Practical Participation

My latest SlideShare upload: http://slidesha.re/gfBzh6

I have just finished a caffeine induced rush of a presentation on participation risks at a time of change to colleagues in the Yorkshire and Humber region. Thanks to an 80 minute delay on the train from Newcastle, I managed to have ready a series of photographs to illustrate the conversation.

I started with Talha Ghannam’s deep thought about why we do what we do and the notion of intention in Islam: the intention of:

• The miser – what do I get out of this?
• The trader – so, how does this pan out
• The lover – we do what we do because it is the right thing to do.

(www.rightspace.org.uk)

And two reflections based on pictures and words from two young carers in Leeds.

Georgia, young carer, aged 12: participation may start as transactional, but grows to be about relationship, being and belonging

Caitlin, young carer, aged 9

1. My life – participative democracy that makes a difference to me
2. Our voice – representational democracy that can have wider influence
3. Poor attempts at representational democracy, disconnected from lived lives

Then some reflections on 10 participation risks:

Participation risk 1: no discernable change?

Poor community engagement leads to disconnection, sense of betrayal and no discernable change

Participation risk 2: veneer covering up the cracks of poverty and social exclusion

Participation risk 3: come and join me in my organisation to do my stuff

When are adults supporting young people on their terms on their issues?

Participation risk 4: collective rights to participate are only valid and relevant where underpinned by individual rights, freedoms and civil liberties

Participation risk 5: who participates and who profits?

Participation risk 6: another brick in the wall – our attitudes may have changed but have our behaviours in supporting children and young people to make change happen where they live?

Participation risk 7: we live here too; what progress toward being equal citizens now?

Participation risk 8: prejudice and discrimination toward the young are all around us. What do you see?

Participation risk 9: change happens! Make sure we notice, share and celebrate.

Participation risks? 10: Joy in children and childhood in the public space

Participation rights: a human right and a procedural right; built in as the keystone and not attached as an outhouse.

I’d be keen to hear your thoughts. How do these ten risks match your reality and what is the best way to counter-act them?

Bill

Practical Participation

Year’s end

As we fast approach the end of the year, I have been revising our children’s rights quiz for 2010. These are tough times and they are about to get a whole lot tougher. We know those who fare worse in such times are the young.

And we know the ideology driving change now is rolling back the state through:

• Cuts
• Shrinking of public services
• Getting rid of central mechanisms of quality and standards
• Fuelling notions of deserving and undeserving

Only 8% progress

At the annual CRAE conference on 19 November, the latest State of Children’s Rights in England report was launched. Of the 118 legally binding obligations on the UK government, substantive progress has been made on 9 (8%) in 2010 (in my view actually 4, if you take out procedural changes that have yet to make any difference to children and young people themselves). I managed to summarise this progress in a single tweet. How depressing:

“SoCR sees more reviews for looked after cyp, support to victims of violence, baby friendly hospitals and reduction in use of hard drugs.”

Longer term trends

So, we need to take stock of the massive impact of this steamroller against a longer term picture. Looking back over 30 years, what is the trend? At a number of management training events recently, I have ended up with the gorgeous diagram as attached: jagged line represents the ups and downs of government policy.

political and policy roller coaster, trends and overall trajectory

The wavy line is what we might see as the underlying trend. And the straight line is our own personal sense of overall progress (or regress). For example, the inspiring Penelope Leach at the CRAE conference said she felt our attitude to the young and our manner of parenting was going in the right direction. Slow but steady progress set against the ups and downs of government policy.

RightSpace

As the year ends, I come back to posing five questions (www.rightspace.org.uk):

• What progress on children and young people human rights have we made?
• What change in style and accountability of services have we witnessed?
• What place for young people as partners and collaborators, rather than objects of others interest and research?
• What do we need to hold on to help us move forward during these tough times?
• How do we ensure our endeavour focuses on participation for change?

And all this leads to the last question:

• How hopeful are we for the next decade? There is much outside our control. What is within our sphere of influence to continue to promote and establish gains for children and young people’s human rights?

