scholarly journals Debates on youth participation: from citizens in preparation to active social agents

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Tsekoura
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Young People ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Youth Participation ◽  
Social Agents ◽  
Participatory Decision Making ◽  
The Public ◽  
Policy Debates

Abstract This article presents current debates regarding the presence of young people in the public domain. There is a wealth of discussion and perplexity regarding how young people choose to get active in the public domain that originates from the distinct use of the term political in academic and policy debates. This article will proceed in the following way: it will summarise the main tenets of the Decline discourse, it will present how the Personalisation discourse draw our attention to alternative ways of involvement, it will discuss how Context focused discourses highlight how participatory decision making relates to the ways young people conceptualise their daily lived experience, and concludes arguing that youth participation can be better understood when it is contextualised within everyday lived experience.

scholarly journals Modernization of local government development programms in the field of youth policy (in case of Dnipropetrovsk region)

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-85
Author(s):  
Liliia Hyrenko
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Young People ◽  
Policy Implementation ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Youth Participation ◽  
Development Programs ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Youth Policy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Government Development

The article analyzes the local self-government development programs in the field of youth policy (in the case of Dnipropetrovsk region), especially innovative forms and methods of cooperation with youth. The particularities of youth involvement to public administration activity on the city, restrict, rural territorial communities’ levels are investigated. It’s argued that the transformation of value approaches in the organization of public administration is depend on the realization of market-liberal and democratic values, which influences on the activities of public authorities, which is especially noticeable at the local level. Decentralization processes have opened a «window of opportunities» for the youth’s involvement to the public policy-making processes. Seeking the new mechanisms and generating new ideas to intensify the processes of involving young citizens in public local affairs and to solve particularly significant problems is a new challenge in the activities of local governments. There is a need to find appropriate innovative forms and methods of engagement with young people, in particular in youth development programs in the field of youth policy, as well as in the context of finding new organizational forms of activity. According to the concept of sustainable development, it most often refers to the activities and development of modern states, regions, communities for the sake of security and the capabilities of future generations of citizens. In this context youth participation in society is not limited to forming an active part of the public or building democracy in the future. It is about the need to create a level playing field for participation in socially important affairs in determining this future. For participation in society to be meaningful to young people and a justifiable part of their lives, living space, it is essential that they be able to influence decisions and take action at a young age, not just at a later stage in their lives. There are different approaches to understanding the level of youth participation in these processes: discussion and decision making. The institutional involvement of young people in local and regional affairs involves the introduction of appropriate structures or mechanisms that will enable young people to participate in the decision making and discussion of decisions that affect them and may affect their lives. Accordingly, forms of representative participation on a permanent basis are proposed, but are not limited to youth councils, youth parliaments, youth forums. This approach facilitates a rethinking of opportunities for youth policy implementation at the regional level and shifts the focus in terms of decentralization of the Ukrainian authorities from «youth work» to «active youth participation». Changes in the functions of public authorities in the sphere of youth policy implementation: dialogue and partnership; consultancy; active involvement in counseling. According to the author, one of these forms could be creation of regional councils of Youth Associations – a permanent advisory and advisory body.

scholarly journals After the age of criminal responsibility: a defence for children who offend

2016 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
pp. 327-341
Author(s):  
Claire McDiarmid
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
Mental Disorder ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Developmental Psychology ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Mens Rea ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
The Public

In Scotland, the age of criminal responsibility is 8, although children cannot be prosecuted until they are 12. In England and Wales, for all purposes, the age is 10. This article argues that a further mechanism is needed to protect the young who do wrong within the criminal process and it argues for a new, bespoke defence, to be available to young people from the age of criminal responsibility until they attain the age of 18. It looks firstly at criminal capacity – what it is that needs to be understood fairly to hold anyone criminally responsible – and draws on material from developmental psychology and neuro-science, as well as looking at the child’s lived experience, to provide some evidence that the young may, without fault, lack this capacity. It then examines the use of age generally in law, and the age of criminal responsibility within this. Next, it considers existing lack of capacity defences – nonage, diminished responsibility, insanity (or mental disorder) and absence of mens rea – to consider their suitability for use by young and immature defendants. Finally, it presents a proposal for the form of the new defence, taking into account the need for balance with the public interest in conviction of the guilty. Throughout, it notes and analyses the Law Commission’s proposals in this respect.

