INTRODUCTION

Often the discourse on youth takes a contradictory and sometimes even confusing narrative. On the one hand we have a youth dividend to take advantage off, an opportunity that government and development practitioners must embrace, a source of innovation, novelty and modern solutions, the next frontier of entrepreneurs – essentially an asset to development. On the other hand we also hear that youth lack opportunities, are marginalised, lack capacity, are vulnerable to abuse by adults particularly politicians, are unemployable, are destructive and lack a sense of identity – essentially they are in need of serious help. Is it possible that we are talking about the same important group and do we, as society, understand youth and our interventions in order to genuinely advance their development? More often than not our understanding is found wanting and hence our interventions falling short.

YOUTH BY DEFINITION, HISTORY AND SOCIAL CONSTRUCT

Youth are essentially a homogenous grouping, which for development purposes is now defined using an age bracket. The UN uses 15 – 24 in most situations but here in Africa we were generous enough (others would say inclusive) to use 15 – 35 through the African Youth Charter. While these are positive steps in allowing governments and others to plan, research and develop appropriate measures in this growing opportunity or challenge, this definition does not provide the whole story. Most interventions either fall under youth empowerment or youth participation (article 11 of the African Youth Charter) or are sometimes a mix of the often-interchangeable use of the two to some detriment. It is precisely on these seemingly similar interventions that a purely age bracket definition meets its limitations in fully advancing the role of young people in development.

The trajectory of this discourse can be traced back to 1985 when the UN General Assembly observed 1985 as the first international year of youth and hence first defined youth as being between 15 – 24 years of age. This definition still holds in most UN forums. For years Africa developed strategies at national levels which took cognizance but was not limited to the 1985 UN processes. The 90s and early 2000 show various youth initiatives mushroom at continental level. Both the UN in their efforts for clarity and the AU in line with its constitutive Act saw to it that this key constituency was no longer ignored.

The work particularly of the AU Youth Division and the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA) from 2004 culminated in the 2007 African Youth Charter which came into force soon after. The charter now enjoys huge support from many African countries going by the number and speed of ratifications (only 6 countries are yet to sign or ratify). United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) who in 2006 devoted its African Development Forum to youth, have since followed up with bi-annual Africa Youth Reports. The AU itself in 2008 declared 2008 – 2018 the decade of youth and the 1st of November as the Africa Youth Day. In 2011 the AU devoted its Malabo Summit to Youth Empowerment. This clearly indicates a renewed energy to accommodate youth in the development discourse.

In Africa however the role of youth if we are to keep true to the African youth charter (AYC) definition is also traced back to a majority of efforts against colonial domination where young Africans led both in the intellectual and military interventions in order to free their communities. Examples such as Sekou Toure, Patrice Lumumba, Steve Biko, Graca Machel (Minister of Education in Mozambique at 28) illustrate that Africa has also benefited from a youthful energy. This informs us among many other things that the continent has always looked towards courageous young people to tackle the challenges confronting it. And as such a key component of defining a youthful mind and disposition is one of challenging the status quo and injustices that other segments of society may not be in a position of doing. During this era the Pan African Youth Movement (PYM) was formed and was instrumental for cross-pollination of the lessons of struggle for independence. The Pan African Youth Movement has since converted itself to the Pan African Youth Union. This comes after years of struggling to define itself within the post independence dispensation and defining its membership. It is currently based in Khartoum. This is merely to prove that the youth discourse is not a new one to Africa but the nuances have been changing over time.

Another important point to note is that in reaching the definition two factors are taken into consideration. One as mentioned above is to create a framework in which clear planning and envisioning of how this group can move society in all spheres of development. A good test of this would be to ask oneself, how effective would one be five years ago if one possessed the experiences and opportunities one enjoys today? This is to say that the purpose behind all this “noise” around youth is geared at getting younger people involved early in the development of their communities. The second consideration is the social, cultural and economic realities of this grouping in as far as it is similar. Accordingly to the UNDP Report: Youth and Violent Conflict: Society and Development in Crisis (2006), states that the concept of “youth” is socially constructed, with less to do with age than with status and behaviour. The concept of youth is hence intrinsically linked with the idea of transition from childhood to adulthood – from a phase of life in which the individual needs protection, sheltering and guidance to one of self-determination, maturity, independence, responsibility and accountability for decision-making. Using this consideration the AU justified an age limit of 35. However the reality of it is that the upper limit used by the AU is more a coincidence of growing challenges of positive legal instruments and rhetoric at the AU level and often contradictory practices at country level. At the 2006 AU Youth Forum to engage youth leaders on the draft charter, the definition was 15 – 30. However most of the participants who had been invited through national ministries responsible for youth were between the ages of 30 – 35. So contentious is the age definition of youth that in a discussion that spanned over 4 hours it was finally agreed that 35 would be a good compromise. The rest of the charter took less than three hours to discuss!

