Professionalization of Youth Work; A solution to Youth programming in Uganda

There are several social, economic, and political issues that Uganda is currently struggling with.  Uganda’s energetic and optimistic youth are invaluable resources for tackling these various issues. Uganda being one of the countries in the world and more so in sub-Saharan Africa with the youngest population, currently with a labour force that is estimated to be 9.8 million for persons aged 14-64 years, of which 53% are female and about 75% of the labour force is below 40 years.

A lot of efforts have been done in addressingyouth issues that involved anumber of key stakeholders that stem from Government, CSO, private sectorand Development partners etc. However youth hood is a transition from child hood to adult hood and is a stage of potential destruction and development.

Uganda’s youth sector has been developing with great potential and constraints. There is internal brain drain and transfer of human resources across other sectors partly due to limited recognition. Thus, the need to professionalize and institutionalize youth development in Uganda.

On-going Efforts. In response to the need to support the growth and development of practitioners in Youth work occupation, in addition to customized workshops/trainings for the senior government officials, youth workers and youth leader, the Commonwealth Youth Programme has been providing a special training programme for youth work practitioners through a Commonwealth Youth Diploma in partnership with Makerere University. The diploma in Youth Development was initiated in 1974 by the Commonwealth Youth Program which was an important step in professionalizing youth work. As of today Makerere University has step-up to a Bachelors degree in Youth Development work which was launched last year

In addition, there are key global efforts in development of youth Work Ethics and Standards by the commonwealth Youth Program and putting together networks of Youth Workers associations, developing competency standards and parallel qualifications for youth works. However Uganda has lagged behind in these efforts and process that are shaping today’s global agenda and focus on how to approach youth development.

Professionalization of youth development being a strategic objective for the commonwealth Secretariat and in recognition of the GNOP key focus areas of working towards coordinating stakeholders including youth experts, academicians, CSOs, Government in the youth sector towards the process of establishing /developing Occupational/Competency Standards for Youth Development Work for Uganda and in the East African Community.

While we focus and advocate for Professionalizing Youth work in Uganda, must consider towards achieving:

        i.       A Country where youth work is recognized and valued for its contribution to development and democracy outcomes.

      ii.         A Uganda where youth workers are in place, recognized and supported in their work.

    iii.  A nation where youth workers are well trained and equipped, and have access to quality education and training.

    iv.         A sector where youth workers and practitioners work together to influence youth and national development Policy.

However is recognition of youth work, we must define key terms for clarity to those who are involved in youth Programming and practice.

Key Terms: Among the key important terms to define, is “Youth Work” and “Youth Sector”

a)   Youth Work:

Given the diverse range of work, training and expertise in the youth work field, it is difficult to arrive at a simple definition of youth work. However, there are a number of definitions presented by many youth experts, however for purposes of this concept we could consider the three definitions of Youth Work from different agencies;

Definition 1: “The informal social and political education and empowerment of young people within a matrix of care, including enhancing young people’s participation in issues that affect their lives” (CYP).

Definition 2: “Youth work is a practice that places young people and their interests first. Youth work is a relational practice, where the youth worker operates alongside the young person in their context. Youth work is an empowering practice that advocates for and facilitates a young person's independence, participation in society, connectedness and realisation of their rights.” (Australia)

Definition 3: “Youth work is a field of practice that focuses on the holistic development of a young person.” (South Africa).

b)     The youth sector:

This is a part of the national social and human development framework. It comprises of those agencies – organizations, programs and workers, government and non-government, paid and unpaid – who work with, or to the benefit of, young people as a significant part of their work. It includes volunteer and paid work in face to face youth work, management of service delivery, advocacy, research, training, evaluation and policy formation.

Those working in the youth sector possess a variety of skills, experiences and qualifications and the sector includes, but is not confined to, professionals who have formally trained in youth work. Most importantly, a significant proportion of the sector’s work involves working with or to the benefit of young people (CW-CEP).

Professional Youth Workers Associations. Professional associations provide a resource, a backup and a foundation for professionals who may share common interests and values. They are typically created to provide an organized structure for a group of individuals, usually from a specific range of employment background. Volunteers can sometimes also be members of a professional association. Professional networks also play a crucial role in defining and regulating the nature of practice, validating, qualification and certification, acting as a gateway to the profession. At the foundation of a successful professionalizing process lies the collective strength of youth work practitioners participating in defining the parameters of their profession.

