WALKING THE WALK

PRIORITIZING YOUTH POLITICAL

AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN
RENEWING DEMOCRACY

PRODUCED BY WITH SUPPORT AND ENDORSEMENTS FROM

1
 TOP TAKEAWAYS:

1. Young people are losing trust in institutional politics as they face unprecedented economic
inequality and witness policy stagnation on critical long-term issues like climate change. This
growing crisis in global youth political and civic engagement must be prioritized if we are
to successfully reverse decade-long trends of democratic backsliding;

2. This lack of trust in institutional politics, however, should not be mistaken for apathy, or a lack
of political interest. Young activists are taking urgent and real action by engaging in informal
means, using collective action to address concerns of shrinking civic space, digital
disinformation, corruption, and participation in meeting community needs;

3. A failure to recognize this informal action, and address the root causes of youth discontentment,
leads to a vicious cycle: from young people, who feel that institutional politics cannot work, and
from governments who struggle to understand the desires and motivations of the youngest
generations and are unable or unwilling to engage with young people’s informal political
engagement activities. The more governments fail to account for the opinions of
young people, the more this substantiates young people’s sense that their voices
do not matter. Subsequently, young people are less likely to engage with
institutional politics, and the less visible youth voices are to governments.
The vicious cycle continues;

4. Donors and governments committed to democratic progress are leaving substantial

returns on investment unrealized by not addressing this cycle. There is an imperative
to recognize informal methods of youth engagement, and create intentional youth-specific
channels for investment on youth civic and political engagement. Thousands of national and
locally youth-led democracy organizations could expand their impact if donors intentionally
supported their development and work;

5. It is not only possible, but necessary, to convert increased specific prioritization and
investments in youth-led democratic engagement efforts into real outcomes,
simultaneously benefiting millions of youth, and democracy, rights, and governance
technical outcomes.

2
 Executive Summary
Democracy is at risk. Across the world, democracy, as a governing concept and societal
organizing ideology, is at the proverbial tipping point.

In the midst of rightful concern about the future of democracy, the United States Biden
Administration’s Summit for Democracy is a welcome and needed event. The principal themes
of defending against authoritarianism, fighting corruption, and promoting respect for human
rights are critical levers in any effort to revive democracy. These themes are also insufficient.

Writing in the context of this critical moment, we propose that hope and progress can be
found not only among the governing authorities who promise wide-ranging reforms, but
perhaps primarily from young people who stand just outside the spotlight. Across the world,
youth are taking umbrage and rising up in the midst of growing authoritarianism and closing
civic spaces, protesting crackdowns on human rights, and bravely organizing in the face of
increasingly hostile and corrupt political environments. Young people are redefining and
recreating democracy itself.

Globally, young people are often generalized as apathetic and seen as increasingly turning away
from democracy. We believe, contrary to this dominant narrative, that our youngest generations
can be—and in many places are already—the primary drivers of democratic renewal. The
collective hesitancy to recognize this advocacy and organizing is a product not of apathy itself,
but rather of conceptual limitations about what actually counts as political action and civic
engagement. True modes of political and civic participation have radically transformed in recent
years as a result of youth innovation amidst a political landscape where formal civic spaces
are closing and where the world’s challenges—accelerating inequality, climate crisis, and racial
injustice—have become existential in scale.

Young people are not turning away from democracy as an ideal, but rather, oppose the
particular traditional forms of democracy that they are experiencing in their own lives. They are
growing increasingly frustrated with governments who are unresponsive, and who fail to prioritize
issues that young people find critical to their future.

This youth political discontent should provoke real and immediate action. It is critical that any effort
toward democratic renewal focuses on young people. This bedrock principle includes elevating
youth as critical actors in promoting democracy, understanding how they conceive of the idea
of democracy, and seeking out ways they are informally engaging inside and outside of more
traditional, formalized mechanisms. This principle also entails moving beyond paying lip service

3
 to young people, and instead, investing serious resources in youth political engagement efforts
around the world.

This report will articulate the ways that young people are distrustful of formal political institutions,
explore the ramifications of youth formal political disengagement, and argue for the importance
of involving young people in the democratic process. It will also explore emerging forms of youth
democratic engagement based on interviews and case studies with youth activists and civic
engagement practitioners from around the world, showcasing the ways that young people are
participating in the democratic process in creative and often unexpected ways.

Released just prior to a Democracy Summit that will explicitly focus on commitments that
governments can make to promote democracy and lead into a Year of Action, the report will
offer concrete recommendations to governments around the world, international bodies, funders,
and organizations on ways to ensure that young people are front and center in any democratic
renewal efforts. These recommendations include investing significantly financially in youth
political engagement, providing concrete opportunities for young people to engage in the
political process through lowering existing barriers to entry for participation and being part
of government itself, training elected officials to recognize and appreciate youth political
engagement, and officially and urgently elevating young people as a critical leverage point
in efforts to promote democratic reform.

It is the hope that this report is iterative and actionable, catalyzing a conversation, and potential
formal alliance of youth-serving organizations, in the Year of Action that will follow the Democracy
Summit. If we wish for democracy to survive, and thrive, young people must be not afterthoughts,
but at the very center.

The new “Global Alliance for Youth Political Action” consulted significantly on the material in this
report and subsequent recommendations. The Alliance consists of: Accountability Lab, Community
of Democracy, Democracy Moves, International Foundation for Electoral Systems, the International
Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, People Powered, and Restless Development.