Liminal Participation: Young People’s Practices in the Public Sphere Between Exclusion, Claims of Belonging, and Democratic Innovation

2021 ◽  
pp. 0044118X2110408
Author(s):  
Ilaria Pitti ◽  
Yagmur Mengilli ◽  
Andreas Walther
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
Public Sphere ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Youth Participation ◽  
European Research ◽  
Research Project ◽  
The Public ◽  
Qualitative Case Studies ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
Innovation And Change

Existing understandings of youth participation often imply clear distinctions from non-participation and thus boundaries between “recognized” and “non-recognized” practices of engagement. This article aims at questioning these boundaries. It analyzes young people’s practices in the public sphere that are characterized by both recognition as participation and misrecognition or stigmatization as deviant and it is suggested to conceptualize such practices as “liminal participation.” The concept of liminality has been developed to describe transitory situations “in-between”—between defined and recognized status positions—and seems helpful for better understanding the blurring boundaries of youth participation. Drawing on qualitative case studies conducted within a European research project, the analysis focuses on how young people whose practices evolve at the margins of the respective societies position themselves with regard to the challenges of liminality and on the potential of this for democratic innovation and change.

scholarly journals Achieving inclusive research priority-setting: what do people with lived experience and the public think is essential?

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bridget Pratt
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
The Public ◽  
Research Priority ◽  
Health Research Priority Setting

Abstract Background Engagement of people with lived experience and members of the public is an ethically and scientifically essential component of health research. Authentic engagement means they are involved as full partners in research projects. Yet engagement as partnership is uncommon in practice, especially during priority-setting for research projects. What is needed for agenda-setting to be shared by researchers and people with lived experience and/or members of the public (or organisations representing them)? At present, little ethical guidance exists on this matter, particularly that which has been informed by the perspectives of people with lived experience and members of the public. This article provides initial evidence about what they think are essential foundations and barriers to shared decision-making in health research priority-setting and health research more broadly. Methods An exploratory, qualitative study was conducted in 2019. 22 semi-structured interviews were performed with key informants from the UK and Australia. Results Three main types of foundations were thought to be essential to have in place before shared decision-making can occur in health research priority-setting: relational, environmental, and personal. Collectively, the three types of foundations addressed many (but not all) of the barriers to power sharing identified by interviewees. Conclusions Based on study findings, suggestions are made for what researchers, engagement practitioners, research institutions, and funders should do in their policy and practice to support meaningful engagement. Finally, key international research ethics guidelines on community engagement are considered in light of study findings.

scholarly journals DILEMMAS OF PRACTICE IN THE ECOLOGY OF EMANCIPATORY YOUTH-ADULT PARTNERSHIPS

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (3.1) ◽  
pp. 475 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeanette Roach ◽  
Esayas Wureta ◽  
Laurie Ross
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Young People ◽  
Youth Programs ◽  
Youth Participation ◽  
Font Size ◽  
Planning Program ◽  
Organizational Decision Making ◽  
Youth Program ◽  
Neighborhood Problem ◽  
Community Decision

<h1><span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;">This article explores dilemmas that arise when using a participatory, experiential neighborhood problem-solving and planning program in settings that have different expectations and beliefs about youth and adults partnering in organizational and community decision-making. Using Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecology of human development and Wong, Zimmerman, and Parker’s (2010) pyramid of youth participation, a series of dilemmas are explored. These dilemmas include: negotiating challenges of power; scaling up youth-adult partnerships into organizational decision-making and governance; reconciling tensions between practices, principles, and values when disseminating a program from one organization to another; dealing with organizational events that occur outside the youth program; and succumbing to pressure to achieve funder-derived outcomes. Two insights emerge from the analysis of these dilemmas. First, young people embrace adult-provided structure when adults and young people are not ready to work in emancipatory youth-adult partnerships. Second, as we move toward emancipatory youth-adult partnerships, the developmental sphere of youth programs has to expand to include the activities, relationships, and roles that traditionally have been limited to organizational leadership and governance. Likewise the developmental sphere of the governing body has to incorporate the activities, relationships, and roles of what has typically been the youth program.</span></h1>

scholarly journals Talking About Youth: The Depoliticization of Young People in the Public Domain

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 591-607
Author(s):  
Marco Giugni ◽  
Maria Grasso
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Young People ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Political Activism ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Claims Analysis ◽  
The Public ◽  
Collective Actors ◽  
Political Agents ◽  
Cross National

In this article, we employ data from comparative claims analysis of five major newspapers in nine European countries between 2010 and 2016 to examine discourse around youth. We look at the ways in which collective actors frame youth in the public domain and how this may provide discursive opportunities understood in terms of the extent to which public discourse portrays young people as agents of social change. More specifically, we argue that young people are depoliticized in the public domain. We find that public statements and more generally public discourse about youth tend to depict them as actors who do not have political aims or to focus on other, nonpolitical characteristics. Our exploratory analysis shows that, while youth are fairly present as actors in the public domain, they are only rarely addressed or discussed in political terms. Moreover, where they are addressed politically, it is in negative terms, with few political claims. At the same time, we observe important cross-national variations, whereby the depoliticization process looks to be further matured in some countries relative to others. This process of depoliticization of youth in the public domain, in turn, has important implications on their potential for acting as political agents and for their political activism.