In conclusion as a Country, we end up missing the benefits of professionalizing youth work to look to address enable of challenges faced in the sector and practice which include but not limited to:

• Youth work is not recognised as a profession/field of study.
• Dispersed, common work and competencies, but no common identity – lack of association building. 
• Inadequate qualifications pathways.
• Inadequate supervision of professional practice.
• Inadequate, sometimes decreasing, investments in youth services and youth service management.

It is also important to note that this strategy requires a multi-sector approach and involvement. Initial efforts have been made by Global Network of Peace Builders (GNOP) to start up the conversation and dialogue with, Stakeholders,  policy makers and the line Ministry to consider fast-trucking of the process of recognizing Youth work as Key sector in National Development Work and structure. 

'Now is the time for reform' declares Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group

“The Commonwealth is in danger of becoming irrelevant and unconvincing as a values-based association,” declared the Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group in a closing statement issued at their meeting in London on 21-22 March 2011. “To safeguard against this danger we will recommend to leaders the adoption of proposals that will strengthen the Commonwealth, both as an association of governments and of peoples,” the group said. “We want the Commonwealth to be a champion of democratic values and fundamental human rights. We also want the Commonwealth to work towards narrowing the development gap between member countries, through bilateral, regional and multilateral co-operation. The whole range of Commonwealth organisations must work more effectively together,” said the group’s chairperson, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, former Prime Minister of Malaysia. “To actively cultivate the Commonwealth’s diverse cultural heritage and strengthen a common Commonwealth identity among its people, we would like to see increased interaction among Commonwealth scholars, professionals, artists, writers, media practitioners and sportsmen and women,” he continued. “Against this background, we are making recommendations for practical reforms to sharpen the Commonwealth’s impact and to tackle the most pressing global issues of our time. "The next few months will be crucial and we invite further feedback from interested parties on the direction of our report before we finalise it." At the Commonwealth summit in Perth, Australia, in October 2011, the group will call on the Commonwealth’s 54 leaders to adopt a package of reforms, including the need for adequate resources that will include the following: Championing values• A ‘Charter of the Commonwealth’ to be developed by and for Commonwealth citizens.• Expanding the range of measures available to the Secretary-General and to the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) to better respond where Commonwealth values are violated. • Creating a Commonwealth Commissioner on Democracy and the Rule of Law to advise the Secretary-General and CMAG on serious or persistent violations of the Commonwealth’s core values.• Specific initiatives on HIV/AIDS around the Commonwealth.• Establishing academies for democracy and election training.• Broadening the remit to strengthen a culture of democracy, including post-election transition of governments and civic education. Advocating for small and developing countries • Placing development concerns at the heart of the Commonwealth’s work by campaigning on priority global issues, leveraging its strength as a convening and influencing body. This should build on the Commonwealth’s many achievements including its landmark anti-apartheid role, debt reduction work, and more recently, advancement of Commonwealth perspectives in the international climate change debate.• Maximising the Commonwealth’s political influence through the use of high-level advocacy missions to advance Commonwealth perspectives in organisations such as the G20, IMF, WTO and World Bank.• Providing extra financial support to improve training for small states in meeting the demands of international regulatory requirements. • Refocusing the Commonwealth’s work with young people to strengthen policies to provide opportunities to all young people based on merit and stimulating investment in youth enterprise. Institution fit for purpose• A significant focusing of the Commonwealth Secretariat’s work plan.• Investment in the Secretariat to attract the best international talent. • Maximising time for dialogue on the priority issues of the day at the Commonwealth summit and ministerial meetings.• Giving the Commonwealth Foundation an explicit mandate to mobilise Commonwealth civil society around global issues.• Expanding opportunities for citizens, such as scholarships and professional exchanges, and expanding the ‘footprint’ of the Commonwealth by creating incentives for Commonwealth organisations to re-locate out of the UK. When the Eminent Persons Group has taken into account the responses on the broad directions that it is contemplating, it will complete its report and deliver it to the Commonwealth Heads of Government, who commissioned it. In its report, the group will recommend to Heads of Government that they release the report in order to facilitate comment and debate throughout the Commonwealth. During the meeting, the group met with the UK Foreign Secretary, William Hague, and Minister of State at the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Lord David Howell. NOTES The Eminent Persons Group was established by Commonwealth Heads of Government at their summit in November 2009. The Eminent Persons Group has been tasked with developing options for reform to sharpen the impact, strengthen the networks and raise the profile of the Commonwealth. The group met at Marlborough House in London, UK, from 19 to 20 July 2010 and from 25 to 26 October 2010. They also met from 26 to 27 January 2011 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and from 21 to 22 March 2011 in Marlborough House. The group has had four meetings and will report to leaders at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, to take place in Perth, Australia, in October 2011.