Once one has endured the grueling and unending discourse on age, it is understandable to resign to simply what is agreed upon. The concept is looked at as an all-encompassing category, as a coherent group where differences related to gender, class, ethnicity, etc. are secondary to a common identification of youth-hood. The danger in this is that one then fails to fully dissect the identity of those within this group. Going back to the introductory paragraph, in the negative corner (for clarity sake lets say this is the red corner) of the age bracket of 15 -35, we have street kids, rural youth, young people living with HIV/AIDS (or at least the most vulnerable group to this scourge), unemployed and unemployable youth, militia youth, abused youth and the list can go on. This is even before considering gender dynamics in this age range (which requires an entire conference on its own) and the differences in the age gradient (at 35 one could easily be a parent to a 15 year old!). These can be contrasted to the positive attributes. This same age group also boasts of the new lawyers, doctors, entrepreneurs, who for the most part fit into the category of healthy members of our community. We have urban youth, new political leaders etc coming from this group (which we will call the blue corner). If for instance the new Nigerian Superstar entertainers such as D’Banj or P-Square and the Footballers we export to Europe put together a fund for development in Africa, this could be a substantial fund. However if one informs the “blue corner” that they are disadvantaged and marginalized and require empowerment, they will surely refrain from such an engagement. Essentially the “blue corner” does not wish to be identified with attributes of the “red corner”. So why is it that the discourse on youth has taken such a “red corner” tone? The consequences too are what usually distinguish between an approach of empowerment or participation.

EMPOWERMENT VS PARTICIPATION

Empowering the youth means creating and supporting enabling conditions under which young people can act on their own behalf, and on their own terms, rather than at the direction of others. In its variations it often results in the older generation working towards the youth agenda and sometimes supported by the youth.

This approach begins with the supposition that youth are not fully capable or are plainly incapable. It is an approach that rarely attracts the student body; of which most students across the continent fall within the African youth Charter (AYC) age range. The concept implies that when youth are empowered they “acknowledge that they have or can create choices in life, are aware of implications of those choices, make an informed decision freely, take action based on that decision and accept responsibility for the consequences of that action.” Youth empowerment is an attitudinal, structural, and cultural process whereby young people gain the ability, authority, and agency to make decisions and implement change in their own lives and the lives of other people (Vavrus and Fletcher 2006). This process of being empowered encompasses intergenerational partnerships, civic engagement and democratic participation.

Youth participation refers to the process through which youth influence and actively engage in initiatives, decisions and resources that affect them and their communities. It is based on the idea that young people are themselves the best resource in promoting their development and that of their communities. It is a proactive intervention that appeals to “empowered” youth and acknowledges young people as a force capable of changing power relations, economic realities and societal norms and values. Participation must be at all levels from conceptualisation, to implementation, to reviewing and monitoring of development intervention. Youth participation should be viewed as a positive factor and an opportunity rather than a problem. The tenets of democracy make it a moral imperative to have youth, the largest population of citizens in Africa, participating constructively in all processes. It is the active, informed and voluntary involvement of young people in decision-making and the life of their communities (both locally and globally). Participation means working with young people, not merely working for them.

Article 11 of the Youth Charter relates to youth participation and specifically calls upon African Governments to “guarantee the participation of youth in parliament and other decision-making bodies in accordance with the prescribed laws.” It further exhorts Member States to “facilitate the creation or strengthening of platforms for youth participation in decision-making at local, national, regional, and continental levels of governance.” It is also important to note that Governments must also ensure equal access of the youth to participate in decision-making and in fulfilling civic duties. With this in mind it is noble to note that many governments across the continent have engaged in process to address these issues through establishing Youth councils or commissions, having quotas for youth parliamentarians, establishing youth funds for entrepreneurship, various programs for capacity building among disadvantaged youth and so on and so forth.

