1. Background
This chapter sets the stage for the report by outlining its scope, structure, and analytical framework. It introduces the rationale for focusing on organised and semi-organised leisure activities as key arenas for youth resilience during crises and clarifies the target group and intended users of the report.
1.1 Scope and structure of the report
An initial review of the research, grey literature, and practical examples reveals how the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic affected young people’s well-being. Particular attention is given to the links between leisure and well-being that were absent during the full and partial shutdowns. The findings indicate that this topic has received considerable attention in recent studies.
However, most sources on young people and leisure treat children and young adults as a homogeneous group. Moreover, while the general impact of the pandemic is well documented, there is a lack of research that examines organised or semi-organised leisure activities separately from informal leisure or school-based social interactions.
This study seeks to fill these gaps by focusing on teenagers and young adults and organised/semi-organised leisure activities as separated from other areas of young people’s lives, such as education or family life, as well as from free time in general.
Throughout the report, ‘young people’ refers to individuals aged approximately 13–24. Particular attention is given to older adolescents and young adults, a group often overlooked in research and policy, despite their strong reliance on peer interaction and leisure outside the family.
This report explores supervised, organised, and semi-organised leisure activities as strategic arenas for fostering resilience and supporting young people during a crisis. These activities are examined not only as sources of recreation, but as vital platforms for social connection, emotional support, and personal development.
The primary target groups for this report are decision-makers, public authorities, civil servants, youth organisations, youth workers, and stakeholder organisations involved in youth policy and leisure provision. The ultimate beneficiaries are young people across the Nordic region – and beyond – whose access to meaningful, inclusive, and resilient leisure activities this report seeks to strengthen. The report is divided into four main chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the context and legal framework of children’s right to be heard, focusing on Article 12 of the UNCRC. Chapter 2 explores the impact of pandemic-related policies and restrictions on young people’s access to leisure activities and their well-being, paying particular attention to vulnerable groups. Chapter 3 presents examples of adaptations in the youth and leisure sector across the Nordic region, including digitalisation. Chapter 4 concludes by identifying key resilience factors provided through leisure and by offering recommendations to strengthen the sector’s preparedness for future crises.
1.2 Aims
This study aims to:
- Summarise available data and research about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, with a specific focus on young people’s access to and participation in leisure and social activities.
- Explore the potential value of leisure as a resilience builder and the role of the leisure sector in promoting the well-being of youth in a crisis.
- Shed light on and share insights about strategies, methods, and good practice applied during the COVID-19 pandemic.
- Provide advice and inspirational, concrete examples, in order to contribute to an approach towards resilience, hence ensuring youth’s continued access to leisure and social activities in the face of future crises.
1.3 Research questions
Young people’s diminished access to leisure time activities and its implications
- In what ways did the access to leisure time activities diminish for young people during the pandemic? What were the implications for young people’s well-being during and after the pandemic?
- Were certain groups of young people more affected by the diminished access to leisure time activities? For instance, girls more than boys? Was some leisure given priority (by authorities and organisations)? If so, who benefited from this discrimination?
- Did the effects on arenas of leisure time activities and youth engagement linger also after the pandemic?
Adaptations in the leisure and youth sector
- What successful strategies can be identified for i) maintaining access to leisure time activities in times of crisis, and/or for ii) mitigating the negative implications on young people’s health and development?
Insights to inform future policy and preparedness
- What can we learn about the value of leisure time activities regarding the health and well-being of youth in general, as well as by means of providing coping mechanisms in times of crisis?
- Could negative implications be mitigated by including youth in the crisis management? If yes, to what extent and in what ways?
- In what ways can the youth sector contribute to the management of future crises regarding the well-being of youth?
- How can the insights contribute to building an approach of resilience and thus ensure youth’s continued access to leisure and social activities in the face of future crises?
1.4 Why leisure matters: A foundation for resilience and well-being
Leisure contributes greatly to the well-being of youth. Although perceptions of what meaningful leisure time is differ between individuals and groups, research demonstrates that physical activity, social interaction, and a sense of community, in addition to the opportunity to contemplate freely and be distracted from stress, are pivotal factors in achieving optimal general well-being and mental health. (Gotfredsen & Strömbäck, 2023)
Moreover, leisure activities contribute to young people’s identity formation (Hendry et al., 1993) and their personal development. (Larson, 2000; Mahoney et al., 2009). For example, it enables active participation, self-organisation and active citizenship, as set out in the European Charter on Local Youth Work.
To strengthen the well-being and resilience of young people in crisis, it is necessary to identify more precisely the factors that build resilience in leisure activities. With this knowledge comes a possibility to strengthen exactly those factors in the leisure sector, but also to ensure their continuation when designing crisis responses and developing adaptations for leisure.
The COVID pandemic provides a valuable opportunity to examine the relationship between leisure, well-being, and resilience. By examining the impact of various policies and restrictions, as well as adaptations within the sector, we can determine how their well-being and resilience were affected by the crisis. This report will examine the relationship between leisure and resilience using a theoretical model of four basic needs: ‘having’, ‘loving’, ‘being’, and ‘doing’.
