Recommendations on knowledge-based and conscious choice of level and method

It is important to decide on the method and level of participation in order to create meaningful participatory processes. Most methods and levels overlap, and many processes cover not one but multiple levels of participation. Knowledge about inclusion and non-discrimination is essential at every level.

Gather the perspectives of children and youth through a range of methods: During a prolonged crisis, it is important to take into account the perspectives of children and youth by combining broad consultative meetings with quantitative surveys and meetings with specific subgroups.

Provide information through channels that children and youth understand and follow: Be prepared to communicate clearly with all children and youth. Children and youth are experts on the communications channels they prefer. This is why they should be consulted.

Ensure that information is provided in an inclusive and accessible way: Since children and youth are a heterogenous group, it is important to analyse how to convey crucial information to all children and youth during a crisis. For example, adaptations may be necessary for children with disabilities, children who speak different languages, younger children, and older youth.

Limit the spread of misinformation: Engage in dialogue with children and youth to understand the kind of misinformation they are receiving and ensure that you take measures to make sure to counteract the spread of misinformation.

Use established structures for children and youth involvement also during times of crises: Uphold existing participation structures even when decisions need to be made rapidly and the location and format of meetings may change.

Regularly consult with children and youth on questions that concern them: Show persistence and continue to invite children and youth to meetings, even when their level of participation does not initially meet their expectations.

Give children and youth the opportunity to have a say in defining a crisis: This is particularly important for children and youth in vulnerable life situations. There is a risk that a crisis will be defined as being ‘over’, when this is the case for most people, even though the crisis still might be affecting vulnerable groups. 

“Youth should be involved in defining what is a crisis for them. If the youth say that this is pressing in our society, that should be considered and be something to be worried about. Power privilege determines who gets to name what it is that is defined as a crisis.” (Petter Lona, School Student Union of Norway)

“It is important how and by whom the crisis is defined. Is it defined only by decision makers? Is it only important to majority people?” (Oscar Sjökvist, National Association for Youth with Reduced Mobility)

Use competences that were developed before the crisis: It is important that, as far as possible, consultative meetings during a crisis are consciously designed ensuring that the children and youth who participate in the meetings have the required knowledge and preparatory material, as well as the meeting format, to be able to effectively offer their perspectives.

“Decision makers should ask our opinion about the crisis, how we are doing and how decision makers can support us. They should make us feel heard, and not just do it for the cover. Ask us how we are doing and how we are coping.” (Kaisu Laine, The Union of Upper Secondary School Students in Finland)

Use different platforms for participation and find creative ways to include children and youth: It is important to engage children and youth not only through spoken and written language, but through a range of methods. Ensure that meetings are held in schools and other locations where youth spend time.

“Meetings should be in everyday places for the youth, like in school. That is where we feel comfortable, and it makes meetings easier.” (Felix Dennstedt, youth representative from Åland Disability Federation)

Build structures so that children and youth can engage with decision makers on their own initiative: These structures should include a clear and concrete framework on how to include their input in decision making. The structures should be sufficiently robust to work in times of crises.

Compensate for the vulnerability of youth organisations: Children and youth are particularly vulnerable during a crisis, and this includes organisations in which they self-organise. It is important to recognise that there is a risk that youth organisations might disappear during a crisis if they do not receive sufficient support. This is not only because their funding is often linked to the number of activities they engage in and their level of membership, but also because their activities may be more difficult to carry out, resulting in recruitment challenges and keeping their members active and engaged. This seems to be particularly true for the younger age groups.

Also make conscious choices when not consulting with children and youth: If it is decided that children and youth cannot or should not be consulted or involved in any way, it is important to still make a clear choice and to document and evaluate the consequences of such a decision.

Never engage in or initiate manipulated participation: Respect the significant effort that children and youth put into participation in decision-making processes. Do not initiate a process for involving children and youth if there if it is unlikely that they will have real influence over the outcome.

Be candid about the perspectives of children and youth: Many children and youth have expressed the view that having been consulted, they were then referred to by decision makers in ways that they did not feel were truthful. This can have detrimental consequences whereby the trust of children and youth in decision makers and democratic processes is eroded.