4
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION

A. The Problem of Democratic Backsliding

B. A Focus on Young People

GOING BEYOND YOUTH APATHY: UNDERSTANDING YOUNG PEOPLE’S

FRUSTRATION WITH POLITICS

A. Youth Mistrust in Institutional Politics

B. A Generation Inheriting Unprecedented Economic Precarity

C. Inaction on Vital Long-term Issues

D. A Lack of Formal Youth Representation and Voice

E. A Vicious Cycle: Ramifications of Youth Frustration

BRINGING DEMOCRACY BACK IN

A. (Re)Defining Democracy

B. Breaking the Cycle: New Forms of Political Engagement

C. Examples of Current Methods of Youth Engagement

RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Elevate the Importance of Youth in the Global Campaign for Democracy

B. Invest Significantly in Youth Political Engagement

C. Meet Young People Where They Are

D. Ensure Young People Have Real Decision-Making Power

E. Get Creative

F. Continue the Conversation

5
 1
INTRODUCTION

6
 THE PROBLEM OF DEMOCRATIC EROSION

Across the world, democracy is backsliding. Dictatorships are on the rise. Civil liberties are in
rapid decline. Far-right xenophobic and racist political parties are quickly gaining traction and
power across the globe in the midst of intensifying political polarization. The growing sense of
economic and political dissatisfaction felt by the public is metastasizing into deep and enduring
skepticism about whether democracy can actually work. This democratic decay and breakdown
are all occurring amidst unprecedented economic and political inequality—all of which has
been worsened throughout the global COVID-19 pandemic and its unequal response, in which
more affluent countries dominated the early stages of vaccine distribution. In the eyes of many,
democracy, compounded by concurrent policy crises of existential proportions, has failed to deliver
on its promises of effective governance in regions across the globe.

As these crises unfold, many democratic leaders seem more concerned with capturing power
than representing citizen interests, and they seem increasingly likely to undercut civil liberties
to maintain control than to cultivate a truly democratic culture. A vitriolic form of polarization,
in which individuals increasingly demonize people who do not think like them, is enabling the
rise of authoritarian regimes. At the same time, vibrant civic spaces are encroached upon, as
governments work to limit privacy and free speech norms at the heart of a democratic ethos,
while simultaneously promoting elite interests. Given these realities, it is perhaps logical that
individuals are becoming so cynical about democracy’s capacity to deliver.

The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index 2020 report underscores this democratic
erosion: less than nine percent of the world’s population live in a “full democracy,” while more
than a third live under authoritarian rule. In a moment in time in which governments across the
world have used the COVID-19 pandemic to impose restrictions on movement, curtail civil liberties,
and consolidate power, these disconcerting landscapes continue to worsen. The index’s average
global score fell to its lowest ever since the index was first produced in 2006.1

Echoing this index, a report published in March 2021 by the Swedish research organization V
Dem found that the level of democracy enjoyed by the average global citizen is down to the
levels last found around 1990, or around the end of the Cold War. By V Dem’s measurements,
the most common form of government has become an elected autocracy, “a political regime
in which democracy is reduced to the unconstrained power of a majority.” Their study finds that
these electoral autocracies, along with ‘closed autocracies’ (who rule without even the veneer
of popular elections) are home to 68 percent of the world’s population. V Dem indicates that
there are now only 32 liberal democracies in the world, equating to 14 percent of the total global
population share.2

Perhaps as important as these statistics is the reality that many publics themselves are increasingly
distrusting of democracy. A recent report from the University of Cambridge’s Centre for the Future
of Democracy analyzed data across 154 countries, including over four million respondents in
their analysis. The results found that public confidence in democracy is at its lowest point since the
conception of the time-series research in 1995. Throughout the US, Western Europe, Africa, and
Latin America, this deep democratic decay is largely the result of economic shocks, corruption
scandals, and policy crises.

​​1
“Democracy Index 2020,” Economist Intelligence Unit, https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2020/.
​​2
Nazifa Alizada, Rowan Cole, Lisa Gastaldi, Sandra Grahn, Sebastian Hellmeier, Palina Kolvani, Jean Lachapelle, Anna Lührmann,
Seraphine F. Maerz, Shreeya Pillai, and Staffan I. Lindberg. 2021. Autocratization Turns Viral. Democracy Report 2021. University
of Gothenburg: V-Dem Institute.

7
 Yet, despite rising distrust in democratic performance, studies also show that people around the
world still see value in democracy. That is, while some reports show rising discontent with poor
democratic governance, others highlight a widespread desire for the fundamental freedoms
embodied in democracy. This apparent contradiction in attitudes might be best explained by
drawing a sharp and real distinction between the promises of democracy and its imperfect
institutional expression. Democracy in words only constitutes a much different lived reality for
individuals.

The 2021 Democracy Perception Index indicates that of 50,000 respondents polled across 53
countries, 81 percent say that it is important to have democracy in their country, but only 53 percent
of people say that their country is actually democratic. These numbers suggest that democratic
decay and democratic dissatisfaction may be better understood not as a pessimism towards
democracy in principle, but as discontent over their particular countries’ practice.

For decades, citizens have been asked to trust in a governmental process that they have been
told will protect their rights, give them a voice, and strive for greater economic and political
equality. The reality, however, is that we are seeing more and more economic and political
inequality. For many populations, policing has ceased to represent an institution of public safety,
and has instead threatened marginalized communities with brutality, and been used to crush
political opposition. Citizens around the world have seen wealth gaps widen both within their own
countries and also between more and less affluent countries. Closing civic spaces means that
many citizens are fearful to voice their opinions in the public arena. A worsening climate crisis and
the COVID-19 pandemic have only reinforced a sense that citizen’s voices are not being heard and
that economic and social support is profoundly lacking. Why should people defend democracy
when democracy has not improved their lives? This is a complicated question that this report
cannot answer in detail.