The group comprises:

• Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (Malaysia, chairperson)


• Dr Emmanuel Akwetey (Ghana)


• Ms Patricia Francis (Jamaica)


• Dr Asma Jahangir (Pakistan)


• Mr Samuel Kavuma (Uganda, Commonwealth Youth Caucus)


• Hon Michael Kirby (Australia)• Dr Graca Machel (Mozambique)


• Rt Hon Sir Malcolm Rifkind (UK)• Sir Ronald Sanders (Guyana)


• Senator Hugh Segal (Canada)• Sir Ieremia Tabai (Kiribati)

‘Silence is not an option’ declares Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group

“We want the Commonwealth to continue to be a powerful voice with moral authority, speaking out on major issues, but it needs the tools to do it,” said the Group’s Chairperson

The Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group (EPG), today, indicated in an interim statement that it will be calling for the Commonwealth to speak publicly as required and to act with greater authority on serious or persistent violations of Commonwealth values, including democracy, the rule of law and human rights.

They will also be calling on leaders to endorse measures to strengthen the role and functions of the Secretary-General and the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG). They pointed out that there is no contradiction between appropriate public pronouncements and quiet ‘behind-the-scenes’ diplomacy.

“We want the Commonwealth to continue to be a powerful voice with moral authority, speaking out on major issues, but it needs the tools to do it,” said the Group’s Chairperson, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi of Malaysia.

“The Eminent Persons Group is committed to sharpening the impact, strengthening the networks and raising the profile of the Commonwealth association,” he continued.

“Our goal is to reinvigorate the Commonwealth so that we can improve the lives of Commonwealth people.

“The Group has consulted widely across the globe and has received over 230 responses to our public consultations which have inspired and informed our discussions.

“We are committed to doing our work in the most transparent way possible. We want as many as possible of the submissions received by the Group to be shared publicly. We will continue to conduct further public consultation, with civil society and others, before we finalise our report.”

The Group received presentations by Commonwealth agencies and institutions, including the Commonwealth Business Council, the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, the Commonwealth Local Government Forum, the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, and the Commonwealth Youth Exchange Council.

The key issues discussed by the Group at its 25 - 26 October meeting included:

- A Commonwealth Charter to strengthen commitment to Commonwealth values and to set the organisation’s future direction

- Giving greater authority to the Secretary-General to pronounce on serious or persistent violations of Commonwealth values

- Strengthening the role of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) as the guardian of the Commonwealth’s fundamental values

- Strengthening support to the Secretary-General on democracy, the rule of law and human rights

- Increasing the transparency of Commonwealth institutions and their commitment to shared Commonwealth objectives

- The need to address HIV/AIDS as a health, human rights and economic development priority

- Empowering small states to strengthen their economic capacity and resilience

- Supporting and encouraging initiatives to unlock the potential of the young people of the Commonwealth

- Supporting initiatives to strengthen the credibility of national elections

- Reinforcing the capacity of the Secretariat to meet its mandates.

The Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group held its second meeting in London, on 25-26 October.

The Group has had two meetings and is scheduled to have two more in 2011. The EPG’s next meeting will be from 24 to 26 January.

The Group issued a letter of condolence on the death of Prime Minister Hon David Thompson of Barbados.

They also expressed their sadness on hearing of the death of Peter Lyon OBE, former Director of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies, who had taught and inspired many generations of students about the Commonwealth.

What is the EPG?

The Eminent Persons Group was established by Commonwealth Heads of Government at their summit in November 2009.

In the 'Affirmation of Commonwealth Principles' agreed at their 2009 meeting in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, Commonwealth leaders called for the “creation of an Eminent Persons Group to undertake an examination of options for reform in order to bring the Commonwealth’s many institutions into a stronger and more effective framework of co-operation and partnership.”