The challenge continues to be on how to effectively make use of the entire youth body and how to promote genuine and sustainable youth participation. There are resources and assets in the youth body that can be used not only to empower others within the youth movement but also to develop Africa as a whole in what others have coined as Youth Led Development. The trick is to effectively dissect the given definitions further, understand the purpose behind involving youth in development and engage appropriately and effectively. This is a challenge as well to the youth movement to be all encompassing and reach out to the assets and numbers within. For instance youth organizations working on governance issues should engage young lawyers and political scientists and youth working on HIV/AIDS should engage young doctors, psychologist, entertainers to convey their message, etc. Youth themselves must take initiative to alter this discourse by also promoting much more positive, targeted and coordinated sustainable interventions towards the continent’s development.

CONCLUSION

There is still much more to the discourse on youth notwithstanding the issue of definitions which tend to change over time just as society does. Efforts by youth themselves and those by the AU, development partners and civil society to promote youth participation and empowerment must be supported and appreciated as they have been a long time coming. While it is key that youth who are vulnerable and marginalized are protected, brought to the mainstream and essentially empowered, it is at this juncture of the discourse important to locate the assets within the youth body and create an enabling environment for their participation. The continent owes its current circumstances to the courage and visions of young people of the yesteryears and we all have to believe in and support the new generation of young actors. This new generation will chart a way through the new challenges as they balance efforts towards empowerment and participation.

* Patrick Mpedzisi is an independent development consultant based in Harare. He previously coordinated the African Youth Parliament and sits on the board of the Africa Youth Trust and CIVICUS Youth Advisory Board and has over 11 years experience working as a youth and on youth issues. He is no longer a youth!

REFERENCES

1. African Union (2006), African Youth Charter (AU/YF/YOUTH/2). Adopted at the Conference of African Ministers in Charge of Youth, Addis Ababa, 26-28 May 2006.
2. Barasa, Tiberius (2007), Desk & Internet Research: The role of Youth in Anti – Corruption, Africa Youth Trust, Nairobi. www.africayouthtrust.org
3. Economic Commission of Africa (2009), Africa Youth Report: Expanding Opportunities for and with Young People in Africa, Economic Commission of Africa, Addis Ababa
4. Vavrus, J. & Fletcher, A. (2006). Guide to Social Change Led By and With Young People. The Freechild Project.
5. Forbrig, Joerg (2005), Revisiting youth political participation: Challenges for research and democratic practice in Europe. Council of Europe, Strasbourg Cedex, ISBN 92-871-5654-9
6. UNDP, Youth Empowerment, Elections and Management of Diversity. 2012.
7. Economic Commission of Africa, Youth in Africa: A Major Resource for Change, retrieved November 2011, www.eca.org
8. United Nations Development Program (2006), Youth and Violent Conflict: Society and Development in Crisis, UNDP, New York
9. The fifth African Democracy Forum Consensus Statement, UNECA, 2006
10. Youth Participation in Development: Strategies & Best Practices, Daniella Ben-Attar, 2010
11. Youth Councils: An Effective Way to Promote Youth Participation, USAID, 2009
12. Beyond Banjul: It’s time to implement the African Youth Charter, Dabesaki Mac-Ikemenjima, 2009
13. Rage, Rap and Revolution, Bobby Ghosh, Time Magazine (2011), The Generation Changing the World
14. The Status of Youth in Africa, Human Sciences Research Council, 2005
15. www.takingitglobal.org and in particular: http://www.tigweb.org/youth-media/panorama/article.html?ContentID=1395
16. http://www.unescap.org/esid/hds/pubs/2286/s1.pdf
17. http://assoped.blogspot.com/2011/04/cameroon-national-youth-council.html
18. Youth Councils: An effective way to promote youth participation, initial findings from Africa, USAID, 2009
19. Emmanuel Akwetey (2006), Youth and Political Development: Deploying youth capacities, confronting the challenge.