Participation & Governance

Hard questions for the Global youth Symposium in London: who are we and why are we here?

Published on

In an established group, self-reflective questions are hard to come by. The group thinks they know their worth, understand their purpose and find their approval and identity in one another. And that’s what makes the Global Youth Symposium refreshing. Organised by the Open Society Foundation (OSF), the British Council and the Commonwealth Youth Exchange Council, this gathering is trying hard to do some soul searching: what does it all mean?

In an established group, self-reflective questions are hard to come by. The group thinks they know their worth, understand their purpose and find their approval and identity in one another. A gathering of any homogenous group always risks being self-congratulatory.

And that’s what makes the Global Youth Symposium in London refreshing. Organised by the Open Society Foundation (OSF), the British Council and the Commonwealth Youth Exchange Council, this gathering of some 60 youth advocates and the people and organisations with whom they work, is trying hard to do some soul searching: what does it all mean?

But first, some context. As put by Noel Selegzi, director of youth initiatives at the OSF, any vibrant and tolerant democracy features young, engaged people and those who assist them. Yet, he cautions, most attempts at youth consultation are “window dressing” and ultimately, the youth perspective is ignored by policy makers. Noel also identifies flaws with the sense of entitlement held by some youth advocates: “Too often youth want a seat at every table - really? Even in nuclear proliferation talks where they might not have expert knowledge? Just because they are under 30?”

Howard Williamson, Professor of European Policy at the University of Glamorgan, echoed some of those sentiments, then asks some hard questions about how we construct our participatory forums because the vast majority of young people would never dream of joining a council or organisation to represent their views. He went on to question the need for democratic participation when, in certain circumstances, categorical representation would be more suitable - such as when dealing with young offenders or young people with disabilities.

Other cautionary voices were those of Chad Blackman and Anne Gammon, both from the symposium’s planning team. Chad asked if a youth implementation index was needed to hold both the youth and policy makers accountable for pledges made and not acted upon, while Anne encouraged the delegates to come up with a simple story to tell the world about why youth participation is important.

By the end of the morning session the questions raised by both speakers and delegates were coming coming fast and furious. But at this stage there are no answers yet. As Anne made clear, this is the beginning of a dialogue - over time those gathered in Enfield - and the wider youth policy community - will come up with practical suggestions about how to make youth participation better.

In all, it is clear that the debate is timely. Global demographic shifts mean that young people are either vastly in the majority (common in developing countries) or a dwindling group as both mortality and birth rates drop. In either case, having a voice that is as diverse as it is unified to effectively challenge economic, cultural and political norms will become imperative if youth participation is to be meaningful.

Eliza Anyangwe blogs from the London Youth Policy Symposium

Featured Image Credit: Oberazzi via Compfight cc