And amidst the chaos and the doubt, there are these weird contradictions, like from the Minister for children and families. At the CRAE conference she said: “For too long government has been lukewarm toward the Convention on the Rights of the Child – an embarrassing and guilty secret. I want this to change and be proud of campaigning for children’s rights, which is good for children and young people and good for everybody, building civil society.” (Sarah Teather, MP, 19 Nov 2010, CRAE annual conference.)

As we start this difficult year ahead, I’m with CRAE’s Chair Mary Riddell, quoting Martin Luther King: ” We will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” Let’s not be silent in 2011.

Take the quiz

A recent article from the Child Rights Information Network pointed out that freedom of expression and access to information is a good marker for “gauging perceptions of children in any society, because the extent to which children are able to express their opinions and feelings can show how much they are recognised as rights holders.”

We go on (rightly) about young people’s right to participate, to have a voice and influence. But how does this happen if cut off from information held about an individual, about a particular group or community? In events we have run with children and young people getting accessible and relevant information is often a top priority. They talk about it as the gateway to having an effective voice and influence.

One of my favourite Investing in Children (http://www.iic-uk.org/Newsletter.htm) stories is the one about transport and a fair deal on fares. Initial attempts to affect change were thwarted by stubborn adults hiding behind disinformation. Undaunted, the young activists spent the next year researching. Equipped at their next encounter with facts and figures, they won the case and got the fare concessions.

Being given the information you need can be a mark of real respect and partnership, taking you seriously and helping you make massive personal decisions. Sue Morgan is a brilliant cancer nurse at Leeds General Infirmary. When a child said “what colour is my tumour?” she did not dismiss or ridicule. She asked around and found other young people also wanted to know what this scary thing looked like. They wanted to know about their cancer so they could face their fears, take some control and better make choices on the what, where and when of treatment. So, she worked with the scientists and cancer doctors to make it possible for those who wanted to see their tumour under the microscope: “It’s large and spiky with evil eyes and sharp teeth”; “Seeing it helps me know what I’m fighting.” Sue has also been working nationally to develop tools and web resources so that some young people first diagnosed with cancer can think through the information they need about treatments, wards and facilities to make critical decisions about whether they have their treatment at a main specialist hospital or at a local one.

No wonder then that the big laws that govern our countries and direct nations on the rights of children and young people speak so powerfully about children and young people’s fundamental right to information. Here are two of them.

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers” (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Art. 19).

“The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child’s choice” (Convention on the Rights of the Child, Art. 13).

But just a note of caution, as Tim Davies warns, data is not information is not knowledge is not wisdom. Or to turn it around, it is what we do with the information to create understanding that helps us change transport policy or make better personal decisions about our cancer care. I find this diagram http://is.gd/fd9AC really helpful in making that connection.

Bill Badham

One of the reasons the Practical Participation blog has been so quiet of late is that I’ve been immersed in a full time MSc Course at the Oxford Internet Institute, where my recently shared dissertation focussed on Open Data from government.

Over the coming months I hope to explore how best Practical Participation can offer support to local authorities, government agencies, community groups and enterprises who are interested in understanding how to share or use open data, particularly uses of data with an impact for civic engagement.

Look out for more soon – but if you’re interested in talking right now about open data and what it could mean for your organisation, you are more than welcome to get in touch.

At an event in Bradford recently, I gave a presentation based around our emerging findings about rights and participation at a time of policy and political change. Using live feed from RightSpace http://www.rightspace.org.uk/, we looked at some key themes about human rights, accountability and style of leadership and evidence of change.

I’ve taken some of the discussion with the video links to offer some reflections and hopefully generate comment and debate as we build toward the national RightSpace conference on 26 October in Sheffield. To check this out and book on line, go to http://rightspace.org.uk/content/event.

Rights rise

http://rightspace.org.uk/content/making-space-key-discussions

1989 saw the beginnings of an upturn in interest and understanding and use of rights language to promote the voice and influence of children and young people in matters that affect them. The Children Act of 1989 most coherently placed the right of children and young people in child protection proceedings to have their “wishes and feelings taken into account.” This was extended in the 2004 Children Act to all children and young people in need. Also in 1989, the UN set out the Convention on the Rights of the Child which has been signed and ratified by all nations of the world save two and both these – Somalia and the United States – are getting closer to doing so (www.childrightscampaign.org).