The Group is also tasked with looking at the format, frequency, and content of Commonwealth ministerial meetings.

The Group met at Marlborough House, London, from 19 to 20 July 2010 and from 24th to 26th October 2010. It is scheduled to meet again in January 2010 and March 2011 before reporting to leaders at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), to take place in Perth in October 2011.

The Group’s goals are to sharpen the impact, strengthen the networks, and raise the profile of the Commonwealth.

Importance of Youth Participation in Decision Making

Uganda's Best Practice as Case Study;Youth Participation in Leadership in Uganda

1.0 INTRODUCTION:

Participation can be defined as the effective involvement in the formulation and implementation of Public Policy at all levels of society, local, National and International. Every individual regardless of age, race, religious affiliation or ideological inclination has a fundamental right to participate in making and implementing of such decisions either directly or through genuinely elected representatives.

Participation in its broadest sense refers to the involvement of individuals and /or groups in policy making; their involvement in decisions, bureaucracies and legislation responsive to their needs and aspirations with a view to improving the quality of policy and making policies responsive to the concerns of the people. Participation should not be taken to simply been taking part or being present (tokenism).

Participation and representation of youth must be considered a basic necessity if sustainable development is to be achieved. This paper examines the framework, policies and legal provisions for young people’s participation in leadership in Uganda. It also points out lessons learnt from young people’s participation in leadership and delivery of services.

2.0 DEFINITION OF YOUTH:

Across nations there is no unusually agreed upon age definition of a youth. For purposes of relating to law, planning purposes, public policy and social perception the category in the population referred to as youth has been defined variously for example, the Common wealth Youth Programme defines a youth as a person who is between the age of 14 and 29 years, other international agencies like the United Nations (UN) including WHO define the youth as persons between 15 and 24 years. Most political parties in Africa have 15 to 35 years as a youth age group. For purposes of this paper however, I will use the definition as provided for by the National Youth Council Statute (1993), which defines a youth as female and male persons between the age of 18 and 30. This is however, not to ignore the definition of the youth as per the National Youth Policy, which defines a youth as all young persons, female and male aged 12-30 years. It is also important to point out that the legal definition of youth also varies according to purpose such as marriage, military service, voting rights and criminal responsibility. What is very basic is that, whichever way one defines youth, the pivotal issue is that this is a group of people who have different characteristics from adults. These are people at a period of time where their potential, vigour, adventurism, experimentation with increased risks and vulnerabilities show themselves in a socially meaningful pattern.

It is un-disputable that young people are the majority. It is estimated for example that in sub-Sahara Africa, the young women and men (14-29 years) are over 50% of the total population and this is not any different from Uganda’s case. Apart from the numerical imperative, young women and men are energetic and vibrant. They are courageous and brave. It is because of these characteristics that our societies must consider youth as a key resource for both their own development and for the entire nation. It is important for everyone to know that young people are their best representatives for they know their problems better and are therefore better suited to articulate them. The young people must not at any one time be at the periphery of political decision-making. In this chapter, the words “Youth” and “Young People” are used interchangeably.

3.0 YOUTH DEMOGRAPHICS:

Available global statistics do indicate that young people under 25 years of age constitute 50% of the World’s population. There are 1.3 billion persons in the age group of 15-24 - this means (if one took this age group to mean youth) that youth make up 17% of the world’s population. Of these 84% live in developing countries, more than one-third of whom live in the Commonwealth; in some countries the figure exceeds 50% (The Commonwealth Plan of Action for Youth 1995). In Uganda’s case, nearly 80% of the population are young people below the age of 30 years. Out of Uganda’s estimated 24.8 millions, 47.3% are young people aged below 15 years. While young people aged between 10-24 constitute 35.5%.

There is therefore a demographic statistical imperative (numerical strength) to cushion and sustain the argument for young people’s participation in leadership.


4.0 GENERAL REPRESENTATIONS OF YOUNG PEOPLE:

Young people are painted variously by various academicians and politicians; depending on the purpose. One of the features of academic and non-academic representations of youth is the widespread construction of youth in general and specific groups of young people in particular, as “problems” (MacDonald et al 1983). This problem status may involve being seen as the source of a particular policy focus of adult concern such as football hooligans, or as being at risk of getting into difficulty such as teenage pregnancy, contracting AIDS, etc. Young people are frequently presented as, either actively “deviant” or passively “at risk”, and sometimes as both simultaneously “(Griffin, 1993)”.

