Search results

Formal forms of youth participation, like youth councils and student committees, are often criticised for being too affiliated with adult-led power structures, giving young people little space for their own initiative and agenda. The general conclusion from the PARTISPACE project confirms this picture, though there is also a considerable variation in how these institutions are organised and led. This complexity is illustrated in a comparison between the Youth Council of Gothenburg (YCG) in Sweden, the Greater Manchester Youth Combined Authority (GMYCA) and the Manchester Young Researchers (MYR). The YCG and the GMYCA both have strong ties to the political assemblies in their cities and this has great influence over their work process. In this respect, the MYR represents an effort where the young members can make their own choices, take on much more personal responsibility, and learn a lot from this practice. At the same time, both YCG and GMYCA deal with important issues for young people and have succeeded in making substantial changes, for example, when it comes to youth access to public transport. The young people who are engaged in the different participatory efforts all want to contribute to an advanced position for their peers. To some, formal participation appears to be a feasible way to accomplish this. The experiences from the YCG and the GMYCA show that this choice is associated with limitations in room for manoeuvre. However, many of the young members see through this and maintain a critical perspective on the contemporary conditions for young people’s participation in society, and their capacity to change them through formal means.

This chapter utilises the analogy of ‘parasitical resistance’ (Fisher, 2020) to explore how young people act and interact in ‘adult’ contexts, where they are welcome as young people but still subordinated because of their age, and sometimes their gender. The analysis of young people’s participation in the Greater Manchester Youth Combined Authority suggests that young people who participate in formal, adult spaces need to be able to find the ‘play in the system’ to be heard and to be involved in decision-making. In this sense, the young people embraced a form of ‘parasitism’ and developed tactics to ‘effect subversion from within hegemonic structures’ (Fisher, 2020). This new paradigm argues that resistance is less likely to be found in a radical activism now and is more likely to be found instead in the mutually exploitative relations between dominant hosts (in this case, ‘adults’) giving of their power just enough, and ‘parasitical’ actors (in this case, young people) taking only as much as they need for their own ends. The chapter does not argue that young people are ‘parasites’ at the adult table but, rather, it acknowledges young people must find ways to ‘play the game’ in spaces where longstanding tools of radical resistance have limited effect. The ‘play’ is not unproblematic, however, and the chapter concludes that young people need more than just ‘being heard’ and contributing to something that is achievable, but not especially disruptive or redistributive. Instead, involvement of young people should be focused on achieving genuine parity that can benefit as many marginalised and precarious young people as possible.

Children have been recognized as an important user group for information and communication technology (ICT) and methods for involving them in ICT design have already been devised. However, there is a lack of research on children’s genuine or authentic participation in ICT design as well as a lack of critical research scrutinizing how “children” and “their participation” actually end up constructed in ICT design. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

An intervention involving children in ICT design following the research strategy of nexus analysis was implemented. A qualitative data archive of this intervention is examined through a Foucauldian lens.

The study reveals that numerous discourses were relied on when talking about “children” and “their participation” in the case project: the discourses of participation, equality, domination, segregation, rebellion, and patronization were identified. Moreover, “children” were constructed as equal partners and influential, but also as ignorant, ignored, silent, and silencing each other. Some of the findings are in line with the existing ICT literature on the matter, others even with the literature on genuine participation of children. However, children and their participation were also constructed as “problematic” in many senses.

The study contributes to and opens up avenues for critical research on genuine participation of users, especially children.

Practical suggestions for researchers interested in participation of children in ICT design are provided.

While research literature offers an abundance of best practices and an idealized view on children and their participation, this study shows the multitude of challenges involved and discourses circulating around.

In this chapter, I examine stories that foster care youth tell to legislatures, courts, policymakers, and the public to influence policy decisions. The stories told by these children are analogized to victim truth testimony, analyzed as a therapeutic, procedural, and developmental process, and examined as a catalyst for systemic accountability and change. Youth stories take different forms and appear in different media: testimony in legislatures, courts, research surveys or studies; opinion editorials and interviews in newspapers or blog posts; digital stories on YouTube; and artistic expression. Lawyers often serve as conduits for youth storytelling, translating their clients’ stories to the public. Organized advocacy by youth also informs and animates policy development. One recent example fosters youth organizing to promote “normalcy” in child welfare practices in Florida, and in related federal legislation.