This movement to enshrine adult responsibilities for the wellbeing and welfare of children and young people into law is to be applauded, rather than leaving it to transitory attitudes or passing policy priorities. But there are some risks, two of which are explored here.

Human rights not children’s rights

http://rightspace.org.uk/content/liam-cairns-talks-about-human-rights-children

The language of children’s rights can speak of “them and us”, which can be interpreted as oppositional or divisive. Liam Cairn’s video clip shows the greater strength from affirming children’s human rights, drawing strength and learning from other “emancipatory movements.” And at the Children’s Rights Alliance for England’s (CRAE) annual children’s rights conference on 20 November 2009, Professor Klug urged that children and young people’s rights do not become a separatist movement, but one held and championed within a wider human rights framework which holds the “vision for society based on ethical norms,” rooted in “the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – the mother & father of all human rights instruments.” See the blog post at: http://www.practicalparticipation.co.uk/2009/11/20-20-vision-children’s-human-rights-in-focus/

Right and virtuous action

http://rightspace.org.uk/content/participation-virtue-talha-ghannam

Why do we do what we do? What is our motivation? We can look at this in three ways: because we ought to, because we’re told to and because we want to. If we only, for example, encourage children and young people’s participation because the law tells us we must, that is not very high motivation and may not face up to a contrary climate. Talha Ghannam’s short clip offers a powerful commentary on intention and the reason for action.

Right challenges

These two challenges above come together in a third area of concern: how we see and treat children and young people in England. We tend to polarise them as angels, victims, empty vessels, units of investment, threats and thugs. Our policy and personal responses too often shift to suit political expedient and public scapegoating. But, “Children and young people’s human rights are not a pick and mix assortment of luxury entitlements, but the very foundation of democratic societies” (Alvaro Gil-Robles, Council of Europe Human Rights Commissioner). And our social and political reference points should enshrine this.

Leadership turned upside down

http://rightspace.org.uk/content/alex-farrow-twelve-years-participation

Leading and managing work with young people is being turned on its head. The position of the service user, however young they may be, is moving from object to subject, consumer to co-creator, empty vessel to expert by experience, receiver of services to being involved by right in their design, delivery and evaluation. These are transformative times. What impact is this having and should it have on the style of leadership and the accountability of managers to children and young people themselves? There are signs across local authorities and the voluntary sector that it isn’t all just about new structures, such as youth forums and advisory boards, or news systems like dedicated budgets, or monitoring and recording of participation activity.

Stubborn challenges

But there still seem to be some big challenges:

• Transactional or transformative participation: do we still tend to see active involvement as “come and join me in my organisation on my terms about things that will help our service”? Or is there evidence of participation as shifting to being about transforming relationships, understanding and collaborative working?
• Representational or participative democracy: are our main methods and approaches encouraging exclusivity and feeding into the few chosen being told they represent the many, rather than supporting grass roots engagement and empowerment?

A style of leadership that understands young people as having lives and interests reaching far beyond the bounds of a particular organisation is crucial to the full realisation of a society in which young people are equal citizens now, activists in vibrant, forward-moving communities, exercising their right to participate, including their right as citizens to dissent.

Nottingham Children and Young People Trust showed innovative leadership and strong accountability to children and young people by running a two event where the children and young people first had the space to identify the issues affecting them and agreeing their top participation priorities before being joined by the managers and leaders to agree action plans with clear responsibilities and time frames. The video tells the story.

http://rightspace.org.uk/content/accountability-nottingham-children-and-young-peoples-trust

What’s changed?

http://rightspace.org.uk/taxonomy/term/7

With such attention to the participation of children and young people in matters that affect them in recent times, backed by a vast array of laws and policies, we have perhaps been guilty of not asking searching enough questions about the purpose of this industry and who the beneficiaries have been. Adults have tended to justify participative activity mainly by the act of involvement itself and any changes to the organisation or service resulting. But as Liam Cairns explored earlier in his video clip, taking this approach risks confusing means and ends.