“Sometimes politicians make your comments a bit reversed, even when you have been very clear. There is a problem with that, you don’t get the chance to speak for yourself - politicians deliver your words to the public, but they may misinterpret or misrepresent what it was that you said and meant.” (Polina Tashinova, The Union of Upper Secondary School Students in Finland)

There is no single method that works for every process or situation, but the method and level of participation should be determined by the purpose and the context of the participation process. The choice of level of participation and method will influence how much power decision makers share with youth. Regardless of the method and scope, the choice of method should be conscious and active and the nine principles for meaningful participation developed by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child should always be met.  

It is vital that all participants have access to the information they need – this is a prerequisite for being and feeling included in society. Information should be adapted to different target groups, including various age groups, in an inclusive way. This provides a basis for meaningful and real participation in all its various forms. A lack of information makes it hard or even impossible for children and youth to participate in decision-making and consultations. Nevertheless, it is often the case that children and youth often do not receive sufficient information before, during and after participatory processes.

“In many student councils in Norway, the delegates don’t get the information that you need in order to make good contributions.” (Petter Lona, School Student Union of Norway)

“Among decision makers there is a common view of youth as only visionaries who are not in touch with reality. We see that youth has a lot of respect for limitations. But then you need to know what the limitations are.” (Pelle Enocsson, Swedish Federation of Student Unions)

During a crisis, decision makers should ensure that information is provided to all children and youth in an inclusive way. In order for this to happen, it is important to consider children and youth in vulnerable life situations. Groups who are often overlooked include children who, for various reasons, are not in the school system, children and youth who cannot access written information, children with intellectual disabilities, as well as newly arrived children and youth.

“Adults don’t prioritise to provide information to young people in crisis where the speed is high.” (Cecilia Huhtala, Finlandssvenska Skolungdomsförbundet, Finland)

Everyone has a right to receive information about the decisions that affect them. Thus, the responsibility to reach out to all members of society rests heavily on decision makers. There is an ongoing need to develop the ability of adults to interact and communicate with and reach out to children and youth.

“Adults don’t know how to reach out, they don’t know how to speak and communicate with youth.” (representative from a Nordic student union)

Since the style of communication can differ with different groups of young people and will often change with each new generation, there needs to be an ongoing effort to adapt the style of communication and channels for communication.

“Policy makers have so much to learn about how to communicate with youth. If they would understand how they can communicate they have so much to learn, the student union might have an instagram account bigger than the schools.” (Pelle Enocsson, Swedish Federation of Student Unions)

During a crisis, it is also important that decision makers engage in dialogue with young people so that they understand the current myths and misconceptions that are circulating. This can help decision makers and public sector actors to counteract the spread of misinformation.

It is important to acknowledge that providing information is not enough to achieve meaningful child and youth participation. Information in this case is one-way communication from decision makers to children and youth. However important the information may be, it offers little or no opportunity for children and youth to make their voices heard and provide their perspectives.

During a consultation, decision makers ask children and youth for their opinions about a specific issue. This can take place via focus groups, interviews, or surveys. A consultation is usually a one-off participatory activity in which the decision makers have specific questions they would like to see answered. It is additionally important to consult with children and youth who find the questions relevant.

“You need to know what you want. Often this is missing when decision makers contact young people. Just want the youth perspectives on a broad level. Principals often ask us as a national organisation about what to do in a situation. Then we always advise them to talk to their local student councils. But we, as a national organisation, are not invited to national education summits which is strange since we are also experts on education from a youth perspective.” (Kristoffer Elverkilde, The Union of Danish Upper Secondary School Students)

Children and youth who participate in consultations have the right to receive information about the process and get feedback about the overall results and how their opinions have been taken into account. During a crisis, consultations work well if the questions have been properly defined. Even though decisions need to be made quickly, decision makers should ensure that children and youth are involved before any major decisions are made. In the focus groups, many children and youth encouraged the decision makers to be more creative with the format of the consultations.

“Decision makers should think more about in which format youth participation is best performed. A traditional meeting may not be the format in which young people feel the most comfortable. Important knowledge to know what forms and fora in which young people can contribute the most.” (Pelle Enocsson, Swedish Federation of Student Unions, Sweden)

Cooperation between decision makers and youth can happen in various ways but decision makers typically meet with children and youth multiple times over an extended period. Decision makers and children and youth should be able to influence both the process and the outcome. For example, this can be achieved through regular meetings with a youth advisory board or reference group, collaboration with youth civil society, or by organising activities together with children and youth. In the focus groups, children and youth emphasised that they not only want to be able to influence the outcome of a participatory process but also be able to influence the entire philosophy of the process.