We propose that part of the answer in solving for these

democratic challenges may lie with an oft-ignored demographic:

young people.

3
 oa, R.S., Klassen, A., Slade, M., Rand, A. and R. Collins. 2020. “The Global Satisfaction with Democracy Report 2020.” Cambridge,
F
United Kingdom: Centre for the Future of Democracy.

4
“Democracy Perception Index.” Latana. https://latana.com/democracy-perception-index/.

8
 A FOCUS ON YOUNG PEOPLE:
In the midst of this global democratic backsliding is another reality: this frustration with
underperforming democracies has translated into real and intensive action- especially from
young people, who are demanding a better, more just, and more equitable future, and in turn,
seeking to redefine democracy itself. These young people exemplify a desire to participate in
decisions affecting their welfare and an impatience with governments that exclude youth voices.

During 2020, in the wake of George Floyd’s murder, millions of young Americans gathered on the
street, demanding justice, racial equality, and overdue policy reforms. Young activists maintained
protests for years in Hong Kong despite of crack downs from the Chinese government. Young
people in Sudan and Myanmar are pushing back against the military-led coups to restore
democratic government. Likewise, the youngest generations continue the push for democracy
throughout the Middle East.

Young people of diverse identities and backgrounds are demanding democracy.

The legitimacy of these youth-led efforts often go unrecognized despite the obvious intensive
action, young people are too often cast to the side as marginal players and left out of the
concrete decisions surrounding political reforms. At best, they are tokenized, rather than taken
seriously, by more powerful political actors that discount youth contributions. This is especially true
for young women and young people of diverse identities and backgrounds, who face additional
barriers to participate and are often discounted and excluded based on gender and identity.
The disregard for youth participation may also stem from a perception that ‘youth’ is a temporary
status or a belief that young people are unrealistic in policy demands.

The reality is that youth are revitalizing democracy through pushing back against
authoritarian rule and closing civic spaces, fighting against corruption while
promoting integrity and transparency, and clamoring for the expansion of human
rights. Any real effort to renew democracy should recognize these efforts,
and authentically engage and invest in young people- making space for them to
re-envision and meaningfully participate in the creation of a more equitable
democratic future.

9
 2
GOING BEYOND
YOUTH APATHY:
UNDERSTANDING
YOUNG PEOPLE’S
FRUSTRATION
WITH POLITICS

10
 Rather than a symptom of democratic decay, youth disengagement
can be better understood as a measure of true democratic
shortcomings. The cynicism of young people towards institutional
politics should not be read as another reason to be hopeless about
democracy’s prospects globally, but rather as an indicator that
change is necessary if democracy is to be viable in their particular
countries and regional contexts.
How can we reconcile youth-led democratic reform with the reality that young
people are voting at lower rates around the world? What is the balance between
young people distrusting democracy and institutional politics and envisioning
a new form of political engagement?

To answer these questions, youth demands and their associated unconventional

modes of political participation must be taken seriously. Below, we discuss a few
common discontents expressed by young people across the globe.

YOUTH MISTRUST IN INSTITUTIONAL POLITICS

Clearly, young people are taking action. But despite this intensive youth action, the global
democratic decay, and frustration with formal political institutions, is especially worrisome
amongst our youngest populations. Indeed, 24 percent of U.S. millennials consider democracy
to be a “bad” or “very bad” way of running the country. Young people in Europe demonstrat-
ed similar beliefs: 13 percent of European youth aged 16 to 24 expressed such a view, up from 8
percent among the same age group in the mid-1990s.5 Almost half of European youth (48 percent)
no longer regard democracy as the “best form of government,” with majorities taking this stance
in France (58 percent) and Italy (55 percent), with most skeptics saying that democracy is “just as
good or bad” as other forms of government.6

While younger generations may often express frustration with politics, this level of dissatisfaction
is historically anomalous. Globally, youth satisfaction with democracy is declining relative to how
older generations felt at the same stages in life. This is the first generation in living memory to
have a global majority who are dissatisfied with the way democracy works while in their twenties
and thirties. By their mid-thirties, 5 percent of global millennials say they are dissatisfied with
democracy.7

For example, in the United States, a recent survey demonstrated that one quarter of millennials
agreed that “choosing leaders through free elections is unimportant.” Just 14 percent of Baby
Boomers and 10 percent of older Americans agreed.8 Only approximately a third of US millennials
view civil rights as ”absolutely essential” in a democracy, compared with 41 percent among older
Americans: In the European Union, the rates are 39 percent and 45 percent, respectively.9

5
Haerpfer, C., Inglehart, R., Moreno, A., Welzel, C., Kizilova, K., Diez-Medrano J., M. Lagos, P. Norris, E. Ponarin & B. Puranen et al. (eds.). 2021. World
Values Survey Time-Series (1981-2020) Cross-National Data-Set. Madrid, Spain & Vienna, Austria: JD Systems Institute & WVSA Secretariat.

6
“Young Europe 2017 the Youth Study .” TUI Foundation. Accessed November 24, 2021. https://www.tui-stiftung.de/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/
All-results-TUI-Stiftung_European-Youth.pdf.