Evidence of dialogue and evidence of change

Lord Ouseley said in his report after the Bradford disturbances: ‘If the people who are supposed to benefit from change do not know that it’s happening, then it probably isn’t happening’.  How do we know children and young people have benefitted from participative activity? What’s better for them as a result? Is their area safer? Do they get better access to training or job opportunities? There may be representative structures in place like school councils or care councils, but are students and looked after young people getting a better deal as a result?

Stories to tell

http://rightspace.org.uk/tweets

For some years we have been researching, collecting and celebrating stories that give evidence from children and young people of dialogue and change. They are a great encouragement and inspiration. The tweets from this page give you one example a week. You can look at a whole archive at http://hbr.nya.org.uk/whatschanged and add examples by adding #rightspace to any tweets or adding a comment on line at http://rightspace.org.uk/taxonomy/term/7

Visit http://www.rightspace.org.uk/ join discussion on children’s human rights

Book for RightSpace event, 26 October, Sheffield

Bill Badham, Co-Director, Practical Participation

19 June 2010

Late last year I had a great experience participating in the Internet Governance Forum. The IGF is a UN sponsored international ‘forum for multi-stakeholder policy dialogue’ on issues linked to the Internet. That could be anything from issues of how Internet access and infrastructure is being made available across the globe, to filtering and blocking policies, to how people’s rights are being respected or promoted online. Clearly the topics discussed at the IGF have a big impact on young people – and it was great to hear so many people talking positively at IGF about the need to listen to youth. However, as I explored in this earlier post, there were times when the positive words about listening to young people could be seen to fall short of a reality, and times when it wasn’t clear exactly what was meant by including ‘youth’. So, as the IGF operates an open process for planning it’s meetings, I’ve prepared the following submission from Practical Participation which has just been sent in to the IGF organisers.

Youth Participation in the Internet Governance Forum: reflections

IGF09 Sharm El Sheik was Practical Participation’s first experience of IGF. We were involved in supporting young people from Egypt, and fellows of Diplo Foundation to use social media to record and report on aspects of IGF09, and supporting young people involved in creating the ‘Youth Corner’ newsletter.

We welcome the increasing involvement of youth in the Internet Governance Forum’s meetings and activities – and the strong statements made at IGF09 recognizing the role of young people. The following reflections are offered to support the continued involvement of youth in IGF. Our reflections are offered both IGF MAG, and to the wider IGF community.

A clear case for youth participation

The argument for youth involvement in IGF is clear. Youth make up an increasing share of the world population, and form a majority of Internet users in many countries and contexts. Yet youth can end up excluded from national and international decision-making structures that affect the Internet. The right of under 18s to be listened to and taken seriously by decision makers is set out in Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC).

The Internet does not belong to either youth or adults, but is a shared responsibility – requiring youth and adults to bring together their complementary skills, experiences, ideas and insights to safeguard the present and potential value of the Internet.

Recognize the diversity of children, young people and adults impacted by Internet Governance decisions, and to be engaged in IGF.

‘Youth’ are not a homogenous group. Children (0 – 14), Youth (15 – 24), and young adults (25+) have diverse experiences of the Internet, and are affected by Internet governance issues in many ways.

Whilst youth are often labeled ‘digital natives’, the technical skills and digital experiences of youth are as wide-ranging as those of adults. Whilst some youth are making use of the Internet to advance their careers and important causes, other youth lack opportunities to develop the practical and critical skills needed to benefit from the opportunities the Internet can offer.

It is vital that IGF is equipped to listen to the real and varied experiences of a diverse range of children, young people and young adults – and to take into account the specific needs of particular groups when engaged in dialogue on Internet Governance.

It should be recognized that youth contributing to IGF are not ‘representatives of all youth’, but they are experts in their own experiences – able to offer specific insights and ideas that can lead to better Internet Governance.

Increasing involvement

We encourage IGF to continue to accept the participation of self-motivated young participants, but to also continue to reach out to include a wider range of young people – including those who may not have existing experience of Internet Governance, and paying attention to the involvement of all three youth age ranges:

• Children (0 – 14)
• Young People (15 – 24)
  and
• Young adults (25+)

Youth involvement in IGF should not be limited to involvement in those issues seen to particularly affect youth (e.g. child safety), but should enable youth to play a full role across all areas of IGF that impact upon their present and future experiences of the Internet.