The expansion of research with children offers new opportunities for the development of child-centred practice. Children's participation in research has been championed as a positive way to challenge the processes and practices that affect their everyday lives. Yet opportunities for collaborating with children, and leveraging their voices, remains heavily guided by adult-led priorities. In this chapter, we offer a critique of ‘child-centredness’ and related voice-based and participatory discourses in the absence of a full-fledged engagement with the power imbalances between adults and children. We draw on examples from our research with children on contemporary global challenges (COVID-19 pandemic, health and migration) to expose the ways that adult-led agendas for, and definitions of, participation can affect children's engagement in research. We highlight how children also effect change and display their agency through the sharing of their experiences with adult researchers. The dynamic nature of social change highlights children's considered engagement with contemporary challenges but also the importance of reciprocity and willingness of adults to listen and respond to the issues that children identify as being central to their lives. We attend to the ways our methodological decision-making offers opportunities for leveraging children's perspectives, but also highlight the dangers of reproducing dominant adult/child power relations when seeking to be ‘child-centred’. We conclude by offering some critical questions to prompt further debate in this field, In doing so, we highlight the value of reciprocity and critical reflexivity as necessary first steps towards a more considered engagement with adult/child power relations in ‘child-centred’ research.

Purpose – This paper presents a critical exploration of the concept of children's ‘participation’ by looking in more detail at children's right to play and the possibilities this presents for a different understanding of children as political actors.Design/methodology/approach – The paper applies a range of concepts, largely drawn from Deleuzian philosophy and children's geographies, to produce an account of playing that unsettles traditional ways of valuing this behaviour. In doing so, it also extends current approaches to children's participation rights by presenting play as a primary way in which children actively participate in their everyday worlds. Observations of children's play are utilised to illustrate the multiple ways in which moments of playfulness enliven the spaces and routines of children's lives.Findings – Playing may be viewed as micro-political expressions in which children collectively participate to establish temporary control over their immediate environment in order to make things different/better. These everyday acts are largely unnoticed by adults and represent a markedly different form of political engagement from the ways in which children are brought into adult-led political realms. Yet playful moments are a vital expression of children's power and ability to influence the conditions of their lives.Originality/value – Thinking differently about playing offers an opportunity to revitalise the very notion of participation. Such a move marks a line of flight which opens up the possibility for everyday collective acts to disturb dominant ways of accounting for adult–child relationships and by doing so establish moments of hope that people can get on and go on together by co-creating more just and participative spaces of childhood.

Is more child participation always better for child rights advocacy? That is the question I examine, in this chapter, as I analyse advocacy for child rights in India that led to the adoption of the landmark Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (the ‘POCSO Act’). Through ethnographic fieldwork with non-government organisations (NGOs) and a narrative analysis of interviews and awareness material, I tell the story of how a combination of adult-led but child-participatory advocacy brought about a new, de-tabooised way of talking about child sexual abuse. By applying the theoretical lens of ‘critical child rights studies’, I suggest how we can conceptualise a critical perspective on child participation in child rights advocacy. First, adults’ multiple and, at times, conflicting roles in children’s lives – as advocates, protectors, and abusers – needs to be recognised. Second, children should participate in advocacy activities where they can have meaningful influence and be part of the conversation. This may not necessarily occur in adult spaces, where their participation remains token. Finally, I argue that child participation should never turn into a responsibilisation of children.

Youth political engagement is often ignored and downplayed by adults, who often embrace a youth deficit model. The youth deficit model downplays the voices and unique experiences of youth in favor of adult-led and adult-centered experiences. Like other historical deficit models, the youth deficit model also provides permission to adults to speak for or about youth, even when not asked to speak for them. We refer to this powerful construction of youth interests by adults as mediation. Fortunately, online advocacy could offer an unmediated route to political engagement for youth as digital natives. Using a unique dataset, we investigate whether online protest spaces offer an unmediated experience for youth to learn about and engage in political protest. However, we find that youth engagement, and especially unmediated youth engagement, is rare among advocacy digital spaces, though it varies by movement, SMO-affiliation, and age groups. Based on our findings, we argue that, rather than youth being primarily responsible for any alleged disengagement, the lack of online spaces offering opportunities for youth to take ownership of their own engagement likely discourages youth from participating in traditional political advocacy and renders the level of youth engagement an admirable accomplishment of young people.

Conducting research with young migrants offers an important opportunity to understand better their own perspectives on their migration experiences. Yet, engaging migrant youth in research can be fraught with ethical and methodological challenges. Institutional ethics processes have a tendency to prioritise standard principles – many of which depart from the ethical sensitivities that emerge during research practice. In this chapter, the authors explore some of the procedural and situated ethical issues involved in conducting research with child and youth migrants in Ghana. In particular, the authors highlight how the diversity of young migrants prompts definitional issues about what constitutes childhood and youth, and in different socio-cultural spatial settings. Differing categorisations of child and youth generate issues of representation and guide adult-led decisions about children’s assumed competencies and vulnerabilities to participate in research. The precarious living circumstances of many migrant children, including the absence of parental figures or legal guardians, coupled with language and cultural barriers, present particular difficulties for securing informed consent. Challenges of this kind can deny young migrants the opportunity to participate in research about their own lives and serve to reproduce dominant power asymmetries and assumptions about these children’s vulnerabilities. The authors conclude by offering some suggestions for how researchers might develop critical ethical reflexivity to support the meaningful and ethical engagement of young migrants in research.