11
 This distrust in formal politics leads to less participation in the political process itself. Young people
are increasingly turning away from voting, and more so than previous generations. Survey results
from a sample of 33 countries indicate that only around 44 per cent of young adults aged 18 to 29
years “always vote”, compared with almost 60 percent of all citizens. Among those over the age of
50, the corresponding rate is more than 70 percent.10

Importantly, voter turnout among young people has decreased in all democracies since the 1980s.
Amongst EU member states, almost 60 percent of eligible voters between 16 or 18 and 24 years old
opted not to vote in their country’s most recent national election. In Asia, the youth turnout rate in
the region is generally 15–30 percent lower than that of people older than 35. In Africa, youth are
about twice as likely (34 percent) to have skipped voting in their last national election as middle-
aged (19 percent) and older (14 percent) citizens. This voting gap between youth and seniors is 30
percentage points or more in countries like Botswana, Lesotho, Côte d’Ivoire and Gabon.11

Relatedly, political parties are facing difficulties in attracting new party members, and in particular
young people. The 2016 UN Global Youth Report demonstrates that political party membership is
less prevalent among those under the age of 30 than among older adults.12

Young people are increasingly turning away from formal political parties as a means
of democratic expression.

Young people are often treated as either apathetic or uneducated to explain the increasing
disillusionment with democracy. But the rationale for the frustration with the governmental
institutions that have defined their lives run deep, and this frustration is, in many cases, logical.
Amongst other reasons, this increasing distrust for democracy and institutional politics can be
explained through the reality that young people have encountered historically challenging
financial realities, feel that their government is not taking effective action on vital issues, and
do not think that their government actively listens to their concerns.

7 Foa, R.S., Klassen, A., Slade, M., Rand, A. and R. Collins. 2020. “The Global Satisfaction with Democracy Report 2020.” Cambridge,
United Kingdom: Centre for the Future of Democracy.

8 Roberto Foa and Yascha Mounk, “The Democratic Discontent,” Journal of Democracy, July 2016.

9 Ibid.

10 “UN World Youth Report - United Nations.” https://www.un.org/development/desa/youth/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2018/12/un_world_

youth_report_youth_civic_engagement.pdf.

11 Asiamah, Gildfred, Ousmane Djiby Sambou, and Sadhiska Bhoojedhur. “Analysis | Are African Governments Doing Enough to
Help Young People? Here’s What Afrobarometer Surveys Reveal.” The Washington Post. January 15, 2021.

12 UN World Youth Report - United Nations

12
 A GENERATION INHERITING UNPRECEDENTED ECONOMIC PRECARITY
Due to a number of factors, including the 2008 financial crisis and its aftermath, the propagation
of inequitable economic policies, and the COVID-19 pandemic, younger generations are predicted
to be worse off financially than their parents’ generation. Accordingly, levels of wealth inequality
are one of the few covariates of the democratic satisfaction “gap” between older and younger
generations. There is also a strong relationship between past income inequality and the current
generational gap in satisfaction with democracy.13

In the United States, for example, millennials make up close to a quarter of the population but
hold just 3 percent of wealth - whereas baby boomers held 21 percent of wealth at the same
age. Correspondingly, across the globe, controlling for fluctuations in overall employment, excess
youth unemployment correlates strongly with youth perceptions of democratic performance.
For example, younger citizens took the brunt of the recent Eurozone crisis, which sent youth
unemployment rates 25 percentage points above the average. Accordingly, youth assessments of
democratic performance soured.14

African youth similarly experience financial difficulties. Africa has the world’s youngest population,
and a median age of 19.7 years. But according to a recent African Development Bank report, one-
third of Africa’s 420 million young people between the ages of 15 and 35 are unemployed, another
third is vulnerably employed, and only 1 in 6 are employed in the formal employment sector. A
recent World Bank report found that on average 72 percent of the youth population in Africa lives
with less than US$2 per day. The incidence of poverty among young people in Nigeria, Ethiopia,
Uganda, Zambia and Burundi is over 80 percent.15

It should be noted that young people in poorer countries are actually more optimistic about their
economic prospects than those in wealthier countries. A recent UNICEF survey of 21,000 young
people around the world found that about two-thirds of young people (15-24 year-olds) in low-
income countries thought that today’s children would be better off financially than their parents,
compared to 43 percent of young Americans. This does not necessarily speak to optimism with
democracy itself, but rather, a belief in their own ability to help build a better lives for themselves,
and their families.

Throughout the world, young people are suffering economically, disproportionally to previous
generations, despite democratic governments that have promised better results. It is perhaps
logical that young people are distrustful of a system that continually leads to such dismal
economic prospects for their generation.

13
 oa, R.S., Klassen, A., Slade, M., Rand, A. and R. Collins. 2020. “The Global Satisfaction with Democracy Report 2020.” Cambridge, United
F
Kingdom: Centre for the Future of Democracy.

14 
Ibid.

15
 “Final Briefing Note: Income Inequality in Africa.” African Development Bank Group. https://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Docu-
ments/Policy-Documents/FINAL%20Briefing%20Note%205%20Income%20Inequality%20in%20Africa.pdf.

13
 INACTION ON VITAL LONG-TERM ISSUES:
Young people also often feel that governments and public officials opt for political expediency
rather than taking action on long-term issues critical for them, and for broader society. In a
recent survey of 10 countries, young people overwhelmingly rated their government’s response
to climate change negatively. Only 33 percent of respondents believed that the government
is protecting future generations. More than half believed the government is betraying future
generations (58 percent) failing young people (65 percent), lying about the impact of its actions
(64 percent), and dismissing people’s distress (60 percent). In all, 60 percent of those sampled
disagreed with every positive statement and agreed with every negative statement. While results
vary among countries, across all respondents, reports of democratic betrayal outweighed
feelings of reassurance.