We encourage IGF to pay particular attention to ensuring the voices of young women, and young people from minority groups are present at IGF.

Meaningful & inclusive dialogue

We encourage IGF to explore different formats for workshop sessions in order to enable deeper dialogue and to make a number of IGF sessions more accessible to children, young people and young adults.

• For example:
  In a long session, consider including a short break (Approx. 10 minutes) in the middle to allow small-group discussions amongst people sitting near one-another.

  This can give time for those who may be struggling to keep up with all the discussions to ask questions of other participants – and can help to build person-to-person dialogue between participants.

• For example:
  Rather than inviting workshop participants to ask questions of a panel, allow delegates (youth and adults) to share the story of a particular experience of an Internet issue. The panel and floor can then consider the implications of these experiences.
  
  For children and young people who may not have a ‘policy position’, or a organizational agenda on specific Internet Governance issues that affect them, this form of conversation based on grounded experience can help ensure the inclusion of younger voices and insights in key debates.

• For example:
  Increase the links between Remote Participation and Workshop sessions, and allow people in the workshop room to also type their questions into the Remote Participation space, for them to be asked by a chair watching the Remote Participation channel.

  For some children and young people (and adults too) who may not feel as confident in forming and asking their question verbally, this can support their contributions.

We also encourage the continuation of other activities around IGF for youth-adult interaction and dialogue.

• For example:
  The ‘Digital Diving’ activity in the youth corner at IGF09 involved short (20 minute) conversations between one young person, and one adult participant at IGF. In these conversations, each person was invited to talk about their day-to-day experience of the Internet. We found these sessions provided important opportunities for young people and adults to gain better understandings of each others online experience. Activities and opportunities like this could be extended to support young people and adult IGF participants to reflect on the different Internet Governance issues that affect them.

Capacity Building

We welcome the creation of a Dynamic Coalition on Youth to act as a network for many youth participants in IGF. We welcome investment from the IGF community in capacity building for youth to participate in IGF.

We encourage IGF, and other Internet Governance institutions to also reflect on developing their own capacity for engaging with youth. From our experience working with the ‘Hear by Right’ standards for the participation of children and young people in organizations (http://hbr.nya.org.uk/), we know there are many ways in which organizations and institutions can make small adaptations to their practice to become far more inclusive of the voices of children and young people.

Tim Davies

Director, Practical Participation Ltd.

14^th January 2010

tim@practicalparticipation.co.uk

[Summary: Two day course, and six-month action learning set on social media in youth work and youth participation] (Reposted from Tim’s Blog)

Getting started with digital youth work, or with using digital tools in youth participation, can seem daunting to many. It’s not enough to just talk about how digital skills are essential assets needed in the youth-serving workforce, or to point to tools and approaches that professionals should be using. Training opportunities, capacity building, and ongoing action learning to inform that training are all needed. Which is why I’m really pleased that 2010 will see the return of two key opportunities.

1) Social Media and Youth Participation Action Learning Set

Building on the Action Learning Set I co-facilitated last year, this six-month (one meeting a month) action learning supports participants who are working to increase their own organizations engagement with social media. Through expert inputs, workshops and shared action learning projects with peers – the action learning set aims to develop the skills of individuals, and the capacity of organizations, to engage with social media in youth participation.

Last year’s set resulted in a printed and online guide; and supported a wide range of local projects – ranging from those focussing on social media and youth engagement around commissioning, to projects supporting the use of social networks to engage young people in care in decision making.

You can find out more about this year’s action learning set (first session taking place at the end of January) and details of how to book in this flyer: Social Media and Youth Participation Action Learning Set

2) Two-day training for Youth Work Professionals

After a successful pilot, Katie Bacon will be leading a number of two-day trainings in 2010, on ‘Social Media for Youth Work Professionals’. Katie & I have developed the course together, and initially we’ll be running a number of sessions in partnership with LECP Training.

This two-day training is designed to support youth professionals from a wide range of backgrounds to develop their understanding of social media and how to use it as a tool in their work. Including hands-on activities to learn to use different social media tools – it’s a practical training that grounds the use of social media tools in professional values and practices.