The model in Figure 1.1 below was originally developed by Allardt (1995), further elaborated by Helne & Hirvilammi (2015) and Kauppinen & Laine (2022). The authors of this report (Gunvén & Johansson) developed it additionally by identifying the critical resilience factors of leisure within its framework (see Chapter 4, Figure 4.1).
Figure 1.1: The four dimensions of well-being
Building resilience in the face of crises
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the fragility of our societies and emphasised the need to enhance resilience for the future. Several vital societal functions were caught unprepared, requiring the public and social spheres to adjust and adapt to new conditions and testing the very core of our resilience.
This report highlights actions and strategies that would give young people increased access to leisure activities, strengthening their resilience and enabling them to recover and evolve in the face of future crises. Resilience is defined as the ability to withstand and adapt to change. (Myndigheten för samhällsskydd och beredskap, 2013)
In an ever-changing world where societal change, natural disasters, or geopolitical conflicts and wars could trigger the next crisis in the Nordic countries, it is impossible to predict what the next emergency might look like.
Due to the limited time and resources available, we did not have the opportunity to conduct in-depth research into potential crisis scenarios. However, a few interviews were conducted with key stakeholders who have extensive experience of working with young people in emergency situations, including war and invasion (Ukraine), natural disasters (volcanic eruptions), and permanent evacuation (Grindavík, Iceland), as well as the expansion of criminal networks (Sollentuna, Sweden). The informants were particularly helpful in substantiating our findings regarding the link between access to leisure activities and resilience. They also shared their extensive knowledge of the role of leisure activities and spaces, as well as the challenges and opportunities within the leisure sector in a crisis.
The Nordic dimension
The report builds on the Nordic dimension, its fundamental values and aspirations, and the idea that Nordic societies are organised in a similar way. Thanks to the important role played by social welfare systems, a crisis situation in the Nordic countries is often less damaging for citizens. In the leisure sector, government funding plays a key role in supporting activities for young people (Krieger & Nordhagen, 2022). One example of this is the government’s financial support for municipal youth work at a local level. Many leisure activities, such as sports and other hobbies, are offered by voluntary or private organisations operating within civil society. Many of these organisations also depend partly on government funding to support their activities.
Authorities at the national, regional, and local levels, as well as in different sectors across the Nordics, responded differently to the pandemic. The restrictions imposed, the policies implemented, the challenges faced, and the organisation of responses varied – even within the same country.
The similarities in the basic structures of the Nordic region mean that these variations in crisis response and their outcomes can be compared across the region, allowing conclusions to be drawn for future crisis situations.
Our intention in this report is to promote learning by highlighting the commonalities and differences, rather than conducting an in-depth comparative investigation.
To this end, we conducted interviews with young people, youth workers, youth organisations, representatives of youth umbrella organisations, and other experts across the Nordic region. Informants representing Denmark, Finland, Faroe Islands, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Åland greatly contributed to our cause with their narratives, examples of good practice, and suggestions on possible ways forward.
1.5 Methodological approach and tools
Rather than a piece of research, our report is an overview of knowledge and insights. It draws on existing research and grey literature enriched and substantiated by the experience, knowledge, and learning narrated by practitioners, researchers, and youth organisations.
The study used semi-structured interviews. Interview guides were developed to operationalise the main questions and assumptions. A basic template of an interview guide can be found in Appendix I.
Key actors in civil society and community-driven youth work, researchers as well as various experts and authorities/administrations are the key informants and interviewees for this report.
The interviewees were selected to represent all the Nordic countries: Denmark, Finland, Faroe Islands, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Åland, and included various sectors and groups of young people, particularly disadvantaged groups, as well as rural, urban, and semi-rural areas. To ensure a youth perspective, we interviewed representatives of youth-led umbrella-level organisations, and several individual young people were included in the final triangulation (feedback) phase also referred to below. A total of 36 interviews were conducted with the following groups: experts (6); representatives of ministries/public administrations (4); national youth councils (3); hobby and youth organisations (8); youth work umbrella organisations (6); municipal youth workers (5); and four individual young people.
The findings, conclusions, and advice were refined through various feedback activities. More than 40 stakeholders, including policymakers, experts, youth workers, youth organisations, and young people, provided feedback through two designated workshops at a conference arranged by the Nordic Welfare Centre.
Conference participants and interviewees were asked to assess assumptions and findings, and several key informants provided feedback on the final set of insights and advice (see Chapter 4) via an interactive survey. 34 persons (including eight youth) contributed.
A second survey was designed, with the aim to get feedback on findings about the resilience factors. A total of 18 persons (including eight youth) responded. The surveys are attached to this report in Appendix II.
Some of the survey respondents are cited in the report and referred to as ‘respondents’. Finally, four young people were interviewed to triangulate the key findings based on their personal experiences during and after the pandemic.
The interviewees are listed in Appendix III.
1.6 Definitions
Leisure
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child defines leisure time as time for play and recreation, including music, art, crafts, social engagement, organisation, sports, gaming, outdoor recreation and hobbies, and sets out children’s and young people’s right to it. (Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989, Art. 31, para. 1)
The authors’ definition of leisure is informed by the concepts of youth work and youth self-organisation. Within these approaches, intentional activities, whether structured or semi-structured, are placed at the centre of the leisure concept.