YOUTH PERCEPTIONS OF GOVERNMENT

58% 65%
believe the government is believe the government
betraying future generations is failing young people

64% 60%
believe the government believe the government
lies about the impact dismisses people’s
of its actions distress

83% 75% 92%

believe the government young people youth called the
has failed to care for said humanity future frightening
the planet is doomed

WORLDWIDE INDIA PHILIPPINES

Similarly, a recent survey of 10,000 young people across the world, conducted by researchers
at the University of Bath, NYU Langone Health, and other institutions, found that 83 percent of young
people said that the government has failed to care for the planet. In India, nearly 75 percent of
young people said humanity is doomed. In the Philippines, 92 percent of youth called the future
frightening.

In the United States specifically, young people are skeptical that the government is serious about
addressing issues of racial inequity. In the wake of Ferguson and other racially charged conflicts, 49
percent of millennials said they had “not much” or “no” confidence in the American justice system.

Young people do not feel like the government is serious about addressing long-term public
challenges like climate and racial justice, and respond with overall cynicism and distrust.

17
 arks, Elizabeth and Hickman, Caroline and Pihkala, Panu and Clayton, Susan and Lewandowski, Eric R. and Mayall, Elouise E. and Wray,
M
Britt and Mellor, Catriona and van Susteren, Lise, Young People’s Voices on Climate Anxiety, Government Betrayal and Moral Injury: A Global
Phenomenon. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3918955.
18
 ickman, Caroline and Marks, Elizabeth and Pihkala, Panu and Clayton, Susan and Lewandowski, Eric R. and Mayall, Elouise E. and Wray,
H
Britt and Mellor, Catriona and van Susteren, Lise, Young People’s Voices on Climate Anxiety, Government Betrayal and Moral Injury: A Global
Phenomenon. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3918955

14
 A LACK OF FORMAL YOUTH REPRESENTATION AND VOICE
Perhaps at the foundation of their frustration with formal politics is the fact that many young people
do not feel like the public officials actually listen to their voices and opinions. In a recent survey of
13,500 young people from 186 countries, respondents attributed the biggest political inclusion and
representation challenges to the ignorance and indifference of people in positions of authority
(50 percent), and the lack of support and commitment towards young people including support to
youth branches of political organizations (49.8 percent).20

25,000 PEOPLE AGED BETWEEN 18 AND 35 FROM

186 COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES, INDICATED THAT

55.9%
FEEL THEIR VIEWS ARE NOT
BEING TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT

A recent Global Shapers Survey, which included over 25,000 people aged between 18 and 35
from 186 countries and territories, indicated that nearly 56 percent of respondents believe their
views are not being taken into account before important decisions are made.

These viewpoints are not just speculative- young people, especially young women, are quite
literally not represented in their governmental institutions. According to UN Youth, people aged
15 to 24 year-olds make up one-sixth of the world’s population but, in roughly one-third of
countries, the eligibility for parliamentarians begins at 25 years old. Relatedly, only 1.6 percent of
parliamentarians are in their twenties. Young people are largely being excluded and overlooked,
both as political candidates and even as participants in political processes, giving them limited
political control over their own futures.21

This inequity in representation leads to a system in which young people are often only able to
speak from outside the structures of power. Stuck in a system of patronage and self-service,
young see themselves as merely passive recipients of decisions and goodwill from elderly
politicians. Accordingly, the distrust in politicians, frustration with the political process, and decaying
trust in democracy itself, is understandable, maybe even logical.

20 “Global Survey Report on Youth SWAP.” https://www.un.org/development/desa/youth/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2018/02/Global-Survey-

Report-on-Youth-SWAP.pdf.

21 “Formal Representation for Young People Enhances Politics for All.” Chatham House – International Affairs Think Tank, November 3, 2020.
https://www.chathamhouse.org/2020/09/formal-representation-young-people-enhances-politics-all.

15
 A VICIOUS CYCLE: RAMIFICATIONS OF YOUTH FRUSTRATION

There are serious ramifications to this youth frustration and disengagement from formal political
institutions, for their own well-being, for communities, for governments, and for the broader
institution of democracy. A failure to address the root cause of this discontent may lead to
continued frustrations from both young people who feel that institutional politics cannot work, and
simultaneously from governments who struggle to understand the desires and motivations of
the youngest generations and are unable or unwilling to engage with young people’s informal
political engagement activities. Despite young peoples’ efforts to carve out democratic spaces
outside of these conventional spaces, a vicious cycle of inaction often renders these efforts
powerless, thus feeding back into a youth rejection of formal politics.

The reality for young people is that democracy has become associated with a vicious cycle of
inaction.22 Our youngest generations often continually feel like elected officials do not listen to their
voices, as the government fails to engage with them or take action on pressing issues like climate
change and inequality. In turn, young people do not participate in formalized political institutions
that they feel like are systemically broken and corrupt.

When young people do not participate in formalized political structures, elected officials can grow
frustrated that young people are not voting, showing up, or engaging in the traditional political
process. Elected officials are prioritizing people who have power and resources and always vote,
rather than people who are actually participating in politics in more informal ways. This leads to a
reality in which elected officials are not prioritizing the perspectives of young people, or the issues
that they deem as critical.

A VICIOUS CYCLE
Young people turn away
from formal politics

Young people Elected officials

feel unheard cater to voter base

Youth Issues/Perspectives
de-Prioritized

The cycle continues as young people grow more frustrated with formal politics, and the
democratic process itself. Governments generalize young people as unrealistic and impatient in
their demands for political action. In turn, young people think that governments do not care about
their issues, and are not taking action on the urgent issues that define the moment.

