The topic of the paper concerns the analysis of how the Austrian system of education and training policy has responded to the challenges of Lifelong Learning. Austrian policy making is considered a strong corporatist system which, however, has come into heavy criticism for being too little adaptive to the challenges of globalisation and the knowledge economy. The purpose of the paper is to analyse, as to how the players of Austrian education and training policy have responded to the challenges of the development of a "lifelong learning strategy", which has been asked by European policy, first in the pace of Employment Policy, and now second in the pace of the Lisbon follow-up strategy.Theoretically the concept of policy learning is applied, basically drawing a distinction between single loop and double loop learning. Former analyses of other cases of policy making (Lassnigg forthc.) have pointed out that the Austrian policy system has been very much driven by single loop learning, i.e. to adapt practice to poor regulation, instead of double loop learning, i.e. change regulations in order to find new ways to do things. The value of this paper is to analyse the reaction to a new policy proposal from abroad. The concept of "hybrid systems" of policy making (Mailand 2005) will be applied, in order to look whether the new proposal in combination with the policy change of 2000 towards a "lighter" version of social partnership has given more way to policy learning. Alternatively, the change might have put the actors more fiercely against each other, thus even providing less room for policy learning. A comparative methodology is applied, based on the comparison of policy cases, (a) within Austria the case of "Lifelong Learning policy" is compared to the previously analysed cases (i.e. establishment of the Polytechnic Sector in higher education; employment policy; policies for disadvantaged young people), (b) the Austrian case of "Lifelong Learning policy" is compared to those of other countries, using the material of the comparative OECD review (country studies) and the evaluative material of the European policies (Employment Strategy, National Reform Programmes). This part of the study is confined to the reactions of different corporatist systems that were also studied in the OBSERVE project, i.e. Denmark, The Netherlands, and Spain, with interesting differences. Sweden with its huge AEI initiative might be included too. Methodology: Case studies; identification of the key variables influencing the policy process, and determining policy learning (persistent/changing institutional structure; persistence/change of key policy issues/paradigms and evaluative criteria; political environment; use of research and reflection; amount of EU support)Tentative conclusions/expected outcomes are that the challenge of "Lifelong Learning policy" lies in its criss-crossing, and the need of integration of different policy domains. Traditional corporatist systems tend to be built on strong and persistent institutional channels which, however, have to be changed in order to develop lifelong learning. Policy learning seems necessary, however, there seem to be different strategies of change in different systems: NL - organisational change, DK - policy content change, A - none of those. Lassnigg L (forthc.) Policy learning in a strong corporatist system - Austrian employment & qualification policy. In: Joergensen H., Madsen P., eds. Flexicurity and beyond. CopenhagenMailand M (2005) The involvement of social partners in active labour market policy - do the patterns fit expectations from regime theories? In: In: Bredgaard T., Larsen F., eds. (2005): Employment policy from different angles. Copenhagen, 135-151 OECD, Thematic Review on Adult Learning: http://www.oecd.org/document/3/0,2340,en_2649_34511_11997955_1_1_1_1,00.htmlNieuwenhuis A.F.M., Observe; EU project (Leonardo da Vinci programme) on change policies in VET in 10 European countries, coord. by Univ. of WageningenViertel E., et.al. (2004) From project to policy evaluation in vocational education and training - possible concepts and tools. Evidence from countries in transition. Descy P., Tessaring M., eds. The foundations of evaluation and impact research. Third report on vocational training research in Europe: background report. Luxembourg, 191-236.European Journal