You can read about the pilot training day in this reflective blog post from trainer Katie Bacon, and keep an eye on the LECP Training network for details of when the public course dates are announced (join the network to get training alerts).

We’re also exploring how this training might be offered as in-service training in individual local authorities, or offered on a regional basis – so if you might be interested in having Katie and/or I come to train with your service/region, then do get in touch.

Update: Booking form now available for 26th October 2010 Event: Book here.

A new project in partnership between Practical Participation, Investing in Children, Durham and the Centre for Social Action, De Montfort University.

In times of political, social and economic change how do we hold onto the progress that has been made to promote social justice for young people? How do we deepen the practice of listening to and involving young people in dialogue that leads to change? As organisational structures shift and practitioners are working in more challenging environments –  how can we create space for children, young people, practitioners and managers to reflect and learn together?

These are some of the questions we want to explore through a new project in 2010 in partnership with Investing in Children and the Centre for Social Action at De Montfort University – and involving a wider community of practice of people involved in work with children and young people.

The project will have its own online presence at http://www.rightspace.org.uk soon, but to get discussions started, take a look at the two video clips below from Liam Cairns and Bill Badham, and use the comments below to share your reflections on the issues discussed.

We look forward to more dialogue with you in the RightSpace in 2010.

Liam Cairns discussing Children’s Human rights

Bill Badham on key themes for RightSpace

On 20 November 2009, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child celebrated its 20^th birthday. No longer a teenager, it has become since its birth in 1989 the most universally accepted and ratified Convention the world has ever seen.

But what are its achievements and what are the challenges that lie ahead for its full implementation across the UK? This was the subject of the Children’s Rights Alliance for England’s (CRAE) annual children’s rights conference.

At the conference I was’ live tweeting’ with the #crae tag and sought to capture some of the main themes and draw out key issues as identified by delegates. Over the coming months, this dialogue will continue to help clarify the way ahead at a time of policy and probable political change. Add your reflections as we paint a larger picture and build toward a national conference in the early summer in partnership with Investing in Children.

The driving message throughout the conference was that for 20 20 vision, children’s human rights focus is the vital perspective for change.

Sir Al Ainsley Green, outgoing first England Commissioner at 11 Million, is convinced we have reached the tipping point for children and young people’s human rights in England, with the launch of Working Together, Achieving More.

But he was not suggesting complacency! For example Mosquito devices that hurt the ears indiscriminately of the young, against which there are no regulations at all. “If there was similar targeting of elderly people with their scooters or Zimmer frames there would be outrage,” he said.

Sir Al’s threefold challenges are our government’s treatment of asylum seekers and deporting child refugees, our treatment of travellers and, third our juvenile justice system. “These are regimes that are brutal and not fit for purpose,” he concluded.

Other pressing concerns from contributors and delegates included:

• Young people from CRAE’s Get Ready for Geneva project noted that all of their 14 recommendations appear in the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child’s legally binding Concluding Observations to the UK government – but what’s changed beyond the chance to have a say?
• For another young panellist there is outrage at government’s blanket belief that age discrimination does not affect under 18s. “Government is quite frankly wrong. The Equalities Bill should come into force at birth.”
• Tackle the education gaps caused by poverty, disability and being in care – these are the three education rights challenges for Christine Gilbert, HM Chief Inspector for Education at Ofsted.

And for delegates, what were their top three rights issues affecting children and young people?

• Beings not becomings; better informed on children and young people’s rights and learn from change achieved – Ginny Morrow (V.Morrow@ioe.ac.uk);
• Protect the advances of last 10 years, push for socio-economic equality and tackle youth justice wholesale – Lisa Payne (lpayne@ncb.org.uk);

Add your comments on government progress and the key challenges ahead.

What was clear was that, despite the challenges and disappointments of recent years, we may look back and see this 20th anniversary as a high tide of achievement for children and young people’s human rights in the UK, with the tide of policy and positive politics on the retreat.