22
42nd Harvard Youth Poll
https://www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty-research/policy-topics/politics/harvard-youth-poll-finds-young-americans-gravely-worried
23
Pew Research Center - U.S. Politics & Policy, August 25, 2020. ​​“Little Change in Public’s Response to ‘Capitalism,’ ‘Socialism’.”
24
Pew Research Center, October, 2017, “Globally, Broad Support for Representative and Direct Democracy”

16
 There is a danger that the disillusionment of young people goes beyond frustration and lends
itself to an openness to alternatives to democracy itself. Studies have begun to show that young
people, perhaps unconvinced that a deliberative, democratic process can actually lead to policy
outcomes and results, are more apt to support alternative forms of government.

Firstly, young people seem more predisposed to authoritarianism than older generations. In a
recent poll, 43 percent of older Americans voiced opposition to the idea of the military taking over
when government is incompetent or failing to do its job. But only 19 percent of young people were
opposed to the military taking over in such a situation. Relatedly, 29 percent of young Americans
say that democracy is not always preferable to other political forms.

Additionally, statistics demonstrate that young people have become more attracted to
technocracy, a form of government in which technical experts make decisions, rather than
decision making through the democratic processes of deliberation and compromise. In the
United States, 46 percent of 18-29 year old’s indicate that it would be a good thing for experts,
not elected officials to make decisions, whereas only 36 percent of those over 50 years of age
indicate that belief. This same age differential between approval of experts, rather than elected
officials making decisions, is even greater in Australia (19 points), Japan (18 points), the UK (14 points),
Sweden (13 points) and Canada (13 points).

Furthermore, young people have indicated a greater recovery in satisfaction with democracy
when populist leaders come to power. On average, individuals aged 18 to 34 articulated a 16
percentage-point increase in satisfaction with democracy during the first term in office of a
populist leader, irrespective of whether this leader expressed left-leaning or right-leaning
tendencies. Many populists do gain power railing against the elites and the inaction of entrenched
governmental institutions, speaking to the experience of many young people. Populist proclivities,
however, tend to be less about deepening democracy, and more about consolidating power, as
seen in countries like Venezuela, Brazil, and the United States itself.

This glamorization of populists, technocrats, and other governing models might post another
challenging reality of youth engagement in this moment. Young people are hungry for real,
demonstrable change in a moment in which they have been so frustrated with a lack of real
action from their elected officials. But they are beginning to associate this lack of action not only
with institutional politics, but with democracy itself: perhaps viewing democracy as inextricably
intertwined with corruption and a lack of real and intensive policy action.25

25
Foa, R.S., Klassen, A., Slade, M., Rand, A. and R. Collins. 2020. “The Global Satisfaction with Democracy Report 2020.” Cambridge, United
Kingdom: Centre for the Future of Democracy.

17
 3
BRINGING
DEMOCRACY
BACK IN

18
 BREAKING THE CYCLE: (RE) DEFINING DEMOCRACY

“Tell me what democracy looks like!” has become a common

chant in protests across the United States and world in recent
years. It was heard as activists took to the streets in response
to former President Trump’s election, in response to school
shootings in recent years, in response to George Floyd’s
murder- and other incidents of police brutality.
But for young people, what does democracy look like? What does democracy even mean?

Does it look like citizens in the streets, demanding better, more equitable policies? Does it look
like citizens in dialogue and compromising in town hall meetings on public issues like zoning and
housing? Or does democracy actually manifest in populists like Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonoaro,
and Narendra Modi being elected president through the will of the people?

19
 Although democratic institutions represent a western concept for many people, the ‘democracy’
that young activists are fighting does not. Democracy is about voice, and individuals having the
ability to participate, and have their opinions heard, and valued.

While young people may be turning away from poorly performing democratic institutions and
processes, they are participating politically in new, vibrant, and creative ways. Understanding how
young people view political participation, and meeting them where they are, is a vital component
of any democratic renewal effort.

Studies have demonstrated that young people often engage in politics on a case-by case basis,
embracing personally meaningful causes or issues that are often manifested through peer
networks connected by new communication technologies. To that end, rather than voting, or
other forms of established political engagement, globally, the top three forms of “issue-based
engagement” are joining boycotts, signing petitions, and participating in demonstrations.

As an example, young Americans are increasingly turning to street demonstrations, with 27 percent
of young people having said they engaged in a march or demonstration in 2020, a dramatic
increase from when a similar question was asked to the same age group before the 2016 and
2018 elections (5 percent and 16 percent, respectively). Similarly, African youth are less likely than
older generations to report attending a community meeting, contacting a political leader, or
identifying with a political party. The exception is protest: nearly 20 percent of African youth say they
participated in a protest in 2020, about 50 percent higher than those aged 56 or older.28

The power of recognizing this new way that young people are engaging in democracy is
that elected officials can learn about the concerns of their youngest constituents in new,
more vibrant ways. Democracy can begin to be re-imagined beyond solely a process of
voting. Instead, democracy becomes a more vibrant form of engaging individuals, and
young people specifically, in the process of governance itself. Indeed, a broad swath of youth
political engagement exists in the current moment, including national youth councils, youth
parliaments, deliberative mechanisms (e,g., participatory budgeting), demonstration, and
other forms of collective action.

26
Haerpfer, C., Inglehart, R., Moreno, A., Welzel, C., Kizilova, K., Diez-Medrano J., M. Lagos, P. Norris, E. Ponarin & B. Puranen et al. (eds.).
2021. World Values Survey Time-Series (1981-2020) Cross-National Data-Set. Madrid, Spain & Vienna, Austria: JD Systems Institute &
WVSA Secretariat.
27
“ Poll: Young People Believe They Can Lead Change in Unprecedented Election Cycle.” CIRCLE at Tufts University, June 30, 2020.
https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/poll-young-people-believe-they-can-lead-change-unprecedented-election-cycle.
28
Asiamah, Gildfred, Ousmane Djiby Sambou, and Sadhiska Bhoojedhur. “Analysis | Are African Governments Doing Enough to
Help Young People? Here’s What Afrobarometer Surveys Reveal.” The Washington Post. January 15, 2021.