Because young people too often appear in policies as a problem, as a cause of concern, the responses of a range of key institutions, schools, schools, police, employment schemes have been to regard young people as a danger to be confined and appeased (Solomons 1997).

Other academicians have “painted” young people as apprentice or incomplete citizens. They are afforded the rights of protection and provision but are put in the same company as lunatics and criminals in being denied political rights. Rather than being an entitlement, the right to participate is mostly regarded as a privilege available only to a fortunate few”. (Huge Mathews 2001).

5.0 HOW HAVE THE YOUTH PARTICIPATED?

5.1 YOUTH PARTICIPATION SINCE 1986 UNDER THE MOVEMENT GOVERNANCE:


The Government of Uganda since 1986 has been consistent inter-alias on two things; the youth and women. Whatever policy document one lands on, the issue of empowering these two groups is stressed. For example the current poverty eradication plan (PEAP) emphasizes the role of women and youth and so does the Plan for Modernization of Agriculture (PMA). This is in recognition of the fact that these two groups are fundamental in transforming the economy and ensuring self-sustenance.



5.2 YOUTH PARTICIPATION IN LOCAL COUNCILS (L.CS):

Since the formation of local councils to the enactment of the Local Government Act (1997), the youth were represented at all levels, (L.C.1- L.CV) by a Secretary for Youth. In addition, the position of Secretary for Security has been in many instances assigned to young people possibly believes because of their strength.

The Local Government Act (1997) ushered in yet a new era:

-Under the Local Government Act (1997), Article 11 provides for youth representation in the District Local Councils.

-“District Councils shall consist of …. Two councilors one of whom shall be a female youth representing the youth in the district”.

-Consistent with the above Article, Article 24 (1) c provides thus:
“A sub-county council shall consist of two Youth Councilors representing the youth in the Sub-country, one of whom shall be a female”

What then is the role of Youth Councilors?

(a)The Youth Councilors at sub-county and district levels are the representatives of the youth in the local councils at the respective levels.

b)The Youth Councilors should maintain close contact with the youth councils and get their views, opinions and present them to local council for consideration.

(c)Lobby for financial, moral and material support for youth programmes such as reproductive health programmes, IGAs, employment schemes, etc.

(d)Reports to the council any pertinent decisions of the local council

(e)Acts as a bridge between the local councils and the youth councils and strives to ensure that there is harmony between the two structures.

5.3 IMPORTANCE OF PARTICIPATION

According to Diana McNeish the main arguments for viewing participation as a positive outcome in its own right can be summarized as follows:

•It contributes to self esteem, which in turn affects physical and mental well-being

•It contributes to people feeling more in control of their lives and their welfare

•It leads people to being more likely to access the information and skills they need to lead successful lives

• It leads people to being more assertive with services and increasing the likelihood of services being responsive to their needs.

Alongside the notion of participation being a positive outcome is the theory that it can be a beneficial process for achieving other outcomes. The basic premise is that participation generates greater ownership of an issue and that people are more likely to accept plans and messages, which they have played a part in formulating. The danger of regarding participation primarily as a means to an end is that, whilst the process might be participatory, the outcomes remain defined by the ‘experts’.

5.4 CONCLUSION:

Uganda has made very important strides in the area of youth participation and does indeed stand up to be counted as a model in the entire Commonwealth. The country is now at a stage of strengthening youth structures like the National Youth Council to make them able to deliver, more effectively and efficiently.

The mission for the National Youth Policy 2001, “Youth Empowerment” enjoins everybody to make a contribution towards the cause of the youth. At all times, it is important to know that investment in youth is not only a social obligation but also rewarding in economic sense – the youth are the country’s most valuable asset and are an integral component of the development process – they provide for and safeguard the future of the Nation. The youth’s participation is therefore a clear safety net for the future. The existing social order that largely consider youth as “deviants”, or a problem must be transformed.

We need to appreciate that our young people are inheritors and torchbearers of our fundamental values of respect for diversity, economic and social development and good governance. We therefore need to effectively harness the enthusiasm of the youth for the benefit of our country and to carry forward and redefine the values that we so much cherish.