On the larger canvass, concluding panellists therefore urged for backing for the current Private Members Children’s Rights Bill, seeking wholesale incorporation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child into domestic law. If this seems wishful thinking, Professor Francesca Klug pointed out the years of lobbying before the European Convention on Human Rights became the Human Rights Act in the UK in 1998.

So happy birthday UNCRC! Professor Klug set the challenge for the coming few years which may yet see a retreat, not just against children and young people’s rights but human rights for all citizens. In this context, she urged that children and young people’s rights do not become a separatist movement, but one held and championed within a wider human rights framework which holds the “vision for society based on ethical norms,” rooted in “the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – the mother & father of all human rights instruments.”

Photo Credit: Youth Reporters at IGF09

Since the key role of young people as leaders was written into the WSIS Geneva declaration, there has been some level of involvement of young people in the Internet Governance Forum.

This year has seen more youth involvement than ever – laying some strong foundations for future involvement in this forum, and other internet related fora.

There is clearly appetite for more youth involvement – which is a very good thing.

Soundbites Retweeted. A deeper analysis offered here.

Yet good youth participation requires careful thought – and so to try and offer a bit of deeper perspective than the much re-tweeted soundbyte I shared earlier today, voicing frustration at the lack of nuance in conversation about ‘youth’ in the main session – I offer five (hopefully) constructive considerations on effective youth involvement in events like the Internet Governance Forum.

(1) Avoid determining the outcome of dialogue by the way you set it up

The way you frame a discussion has a big impact on the outcomes. When working with groups (youth or adult) who do not have prior experience of an issue – then the choice of inputs to discussion has a big impact on the outcome.

Instead of a ‘dialogue on e-safety’, perhaps hold a deliberative dialogue on living in a connected world – with inputs both on online safety and on benefits of the web. We need to think carefully about how to equip those who do not work already in Internet Governance areas to participate in discussions of Internet Governance.

(2) Identify the role in which young people are participating

Young people can participate in events in many different ways. As developers of technologies. As experts in their own experience, able to offer additional insights into a debate. As researchers. As campaigners. As policy makers. As learners, and as teachers.

Allowing younger participants to participate as ‘young developers’, ‘young internet users’, or ‘young researchers’ (etc.), rather than as simply ‘youth’, helps us to recognise the diversity of young people, and the complex contributions of young people to the Internet.

It also helps us recognise that young people are equal actors with older adults in many contexts.

(3) Recognise the systematic exclusion of young people & work to overcome barriers to participation

One reason to promote participation for ‘youth as an age group‘ (rather than any other conceptualisation of youth) is a recognition of the systematic exclusion and disenfranchisement of young people in many contexts.

However, systematic exclusion is not reversed by simply giving young people a platform (though this is a start) if the power asymmetries and knowledge asymmetries between young people and adults are not considered and addressed.

These asymmetries can be addressed both by capacity building (but that capacity building has to take into account (1) and make sure it is framed in broad terms), and by careful design of engagement processes and activities*.

(*In particular, a serious engagement with youth participation involves choosing new modes of conversation asides from the classic speaker-panel set-up)

(4) Recognise that no one individual or group can ‘represent’ a generation.

A simple point. But too often the views of one individual are talked of as ‘the voice of youth’.

Representation has three substantive main forms: statistical representation (where an individual presents an average / most common view based on clear evidence); representing a group (where an individual has a mandate from a population/organisation they are representing); representing an exemplar view (where a view ‘represents’ one example of simplified possible view).

Knowing when someone is representative (and in what way), and when they are representing their own views only, is important.

(5) Build on foundations of the years before

Some great foundations for youth engagement have been laid, both at WSIS and previous Internet Governance Forum gatherings.

Wheras older participants, in formal job roles related to Internet Governance, may have a history of being at each relevant summit and meeting leading up to an IGF – young people often only get to experience one or two events and lack the opportunity to build strong personal networks and social capital resources for influencing discussions.

Making sure that each year can build on what has gone before, and can help younger groups to gain cumulative understandings of the issues and opportunities of events like the IGF is key to the continued productive involvement of diverse individuals and groups of young people.

I offer these considerations written on the spot and as a newcomer to IGF – and I very much welcome reflections, dialogue, critique and other thoughts on participation in large and open events such as the IGF.