20
 EXAMPLES OF CURRENT METHODS OF YOUTH ENGAGEMENT:
In order to understand how young people are participating politically and
how they conceive of democracy, the authors of this report conducted
interviews and focus groups with a variety of youth activists and civic
engagement practitioners from 32 countries across East and West Africa,
Latin America, Central Asia, Eastern and Western Europe, the Middle East,
North Africa,and North America.

Through this process, we gained rich insight into the wide variety of programs
that successfully engage young people in meaningful and powerful political
participation. We spoke with young leaders working on civic education, youth
assemblies, disability advocacy, free artistic expression, co-networking spaces,
leadership training, campus organizing, and protesting inequitable policies. We
plan to continue these conversations, as there are countless other examples
of democratic engagement and creativity not yet represented in this report.
This analysis should be seen as only a start into a broader exploration of youth
political engagement in the current moment.

BUILDING A TRUE DEMOCRATIC CULTURE,

BEYOND ELECTIONS AND GOVERNANCE

EDUCATING FOR A REAL,

CULTURALLY RELEVANT DEMOCRACY

INCLUDING AND PRIORITIZING

A DIVERSIFIED YOUTH LEADERSHIP

POLICYMAKING STARTING
FROM THE GRASSROOTS

YOUTH POLITICAL IDENTITY IS

TIED TO ISSUES, NOT PARTIES

21
 1.BUILDING A TRUE DEMOCRATIC CULTURE, BEYOND ELECTIONS
AND GOVERNANCE
The authors of this report interviewed numerous organizers from countries where political
corruption is extreme, where the integrity of voting mechanisms is crowded out by bribery,
or where local conflict or dictatorial governance has made participating in formal politics
improbable and ineffective. A common strategy to promote democratic engagement, in
these contexts, is to turn to informal political venues—for example: political and dissident art,
“socially-conscious” music, and hyper local mutual aid. Democracy, for many of these civic
practitioners, is about something more than elections or engagement with representatives.

“Democracy,” says Daniel Orogo, a Kenyan, “is a culture as much as it is about voting.
Democracy is impossible in a community without certain values of integrity, accountability,
and commitment to equality.”(Daniel Orogo, Kenya, Uwazi Consortium).

For young people, democracy cannot solely be a governance concept. It needs to be cultural: an
ideal infused in governmental parties, companies, and government alike.

Examples of this informal, disruptive political engagement in the face of oppression includes:

1. In Colombia, art collectives promote freedom of expression by providing a relatively safe

venue and genre to voice opposition or raise awareness. Musicians, performance and visual
artists thus cultivate and educate young leaders through artistic expression in a political
landscape that might otherwise be hostile to them. (Bonnie Devine, Colombia, La Múcura)

2. In Chile, “common pots” or local soup kitchens and community based agricultural projects
simultaneously provide mutual aid that is sensitive to local needs and give young leaders an
opportunity to participate in democratic decision making with regards to the local community,
its needs and their solutions. (Nacha Hernandez, Federación de Estudiantes de la Universidad
Católica de Chile)

3. In Nigeria, organizers have collaborated and co-created programs with regional musicians
to spotlight socially conscious singers, songwriters, and producers, who use music to express
values of integrity and accountability. For many young people, these spaces first sparked their
interest in mechanisms of democratic governance—via music unions, for instance—in a context
that is more approachable, interesting and hopeful than their formal political infrastructure.
(CiviActs, Accountability Labs)

4. In Nigeria, organizers piloted the Integrity Icon program that spotlights leaders who
exemplify values of integrity and transparency, opting for a strategy of “naming and faming”
to provide a counterweight to discourses of despair. Focused on influencing a culture of
democracy among politicians and leaders, such a strategy seeks to repair discourses
among young people that formal politics is hopelessly corrupt. (Odeh Friday, Nigeria,
Accountability Labs Nigeria)

22
 5. Additionally, for young people, it is not sufficient for opposition parties, for example, to
be against authoritarian governments if their structure itself is not democratic. Namatai
Kwekweza, a young activist who founded Zimbabwean organization WeLead at the age
of 18, an organization focused on youth leadership and development across the country,
indicates that there is a deep distrust that the opposition is actually aligned with democratic
values. Many young people fear that the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) exists
solely as an alternative to the government itself. Namatai notes that the opposition members
themselves “stick around for too long” and are generally older activists that do not heed the
perspectives of the younger generation of movement leaders. Namatai asserts that the
MDC itself is more interested in gaining power than promoting democratic reforms.
She thinks they are almost as part of the entrenched systems as the ruling party itself.

Namatai notes that democracy must be a “way of living,” rather than just a system
of governance. Whereas democracy for Kwekweza implies a contract that encapsulates
inclusion, especially with respect to decision-making, she notes that many movements for
democracy in Zimbabwe are exclusionary and sexist themselves, dominated by men who
assert that their philosophy and decision-making approach is the right one. Namatai is
skeptical that democracy itself can manifest itself through pure political change, but rather,
needs to be nurtured and promoted throughout a broader populace. This youth push for
a more democratic culture in Zimbabwe intersects with similar efforts in countries
throughout the world, including the United States.