Prosecutorial supervision of certain types of criminal procedural activities carried out by employees of the penal system in pre-trial proceedings

2019 ◽  
pp. 127-133
Author(s):  
Марина Сергеевна Красильникова
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Correctional Officers ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Penal System ◽  
Correctional Institutions ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Subject

Статья посвящена исследованию вопросов прокурорского надзора за деятельностью сотрудников подразделений исправительных учреждений уголовно-исполнительной системы, осуществляющих прием, регистрацию сообщений о преступлениях, их проверку и принятие решения по результатам такой проверки. Установлен круг нормативно-правовых актов, регламентирующих порядок приема, регистрации, проверки и принятия решения по сообщениям о совершенном преступлении. Проанализированы правила, относящиеся к рассматриваемой деятельности прокурора, предмет прокурорского надзора в данной области. Подчеркивается необходимость соблюдения порядка обращения с сообщениями о преступлении со стороны сотрудников исправительных учреждений, а также важность размещения соответствующей информации в общем доступе для осужденных. Подробно рассмотрены этапы деятельности сотрудников уголовно-исполнительной системы, осуществляемой в связи с поступлением сообщения о преступлении, выделены проблемные аспекты, вызывающие сложности на практике, а также являющиеся предметами прокурорских проверок, результатом которых становятся акты прокурорского реагирования. The article is devoted to the study of issues of prosecutorial supervision over the activities of employees of correctional institutions of the penal system, carrying out reception, registration of reports of crimes, their verification and decision-making on the results of such an inspection. The article establishes a range of normative-legal acts regulating the procedure of reception, registration, verification and decision-making on reports of the committed crime. The rules relating to the activities of the Prosecutor, the subject of prosecutorial supervision in this area are analyzed. It emphasizes the need to respect the treatment of reports of crime by correctional officers, as well as the importance of placing relevant information in the public domain for convicts. The stages of the activities of the employees of the penal system carried out in connection with the receipt of a report on a crime are considered in detail, the problematic aspects causing difficulties in practice are highlighted, as well as being the subjects of Prosecutor's inspections, which result in acts of Prosecutor's response.

Claiming and Framing Youth in the Public Domain During Times of Increasing Inequalities

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 567-573 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Kousis ◽  
Marco Giugni
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
Original Data ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Claims Analysis ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
The Public ◽  
Mainstream Media ◽  
Political Exclusion ◽  
The Media

Aiming to contribute to research on youth representation in the mainstream media, this special issue provides eight articles offering fresh empirical comparative analyses of the ways in which young people as well as issues concerning them are dealt with in the public domain. Applying political claims analysis on original data from the EURYKA project (European Commission, Horizon 2020), the special issue is focused on how youth-related claims are raised in the media by youth and nonyouth actors during a period of increasing inequalities and social and political exclusion, how young people’s ways of doing politics are dealt with in the media, and to what extent organized youth and contestation are visible in the public domain.

Challenges of Public Participation: A Qualitative Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
pp. 100-109
Author(s):  
Safiah Suhaimi
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Social Participation ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Youth Participation ◽  
The Public

The participation plays an important role among other people. When social participation is used today, a public participation will be rapid. The problem has happened when less participation of young people involved on youth associations. The youth has believed that they have still lacked the partcipation has needed for an effective participation and expressed little confidence in their involvement. This paper has analysed the challenges of public participation among youth associations. The methods that used a qualitative study by an interview for five youth associations in Kedah. Drawing on the final findings, two challenges which are: (i) financial and (ii) a less youth participation. Furthermore, the findings are expected to contribute to strengthening the youth associations to achieve good governance in the public participation.

scholarly journals Space between the borders? Perceptions of professionals on the participation in decision-making of young people in coercive care

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 692-711 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mijntje DC ten Brummelaar ◽  
Erik J Knorth ◽  
Wendy J Post ◽  
Annemiek T Harder ◽  
Margrite E Kalverboer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Young People ◽  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Essential Element ◽  
Youth Participation ◽  
Effective Decision ◽  
Care And Treatment ◽  
Participation Process ◽  
Effective Decision Making ◽  
Coercive Care

The participation of young people in care and treatment decisions is regarded as an essential element in effective decision-making and care. Although care and treatment in juvenile justice facilities is, in the first instance, based on a coercive placement (i.e. non-participatory decision-making), it is likely that participation is also essential for young offenders during their stay in care. In our study, we interviewed 24 care professionals working in two different juvenile justice facilities in the Netherlands. Professionals understand what participation entails (e.g. informing, listening to, taking views into account), and how and why they can use participation in everyday practice. Typically, they link issues such as safety and existing boundaries when talking about participation in a coercive context. Based on our findings, we present a conceptual model of factors that seem to influence a young person’s participation process. These findings indicate that there is a need for the structural incorporation of youth participation into juvenile justice facilities in such a way as to consider the needs and perspectives of both young people and professionals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document