The Role of Youth In Peace Building

Peace Building: The term "Peacebuilding" came into widespread use after 1992 when Boutros Boutros-Ghali, then United Nations Secretary-General, announced his Agenda for Peace (Boutros-Ghali, 1992). Since then, "peace building" has become a broadly used but often ill-defined term connoting activities that go beyond crisis intervention such as longer-term development, and building of governance structures and institutions. It includes building the capacity of non-governmental organizations (including religious institutions) for peacemaking and peacebuilding. The emphasis of the United Nations has been on structural transformation, with a primary focus on institutional reform.

Peacebuilding involves a full range of approaches, processes, and stages needed for transformation toward more sustainable, peaceful relationships and governance modes and structures. Peacebuilding includes building legal and human rights institutions as well as fair and effective governance and dispute resolution processes and systems. To be effective, peacebuilding activities requires careful and participatory planning, coordination among various efforts, and sustained commitments by both local and donor partners. To summarize a construction metaphor used by Lederach, peacebuilding involves a long-term commitment to a process that includes investment, gathering of resources and materials, architecture and planning, coordination of resources and labour, laying solid foundations, construction of walls and roofs, finish work and ongoing maintenance. Lederach also emphasizes that peacebuilding centrally involves the transformation of relationships. "Sustainable reconciliation" requires both structural and relational transformations (Lederach, 1997, 20, 82-83).

Let us explore the role of youth as peace-builders through illustrating their unique power and untapped potential. Young people are typically considered a problem to peace and thus are left out or manipulated by decision-making process especially in societies that have difficulties handling change in constructive ways.

Youth as peace-builders: Similar to that of youth being violent, there is extensive evidence of youth not only being peaceful but of being agents of positive social change. However, this phenomenon has not been analysed by academic research. How many young people are violent and how many young people are peace builders? Social research using quantitative and qualitative methods can help to answer this question. My experience as a youth leader, worker and activist in several context suggest that there are many youth who are peace-builders. They are pro active agents in their communities, in their schools, work places, sports teams, youth groups and universities. Their stories are yet to be told.

McEvoy writes: In any conflict context one examines, the dominant presence of the young people in youth work, in community development, and in inter-ethnic and dialogue and peace group is clear. Many have direct experience of violence, conflict and imprisonment themselves. They are not well paid, their projects are under-funded, often stressful and can be life threatening. Like other civil society actors they are less visible in analysis of peace processes than key elites.

One of McEvoy’s final proposition is that “youth are the primary actors in grassroots community development/relations work; they are at the frontlines of peace building.” Along this line, Ardizzone studied the activities and motivation of youth Organisations in New York City. She highlights Global Kids, an organisation which conducts student-run conferences on children’s rights; Youth Force which teaches teens on how to respond when stopped by the police; and Youth Peace/Roots which tries to counter the active role military recruiters take with inter-city youth by educating about alternatives to militarism. She emphasizes that young people whom she interviewed show a commitment to changing the situation of their peers and the image adults have of youth: “The youth in this study have witnessed injustice and rather than becoming hopeless and apathetic, or perpetrators of direct violence, have chosen to work for social change.” Further studies should be taken to document similar and so visible initiatives in other geographical and cultural contexts, linked to studies of civil society strengthening.

Another aspect to highlight from the conclusion of Ardezzone is that there seem to be parallel with the emancipating functions that war some times has on women. Women are compelled to take on roles left vacant by men-typically soldiers-during times of war. In this case, youth take up the role of a generation of adults who are either hopeless, too comfortable to change or incapable of implementation transformation. The experience of agencies working with youth support this idea. The Oxfam International Youth Parliament Report “Highly affected, rarely considered”, cited earlier, states:

The experience of the International; Youth Parliament (IYP) is that an increasing number of young people are rejecting violence and becoming involved in peace-building efforts at the grass roots, national and international level. How are young people changing their societies? What is their specific power? How can their unique potential be harnessed? Extensive research is needed on innovative and spreading youth initiatives.

Finally there is need to tap the potential of youth by public policies of governments and international institutions. Involve then in all peace processes of their countries sine young people stand to be major stakeholders in the affairs of their nation.