU must distinguish itself here. Especially, youth-led initiatives are forming a space for early experience and an independent implementation of the ideas from the youth for the youth. For all policymakers: these spaces are also the real – and crucial – melting furnaces of leadership skills and soft skills we urgently want for the labour market.
2. Merge with the EU-Solidarity Corps (+ a real financial increase?)
Secondly, the Erasmus+ program is going to be merged with the EU Solidarity Corps. (5) While the desire to use the popularity of the “Erasmus-brand” of the EU is fully understandable, there is the danger of “washing the name out”. Without a clear definition and demarcation from other projects, the already somewhat muddled network of european opportunities and projects for the youth may get more cluttered. Increasing the visibility and accessibility of projects does not happen by including them in a different project area (even if the administration of it may be easier), but primarily with simplified access over EU websites (which are already complicated enough).
Also important to mention: the change from a financial basis of 26.2 million Euro to 40.8 million Euro (5), seems to signify a clear increase. But considering inflation and the extension of aims and projects, the real increase of the financial base “is nearly gone”. (4)
3. New structures
Thirty, the “Key Actions “-Structure disappeared from the program. Still, the essence of them remains often. For example, Key-Action Three “Support on policy development and cooperation” is retrievable in Article 7, which “shall support experimentation, preparation and implementation of the Union’s policy agendas” next to cooperation, dissemination, and synergies between different EU-Programmes and Policies. (5) But in terms of simplifying the program and organising it in a more accessible way, not a good deal. In case we want to access the project results and are trying to find our way to the jungle of categorisations between sphere of influence, target group, topics, field, cooperations, and many more, the Key-Actions help us (the participants and researchers) to understand what a project is about and aims to achieve in a shorter time. It also ensures adequate and comprehensible funding. According to the European Youth Forum, some important elements of the Key-Actions disappeared completely, especially in Key-Action Three. (4)
4. Stronger connections to labour market relevance
Further, the new program proposes to reduce the number of national agencies with the objective of efficiency and lower administrative costs. (5) However, the mixed administrative model remains – and with it, hopefully, an ensured regional connection between participants and the program itself.
There is also a stronger focus on the development of labour-market-relevant skills in the general objectives. The proposal aims for a higher interconnection with other European policies like the Union of Skills (7) and the Clean Industrial Deal (8), and also names the relevance of the development of soft skills explicitly. The program is also referred to as it will raise the competitiveness of the EU. (5) While these changes can create a fruitful win-win situation for industry and education systems, it has to be ensured that labour market and industry needs do not completely determine which projects are funded and granted. It is hoped that other objectives like “foster […] cross-border cooperation” (Ch. 1, Art. 3, 2b) and “engage and empower young people […] to participate actively in society and democracy” (Ch. 1Art. 3, 2d) are valued equally.
Overall, a tighter connection to the labour market makes the program more relevant for all the obstacles facing the EU – climate change, geopolitical crises, and internal reforms, just to name a few – which require new specialised professionals with innovative ideas to navigate them. At this point, decision-makers realise that the youth is nothing less than the future capital of the EU – in terms of safeguarding our democracy, freedom, and safety, in terms of sustaining our livelihoods as much as our economic independence.
What next?
The next FFI is still in the state of negotiations. The next changes need to be watched carefully. During this time, we have to raise our voices and enter the debate, which can be done through public work and instruments like petitions, for example. We need to clarify the relevance of adequate and inclusive support for the youth as a direct investment in our future. A more detailed personal reflection on the Erasmus+ program, including own possibilities (there is more than you might think) and actual shortcomings (9) is also recommended.
Footnotes, sources, and further information
(1) https://eu.daad.de/infos-fuer-einzelpersonen/erasmus-reporters/aktuelle-erasmus-reporters/de/86179-leonie-lehramtstudium-in-mlaga/ (German)
(2) https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/about-erasmus/history-funding-and-future
(3) https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/projects/search/details/2021-1-SE01-KA220-ADU-000029427
(4) https://www.youthforum.org/news/erasmus-reaction-on-new-mff
(5) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=COM:2025:549:FIN
(6) https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/projects/search
(7) https://commission.europa.eu/topics/eu-competitiveness/union-skills_en (explanation)
(8) https://commission.europa.eu/topics/eu-competitiveness/clean-industrial-deal_en (explanation)
(9) https://www.youthforum.org/policy-library/eu-youth-programmes-unpacked