In the focus groups, the children and youth discussed that in one-off consultations, it is important to have well-prepared and concrete questions. However, in long-term cooperation, it is also possible for decision makers to build a relationship with children and youth that enables discussions regarding complex issues in which the questions are more open. In a rapidly changing crisis, it can be valuable for decision makers to search for answers together with children and youth.

“In some cases, decision makers cannot expect very concrete answers. Sometimes neither young people nor the decision makers have the knowledge to come up with a concrete answer. (...) Important for decision makers to understand that they also need to have answers and to do this together with young people.” (Pelle Enocsson, Swedish Federation of Student Unions)

Joint decision-making means that decisions are taken by children and youth together with adults. For example, this often happens when children and youth are part of a school board or a steering group. In this specific case, adults share their power with children and youth and the decision-making is on equal terms. However, it is still important to acknowledge the special role of children and youth.

“We are experts but not the standard type of experts. (...) Students often have perspectives that decision makers cannot have. We don’t usually look heavily into research and finances – you cannot expect that. Student organisations can support that but to a limited extent. You have to respect the youth and their opinions but you cannot hold them to the same standards as other experts that you would draw into the room.” (Kristoffer Elverkilde, The Union of Danish Upper Secondary School Students)

In times of crisis, it is important that existing joint decision-making structures are maintained. This requires resources and dedicated staff. The timing of meetings must enable youth and decision makers to participate in the decision-making, including when it is necessary to make rapid decisions.

Child and youth-led participation means that children and youth are given opportunities to influence decision makers on their own initiative. In order for this to happen during a crisis, structures must be in place that are sufficiently robust. This includes well-developed communication channels between child and youth organisations and the municipality, procedures for information sharing, and structures that require accountability on decisions, and structures for accountability. 

“There should be a way to contact decision makers at any time in any subject in all conversations. Not occasional – regular both if there is a crisis or if there is not a crisis.” (Filip Godlewski, Youth Council in Vantaa, Finland)

Youth organisations are an important part of child and youth-led participation. Since they are represented by elected representatives of children and youth, they can speak for a large groups of young people.

During a crisis, it can become even more difficult for children and youth to make their voices heard. One representative from a youth organisation pointed out that access to the media becomes more challenging during times of crises.

“The media is a big part of youth participation. When there is no crisis, adults and young people have more or less equal possibilities to get their voices heard there. During crisis, youth’s voice is being pushed out. The space becomes smaller and the pace is higher so we need to compensate for that.” (Petter Lona, School Student Union of Norway)

However, it is important to acknowledge that not all youth are part of or represented by young civil society. During the conference, one person shared this reflection on a whiteboard:

“Participation is a tricky subject. Non organised youth don’t have a voice – even if they’d want to.” (Post-it from the conference)

In some cases, the choice might be made to not involve, consult or even inform children and youth. This is defined as non-participation and should always be a conscious choice.

It is important to also discuss child and youth participation and document the decisions, even when decision makers choose not to involve children and youth. This can happen for a number of reasons, for example, because children and youth are not affected by the decision or because it is not practically possible to involve children and youth in the decision-making process.

When this happens, it is important to consider how the perspectives of children and youth could be taken into account using methods other than direct involvement.

Manipulated participation is characterised by artificial processes in which children and youth believe there is an opportunity for them to influence the outcome but there is actually no such opportunity.

“The consultation has to be timely. Often adults do a lot of work and then at the last stage they ask what do you think about that is almost finalised – important that youth get to influence during the entire process.” (Kristoffer Elverkilde, The Union of Danish Upper Secondary School Students)

“Often want to talk to us at the last minute. They need to want to listen to us, it cannot just be because it is said in a paper that they need to do it. They need to want to do it, it cannot just because they have to. Then they often don’t have the expertise to do it well.” (Cecilia Huhtala, Finlandssvenska Skolungdomsförbundet, Finland)

This can also happen when decisions makers interpret or even change the opinions expressed by children and youth based on assumptions or prejudices. Manipulated participation is sometimes called tokenism, meaning that children and youth are only involved on a superficial level so that it appears as if they have been consulted, but their opinions are not actually taken into account. One example is when children and youth are included in a reference group but are not able to influence the outcome on the subjects discussed.