Workshop on Participation of Young People in Civil Society 15-16 November 2013 http://www.sebeke.org.tr/en/?page_id=179

1. Participation or non-participation?
The power of concepts and distinctions in
(dis)empowering young people in late modern capitalism
15th of November 2013, Bilgi University Istanbul
Prof. Dr. Andreas Walther, Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

2. Normative: full participation is positive !
Quantitative: full vs. empty/incomplete
Forms and
areas: some
know exactly
what participation
is, where and
how it occurs
“Full participation of young people in civic and
political life is an increasing challenge, in light
of the gap between youth and the institutions
… increasing youth participation in the civic life
of local communities and in representative
democracy, by supporting youth organisations
as well as various forms of 'learning to
participate', by encouraging participation of
non-organised young people and by providing
quality information services.“
Who has to bridge the gap? Non-participation
as deficit / mal-adaptation of young people
which can be compensated by policies
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de
Social change:
Less participation
Relation:
Participation as
conditional –
young people as
inable and
anxious

3. Questions and aims
• Youth participation is positive and its meaning is unanimous
• Young people do not participate enough or not in the right way
• The lack of participation can / has to be addressed by policy and
pedagogical practice  educate/learn first, participate later
 Questions and overview:
1.
Meaning(s), discourses and prerequisites of „participation“
2.
Empirical findings I: how much youth participation
3.
Empirical findings II: experiences, parctices and meanings of
young people
4.
Conclusions: Distinctions and differentation
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

4. Research background
Youth policy and participation (YOYO).
Qualitative study on potentials of
participation and informal learning for
young people‘s transitions to the
labour market (2001-2004)
Youth – actor of social change
(UP2YOUTH). Literature review and
comparative analysis on transitions to
parenthood, young immigrantsa and
youth participation
Governance of educational trajectories
in Europe (GOETE): access, coping
and relevance of education for young
people (2010-2013)
FI
IE
DK
UK NL
D
S
PL
F
PT
AT
ES
SI
IT
SK
RO
BG
GR

5. 1. Meanings and discourses
of (youth) participation
•
Meaning in most languages ambiguous and broad
– power/claims/rights – presence/attendance
– active – passive
– goal or principle of policy and practice
•
Participation as principle of and tensions in modern politics,
democracy and civil society:
– self-determination - co-determination
– right of voluntary involvement – expectation of responsibility
– engagement - formal procedures
– deliberation (voice) – representation
– public space – organisation
– self-realisation - alienation
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

6. Discourses of youth participation: what is said – what not?
… depend on contexts, actors, interrests, actors and power
relations of the youth participation discourse
–
Individualisation and mass society
−
Fragmentation and mediatisation of the public sphere
−
International and suprastatal governance (EU, UN)
−
Destandardisation of life course and transitions to adulthood
−
Neoliberalism:
− Active welfare / social investment state  activation of human
capital; expectation of self-responsibility (instead of solidarity)
− Active citizenship (denounciation of passive dependency)
−
Emergence of a „participation industry“
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

7. Examples
1) “Youth are a priority of the European Union's social vision, and the
current crisis compounds the need to nurture young human capital …
Europe's youth need to be equipped to take advantage of opportunities
such as civic and political participation ...“
2) „Ladder of participation“: Struggles between policy makers,
professionals and activists on ‚real‘ and
‚enough‘ participation
(Arnstein 1969; Hart 1992)
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

8. • Prerequisites:
– Mediation between subjective relevances and collective
necessities
– Power and rights
– Trust and recognition
– Time and space
– Competencies and consciousness?
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

9. 2. Empirical findings I: how much
youth participation
Political participation
Participation in elections last 3 years
Political interest (<30)
Young people 15-30
(Eurobarometer)
Adults(OECD)
European
social survey
Eurobarometer
2007
2013
2005
2003
2007
EU
62
56
-
-
82
DE
63
53
71
48
87
IT
56
71
81
22
78
UK
53
38
66
41
86
FI
53
64
69
33
82
PL
74
22
55
27
83
SK
71
52
59
-
83
 National differences are bigger than intragenerational differences
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

10. Non-conventional forms of political participation
Eurobarometer
Spannring et al. 2008
2007: preferred action
2004: done past 12 months
debates
petition
demo
party
union
NGO
Demo
Consumerism
EU
29
11
13
16
11
11
-
-
DE
22
20
24
27.7
14.6
IT
34
12
19
46.4
22.6
UK
25
15
3.6
4.5
FI
34
17
9.9
32.3
PL
39
13
-
-
SK
42
17
5.7
20.5
18
15
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
18
11
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

11. Participation and inequality
Eurobarometer
elections
membership
2007
2013
+ (higher)
+ (higher)
+ (higher)
Gender
-
-
Employm.
+ (highest
self-empl)
+ (highest
employees)
debate
2007
Education
Fahmy 2006
demo
2007
2007
+ (higher)
+ (lower)
+ (higher)
+ (male)
-
-
-
+ (highest
employees)
-
-
-
 differences especially according to education
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
pol. part.
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

