How to get youth participation right? The role of youth participation in the creation and execution of the civil service (MDT) in the Netherlands

• In Event: Civic Participation and Co-creation of Governance

Abstract

Finding effective and just solutions to complex social issues entails proper citizen participation (Geels, 2011; Loorbach et al., 2016). Civil society organizations are often seen as having a role in improving citizen participation (Arnstein, 1969; Garst et al., 2022; Liket et al., 2014). This paper examines how youth participation is defined and operationalized in a large-scale citizen service program in The Netherlands.

MDT is a relatively new program that started in 2018 with pilot projects and was formalized in 2022 as a structural program in The Netherlands. The term citizen service refers to (stimulating) formal and intensive volunteer work that is carried out through a structured program that is non-military in nature (McBride et al., 2004). An explicit choice was made that MDT should be designed for, by and with young people. This does not only apply to the central program team, in which young people in both a national youth council as well as a youth panel have a say. Youth participation is also a requirement for organizations – most often civil society organizations and volunteer work organizations – requesting funding through MDT for initiating youth-projects. Meaning, next to how young people can take part in the project, by for example helping elderly learn computer skills or organizing a soccer-event with refugees, the organization needs to explain how they create sufficient opportunity for young people to also participate in the design, execution, and evaluation of the project itself.

We examined how participation is defined and operationalized within MDT. We followed the program in an ethnographic manner, using participant observation and semi-structured and conversational interviews, and we collected and analyzed subsidy-accountability reports.

Analyses of one round of 67 successful subsidy-applications showcases that the interpretation of what youth participation includes differs between projects. As a result, it is not always clear how organizations implement youth participation, to what extent young people can co-decide and have a formal voice. A partial literature review of models of youth participation was performed, showing that while different models of youth participation place different emphases, six common elements can be abstracted (Arnstein, 1989; Cahill and Dadvand, 2018; Gal, 2017; Hart, 2008; Head, 2011; Wong et al., 2010). Based on these results, the MDT-program included additional questions for subsidy-applicants on youth participation for subsequent subsidy-rounds. In 15 interviews with MDT-participants, MDT-youth panel members, MDT-policymakers, and MDT-organisations, difference in definitions of youth participation were observed, including which elements are considered important. In addition, the interviews highlighted the importance of three conditions: sense of equality, agenda-setting of the topics and (co-)decision-making. These three elements link to power, and how participation only has real effect when it entails a shift in power (Arnstein, 1969; Avelino, 2021). At the time of writing this abstract, a subsequent set of 71 successful subsidy-applications is being analyzed to showcase good examples on each of the elements, the three power-conditions and create a set of considerations for organizations setting up their participation practices. We expect to have our data analysis ready to be presented at ISTR 2024.

References

Arnstein, S.R. (1969) A Ladder Of Citizen Participation, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35:4, 216-224, DOI: 10.1080/01944366908977225
Avelino, F. (2021) Theories of power and social change. Power contestations and their implications for research on social change and innovation, Journal of Political Power, 14:3, 425-448, DOI: 10.1080/2158379X.2021.1875307
Cahill, H., Dadvand, B. (2018) Re-conceptualising youth participation: A framework to inform action. Children and Youth Services Review, Volume 95, 2018, Pages 243-253, ISSN 0190-7409, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.11.001
Gal, T. (2017) An Ecological Model of Child and Youth Participation. Children and Youth Services Review 79, pp. 57–64., Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3539970
Garst, J., Maas, K., & Suijs, J. (2022). Materiality Assessment Is an Art, Not a Science: Selecting ESG Topics for Sustainability Reports. California Management Review, 65(1), 64–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/00081256221120692
Geels, F. W. (2011). The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. In Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions (Vol. 1, Issue 1, pp. 24–40). Elsevier B.V. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.002
Hart, R. (2008). Stepping Back from “The Ladder”: Reflections on a Model of Participatory Work with Children. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338607840
Head, B. W. (2011). Why not ask them? Mapping and promoting youth participation. Children and Youth Services Review, 33(4), 541–547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.05.015
Liket, K. C., Rey-Garcia, M., & Maas, K. E. H. (2014). Why Aren’t Evaluations Working and What to Do About It: A Framework for Negotiating Meaningful Evaluation in Nonprofits. American Journal of Evaluation, 35(2), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214013517736
Loorbach, D., Avelino, F., Haxeltine, A., Wittmayer, J. M., O’Riordan, T., Weaver, P., & Kemp, R. (2016). The economic crisis as a game changer? Exploring the role of social construction in sustainability transitions. Ecology and Society, 21(4). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08761-210415
McBride, A. M., Sherraden, M. S., Benítez, C., & Johnson, E. (2004). ivic service worldwide: Defining a field, building a knowledge base. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33(4), 8–21.
McBride, A. M., Sherraden, M. S., & Lough, B. J. (2007). Inclusion and Effectiveness in International Volunteering and Service. Congressional Briefing on Global Service Fellowships, 7–13.
Orton, J. D., & Weick, K. E. (1990). Loosely Coupled Systems: A Reconceptualization. The Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 203. https://doi.org/10.2307/258154
Wong, N.T., Zimmerman, M.A. & Parker, E.A. (2010) A Typology of Youth Participation and Empowerment for Child and Adolescent Health Promotion. Am J Community Psychol 46, 100–114 (2010).

Authors

• Marit Schouten, Impact Centre Erasmus, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam

• Karen Maas, Erasmus School of Economics