Youth organisations
Youth organisations typically focus on promoting and ensuring young people’s democratic and social rights, encouraging their social and political participation, and providing opportunities for personal and social development through leisure activities, volunteering, and non-formal learning. (Brown & Larson, 2009)
Hobbies
Structured sports, cultural activities, or other leisure activities. Unlike youth organisations, we also include other providers of youth hobbies, such as informal hobby groups or hobbies organised for young people by other providers, such as foundations or companies.
Civil society
Refers collectively to voluntary, civic, and social organisations, associations, and institutions. It is seen as distinct from both the state and the commercial institutions of the market.
Relaxed, non-structured leisure
Relaxed leisure characterised by an absence of supervision or structure in hobby groups, youth self-organisation, or community-driven youth work is beyond the scope of this report. This report will only touch upon it to complement the focus on structured and semi-structured leisure.
Youth work
This encompasses a broad range of social, cultural, educational, sports-related, and political activities carried out with, by, and for young people through non-formal and informal learning. Youth work has three essential features: (i) young people choose to participate; (ii) the work takes place where young people are; and (iii) it recognises that young people and youth workers are partners in the learning process.
Youth work plays an important role in the personal and social development of young people, encouraging their participation in society and supporting them through life's transitions. It is intended for all young people, including those who are less engaged with society and/or have fewer opportunities. Through youth work, young people can learn about and experience universal values such as human rights, gender equality, democracy, peace, pluralism, diversity, inclusion, solidarity, tolerance, and justice. (Council of the European Union, 2020)
Community-driven youth work
Refers to youth clubs and centres run or funded by the municipality. These facilities provide supervised, structured, or semi-structured activities free of charge and open to all young people. In addition to on-site programming, they often include detached youth work, which involves outreach to young people in their own environments – such as public spaces or online platforms – to ensure accessibility and inclusion, particularly for those who may not actively seek out traditional youth services.
Youth workers
The term refers to individuals engaged in work or activities with and for young people, either on a voluntary or professional basis. This includes those working in youth organisations, youth services, youth centres, youth/social work training institutions, and other settings that support non-formal education. Their roles may vary, but they share a common commitment to fostering young people’s development, participation, and well-being in everyday contexts.
Well-being and health
The World Health Organization (WHO) defines health in its Constitution as
a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely as the absence of disease or infirmity. This holistic definition underscores that health is not limited to the absence of illness but encompasses a broader sense of overall well-being physically, mentally, and socially. It reflects the importance of supportive environments, meaningful relationships, and opportunities for participation as essential components of a healthy life, particularly for young people.
a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely as the absence of disease or infirmity. This holistic definition underscores that health is not limited to the absence of illness but encompasses a broader sense of overall well-being physically, mentally, and socially. It reflects the importance of supportive environments, meaningful relationships, and opportunities for participation as essential components of a healthy life, particularly for young people.
Youth
We have chosen not to set a strict age limit for the study, as classifications vary across countries and research contexts. Instead, we refer to an approximate age range of 13 to 24 years, focusing on youth in secondary and upper secondary education as well as students and young adults.
Our particular interest in adolescents and young adults stems from the importance that this age group attributes to social interaction and leisure time spent outside of the family. While children are mainly oriented towards their parents and the immediate family, teenagers and young adults are more focused on peer relationships. (Brown & Larson, 2009)
Throughout the study, the attention given to older youth and young adults was consistently highlighted by youth workers and other informants. Several interviewees noted that young adults transitioning from high school to adult life are often overlooked in research and policy and are referred to as a forgotten group.
Resilience
Resilience refers to the capacity of a system, community, or society exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate, adapt to, transform, and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration of its essential basic structures and functions through risk management and preparedness. The term can refer to a system, an organisation, or individuals.
Resilience factors
The aim of this report is to identify the key components of leisure that contribute to the well-being and resilience of young people. These factors – referred to as resilience factors – are analysed and discussed in depth in Chapter 4 and are referred to throughout the report. They include, for example: safe and inclusive leisure spaces, access to supportive adults, opportunities for meaningful participation, personal development, sense of togetherness, and emotional support. Throughout our study, these factors demonstrate the importance of leisure and give valuable guidance to leisure providers and policymakers on designing, developing, and implementing leisure activities in times of crisis and beyond.
Formal and non-formal learning
This study focuses on non-formal learning in the leisure sector, as opposed to formal learning in schools and universities.
Formal learning takes place in organised and structured environments led by an educator or instructor, and follows a predefined syllabus or curriculum. It has clear learning objectives and often leads to recognised qualifications, certificates, or degrees after assessments such as exams and assignments. Examples include schools, universities, vocational training, and corporate training programmes.
Non-formal learning is intentionally organised and takes place outside of traditional educational settings, usually in the leisure sector. It is structured, often with defined goals and learning outcomes, but does not lead to the formal accreditation, qualifications, or degrees associated with traditional education. Examples of non-formal learning include personal development and skills development through leisure activities.