12. Lessons from surveys:
•
No clear sign of break down of political participation
•
No clear sign of break down of social participation (sports dominates)
•
National differences bigger than generational differences
•
Perspective towards formal/conventional forms too narrow  trends towards
non-conventional forms
•
Under-representation of lower educated youth across all conventional and nonconventional forms of social and political participation (are policy makers right?)
- also in e-participation (CIVICWEB project)  but why?
– Competencies and information?
– Low expectation of effectiveness? Learned mistrust in formal institutions
– Lack of relevance of issues associated with participation?
 Need of broadening the perspective: experiences in public
institutions and youth cultures
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

13. Empirical findings II: practices and
meanings of young people
•
Experience of participation in public institutions
– Projects GOETE (www.goete.eu) and UP2YOUTH (www.up2youth.org):
marginal influence in school
– German research on youth in public care: professionals restrict participation
referring to deficits and for loss of professional authority
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

14. •
Youth work as participatory institution?
•
Project YOYO (www.iris-egris.de/yoyo): participation in transition from school to
work  bigger in ‚soft‘ youth policies (e.g. youth work) than ‚hard‘ youth policies
(e.g. training and employment schemes)
•
Choice
•
Spaces for experimentation
•
Trustful relationships
•
Phd Larissa von Schwanenflügel: participation biographies of disadvantaged
young people (low education,poor families) in youth work depend on ‚fit‘ between
biographical needs and what they find in youth work
•
But:
–
‚soft‘ youth policies rarely provide ‚hard‘ resources (problem of social recognition
and relevance)?
–
Trend of instrumentalisation for school in the context of neoliberal activation and
human capital formation
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

15. •
Youth cultures as forms and contexts of participation:
– Youth cultures as expressions of youth as not only preparation for
adulthood but life phase in its own right
– Youth cultures as contexts of (political) socialisation:
• Willis (Learning to labour): youth cultural practice as specific orientation
towards working class culture
• Pfaff: music cultures as contexts of development of (quasi)political
orientations (Goth – left wing; Metal – right wing/nationalist; HipHop –
no party orientation but social justice as issue)
– Youth cultures as practice in the public sphere
• Claims for participation in the public sphere
• Experience of conflicts with other actors/interests and the authorities
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

16. − Example 1: Riots in suburbs of Paris 2005
… as well as Athens,
Copenhagen, London …
 Isn‘t that simply
agression and vandalism?
or a „protopolitical
rebellion“ (Lapeyronnie 2006)
Example 2: Skaters in public space
 Is this serious? Don‘t they just want
to have fun?
Local initiative „Cork Skaters“(Ireland)
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

17. Example 3: young people ‚doing nothing‘ („Chilling“)
Wasting their time (and human capital) or resisting against (or at least claming for a
break from) the constant pressure of (self)exploitation and competition
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

18. Doing nothing?
Contextualisation and/or validation of consciousness and intentions is
needed to distinguish participation from non-participation
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

19. 4. Conclusions: changed meaning of participation
– or necessary differentiation of participation in late capitalism?
•
Individualisation – biographisation:
– relevance of collective political issues needs to be experienced
subjectively with regard to the own biography
•
Neoliberalism – activation:
– The demand to take own choices (within the paradigms of human
capital and employability) – regardless of options and resources –
and being made accountable for own choices
•
Fragmentation of the public sphere:
– Different issues of collective and subjective relevance are dealt with
in different contexts   participation programmes as „containers“
•
Identity work – (in)visibility as a political issue?
– Youth cultures: under conditions of individualisation/ fragmentation
and uncertainty visibility is a vital need of constructing identities
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

20. Claims of visibility:
 who has the power/right to define what is „real“ participation?
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

21. Proposal for a new definition of youth participation
All actions of young people in the public or addressing the public
need to be seen as potentially participatory.
Only communicative validation can show whether the actor
consciously related (or wanted to relate) individual interest with
the wider community or society.
What does this mean?
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de

22. •
Research: extend research designs beyond measuring young people‘s
behaviour with regard to formal participation  analyse how individuals
relate to the public
•
Policy: dialogue rather than criminalising young people who act in the
public; provide (different) spaces for experimentation; participation
rights for young people to negotiate with adults and institutions 
including access to welfare!
•
Pedagogical / youth work practice: negotiation of goals and
methods; conflicts as participatory situation; experimentation rather
than teaching participation regarding predefined issues.
•
NGOs: accept particularity of own objectives and milieu; reflect
differences between interests of initiators/organisors and
participants/users.
Social Pedagogical Research Centre
„Education and Coping in the Life Course“
A.Walther@em.uni-frankfurt.de