IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/zbw/sfustu/342998.html

A new perspective on work: Ideas for growth and prosperity. Annual bulletin of the Advisory Board of the Foundation for Family Businesses

Author

Listed:
  • Felbermayr, Gabriel

Abstract

Free movement of workers ranks among the key achievements of the European single market and is firmly enshrined in law. In practice, however, its potential falls well short of expectations. This article is an excerpt from the 2026 Annual Bulletin of the Advisory Board of the Foundation for Family Businesses. Despite formal rights to mobility, actual cross-border labour migration within the EU has been comparatively low, remaining at a stable but low level for years. At the same time, many member states are experiencing significant skills shortages, whilst in other regions the workforce is underemployed. This discrepancy points to a structural problem: The institutional and economic framework prevents a sufficient number of workers from moving to where they could be deployed most productively, thus weakening a key adjustment mechanism of the single market - with direct negative consequences for Europe's growth, innovation and competitiveness. Institutional barriers remain a major obstacle This analysis shows that the underlying causes are diverse and mutually reinforcing. Institutional barriers remain a major obstacle, particularly as regards the recognition of professional qualifications. Complex, lengthy and often still paper-based procedures make it difficult for workers to utilise their qualifications in other member states, thereby preventing the efficient allocation of human capital. This is compounded by administrative hurdles, for example when posting workers abroad or dealing with social security issues, resulting in uncertainty and additional costs for both workers and companies. Language barriers and a lack of information also remain significant factors that limit actual mobility, despite the legal freedoms in place. Relocation unattractive or impossible. In addition to these institutional factors, economic barriers, too, play a decisive role. A particular problem is the scarce and expensive housing in economically dynamic regions, which acts as a de facto barrier to entry for many potentially mobile workers. Even where attractive employment opportunities exist, high living costs can make relocation unattractive or impossible.Furthermore, there continue to be differences in national social security and tax systems, which complicate the portability of entitlements and thus create additional risks for mobile workers. Overall, this results in an "invisible fragmentation" of the single market, which restricts effective mobility far more severely than the formal legal situation would suggest. Overcoming the barriers. Against this backdrop, three particularly effective policy recommendations can be derived. Firstly, it is essential to substantially simplify and speed up the recognition of professional qualifications. In particular, this requires systematic digitisation of procedures, greater standardisation of requirements and - where possible - wider use of automatic recognition systems. The aim must be to ensure that qualifications can be recognised quickly, transparently and reliably within the EU. Secondly, a focus should be placed on further developing an integrated European labour market information system. Platforms such as EURES can be significantly enhanced through better data integration, standardised skills profiles and closer cooperation between national employment services. A transparent, EU-wide labour market would reduce the cost of searching for jobs, improve matching processes and thus significantly increase actual mobility. Thirdly, it is necessary to improve the framework conditions for mobility at the local level, in particular by expanding the supply of housing in economically strong regions and by improving the coordination and portability of social security benefits. Only if workers have realistic access to housing and the social risks associated with relocating are minimised can the necessary level of mobility be achieved. Overall, it is clear that although the free movement of workers in the EU has been enshrined in law, its economic impact is limited by numerous practical obstacles. Overcoming these barriers is key to fully exploiting the productivity potential of the single market and securing Europe's long-term competitiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • Felbermayr, Gabriel, 2026. "A new perspective on work: Ideas for growth and prosperity. Annual bulletin of the Advisory Board of the Foundation for Family Businesses," Studien, Stiftung Familienunternehmen / Foundation for Family Businesses, number 342998.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:sfustu:342998
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/342998/1/1981744401.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gabriel J Felbermayr & Wilhelm Kohler, 2014. "Immigration and Native Welfare," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: European Economic Integration, WTO Membership, Immigration and Offshoring, chapter 10, pages 335-372, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Felbermayr, Gabriel J. & Jung, Benjamin, 2009. "The pro-trade effect of the brain drain: Sorting out confounding factors," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 72-75, August.
    3. Gabriel Felbermayr & Wilhelm Kohler, 2014. "Can International Migration Ever Be Made a Pareto Improvement?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: European Economic Integration, WTO Membership, Immigration and Offshoring, chapter 11, pages 373-393, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Chang-Tai Hsieh & Enrico Moretti, 2019. "Housing Constraints and Spatial Misallocation," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 1-39, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gabriel Felbermayr & Wilhelm Kohler, 2014. "Can International Migration Ever Be Made a Pareto Improvement?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: European Economic Integration, WTO Membership, Immigration and Offshoring, chapter 11, pages 373-393, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Mariya Aleksynska & Giovanni Peri, 2014. "Isolating the Network Effect of Immigrants on Trade," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 434-455, March.
    3. Laiqun Jin & Xiuyan Liu & Sam Hak Kan Tang, 2021. "High-Technology Zones, Misallocation of Resources among Cities and Aggregate Productivity: Evidence from China," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 21-11, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    4. Jin, Laiqun & Dai, Jiaying & Jiang, Weijie & Cao, Kairui, 2023. "Digital finance and misallocation of resources among firms: Evidence from China," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    5. Nicholas Kacher & Luke Petach, 2021. "Boon or Burden? Evaluating the Competing Effects of House-Price Shocks on Regional Entrepreneurship," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 35(4), pages 287-304, November.
    6. Pablo D. Fajgelbaum & Edouard Schaal, 2020. "Optimal Transport Networks in Spatial Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(4), pages 1411-1452, July.
    7. Greg Howard & Carl Liebersohn, 2019. "What Explains U.S. House Prices? Regional Income Divergence," 2019 Meeting Papers 1054, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    8. Misuraca, Roberta & Zimmermann, Klaus, 2024. "Migration and Consumption," MERIT Working Papers 2024-006, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    9. Brandsaas, Eirik Eylands & Kvaerner, Jens Soerlie, 2026. "Partial homeownership: A quantitative analysis," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    10. Behncke, Nadine, 2014. "The structure of ethnic networks and exports: Evidence from Germany," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 198, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    11. Sitian Liu & Yichen Su, 2026. "The Geography of Research: The Trade-Off Between Knowledge Production and Access," Papers 2608.15981, arXiv.org.
    12. John Landis & Vincent J. Reina, 2021. "Do Restrictive Land Use Regulations Make Housing More Expensive Everywhere?," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 35(4), pages 305-324, November.
    13. Henry Hyatt & Erika McEntarfer & Ken Ueda & Alexandria Zhang, 2016. "Interstate Migration and Employer-to-Employer Transitions in the U.S.: New Evidence from Administrative Records Data," Working Papers 16-44, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    14. He, Xiaolong & Yu, Zhuangxiong & Liang, Yufan, 2026. "Public data, market competition and resource misallocation," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 110-122.
    15. Andreas Hatzigeorgiou & Magnus Lodefalk, 2016. "Migrants’ Influence on Firm-level Exports," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 477-497, December.
    16. Gabriel Felbermayr, 2024. "Wo steht Österreich im fünften Jahr multipler Krisen?. Eine makroökonomische Betrachtung," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 97(3), pages 99-113, March.
    17. Wang, Changming & Liao, Hongwei & Zhu, Lei & He, Leihua, 2024. "The haze reduction effect in china under the digital economy," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    18. Tito Boeri & Andrea Ichino & Enrico Moretti & Johanna Posch, 2021. "Wage Equalization and Regional Misallocation: Evidence from Italian and German Provinces [“Regional Wage Disparities and Migration.”]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 19(6), pages 3249-3292.
    19. Sergey Kichko, 0. "Competition, land prices and city size," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(6), pages 1313-1329.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:sfustu:342998. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.familienunternehmen.de/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.