These examples demonstrate the virtues of adopting a more expansive understanding of

democracy. Understanding democratic values as the foundation of political action, an ethos that
underpins effective democratic participation, broadens the space that organizers can target in
developing youth programs. By cultivating spaces where young people can feel safe engaging
in politics, spotlighting values that are integral to a democratic culture, young people can begin
to experience their participation as possible and powerful, cutting through otherwise common
experiences of despair and hopelessness that can accompany conflict, crisis, and corruption.
Democracy can and must become a cultural ideal, rather than solely a governance staple.

23
 2. EDUCATING FOR A REAL, CULTURALLY RELEVANT DEMOCRACY
Among those interviewed, there was near universal agreement that access to high quality political
education is a fundamental precondition towards deepening democracy in their countries and
communities. An equally important secondary insight concerns the way in which this education is
implemented. Organizers have found that political education programs are most effective when
they meaningfully engage with youth skepticism towards democracy.

Calls for civic education are often associated with addressing democratic deficits. Civic education
for young people is critical- but too focused on youth understanding how government works. This
type of action risks being perceived as paternalistic in nature, and catering to the existing, more
traditional forms of democratic engagement, like voting, or meeting with elected officials. Voting
is a critical, but insufficient mechanism in engaging with the political process. Young people are
calling out for a more comprehensive, holistic form of political that addresses the often oppressive
nature of democracy in their communities and countries. Effective civics education must address
why young people are skeptical of politics in the first place. Indeed, young people often have
valid reasons to avoid adopting a dominant understanding of democracy, or to avoid traditional
mainstream political education at all.

The skepticism of young Black Americans towards the history of democracy as taught in core
curriculums, for instance, must be understood, respected, and addressed in any meaningful effort
of political education. Interviewees in Mali, India, and Cameroon similarly described a rightful
resistance by young people to models of democracy that are imported from the West. The most
successful efforts of political education by these organizers are those that spend resources and
time on adapting democratic principles to already historically rich political and social landscapes.
In the words of one interviewer, the director of a think tank specializing in youth in conflict
resolution,

“At first I was frustrated when young people always wanted to talk about traditional
rulers and the traditional model of governance, but soon I learned to transform these into
opportunities to discuss fears about their cultural heritage, how traditional rulers govern their
village, about what the best practices are in their communities. I think that a truly modern
democracy is one in which young people can feel their own traditions in politics, where they’ll
see something very similar because democracy is about rule by the people, about giving
power to the people, for the people.”
— El Hadj, Mali, Timbuktu Center for Strategic Studies on the Sahel.

24
 In effective civics education programs, operative narratives (for example, about democracy and
freedom) are rarely ever imposed. Rather than prescribing a universal model of governance or
way of thinking, the young people prefer to engage in a synthetic and collaborative approach that
acknowledges the agency and reasons that every young person has about political governance.
To avoid this kind of paternalism, practitioners found the most success when they:

1. Spend significant time acknowledging discussing young people’s hesitancies and frustrations
with their political landscape;

2. Acknowledge difficult histories of oppression, imperialism, and colonialism in communities

and countries;

3. Bring in culturally relevant and customary leadership into their mentorship programs, including
local and indigenous leaders;

4. Ensure that civics education is experiential in nature, and that young people are learning how
to take action to improve their communities, rather than just taking in civics knowledge;

5. Center community based knowledge generation rather than top-down imposition of political
models- acknowledge that young people have specific civic knowledge to bring to the table,
rather than imposing governmental knowledge on them;

Organizers often understand their democratic and political work as a co-constructive

project. They plan with young people instead of merely for them. This means elevating young
leaders as well as adopting inclusive and participatory methodologies such as community
self-census, community-owned data, feedback loops, etc. Regardless of the particular context
and application, at the end of the day, such practices assume the fundamental principle that
young people are equal partners and stakeholders in the process of civic engagement.

25
 3. INCLUDING AND PRIORITIZING A DIVERSIFIED
YOUTH LEADERSHIP

“Youth are not a homogeneous group. We must accept that because you might work with a
young person who is working, another who is not working; there may be youth from rural
areas, others from urban ones. All these dynamics have to be captured somehow.” — Anne
Rose Osamba, Kenya and Uganda, East African Youth Peace Network (EAYPN).

Increasing youth representation in key decision making spaces is crucial —the perspectives of
younger generations are invaluable to good governance and the overall health and sustainability
of democratic systems requires that youth needs are genuinely taken into account. Many of the
youth organizers interviewed for this report understood their work to be counter to political trends
in their own countries to tokenize young people.

Just as many false promises are made to young people during election years, similar political
optics drive appointments of young people to symbolic roles that grant little power or opportunity
to effect change. Against these tendencies, organizers emphasize meaningful involvement in
policy making, from policy formulation to its monitoring and evaluation. This means:

1. Placing youth at the center of the policymaking and implementation process; giving them
direct experience in politics by eliminating the need for middlemen. This includes creating
specific opportunities for young people in policy-making committees, and engaging in
comprehensive training programs for young people to run for political office. Relatedly, the
tokenization of young people in political debate should be minimized;

2. Providing material financial and educational resources as well as mentorship to young

leaders in a collaborative, non-competitive manner.

3. Cultivating a generation of young leaders that are truly representative of the community.

Youth representatives cannot only hail from elite institutions, those with formal education, urban
areas, literate backgrounds. Too often, international democratic engagement efforts focus on
the same young people from more established and elite backgrounds. International political
and democratic bodies must include and center youth voices from the Global South. Regional
and country-level efforts must be representative of diversity of socio-economic and cultural
backgrounds in their communities. Bringing diverse groups into conversation with the assumption
that there is something to be learned by everyone is the bedrock of many of the successful
initiatives we encountered in preparing this report.

26
 ​​4. POLICYMAKING STARTING FROM THE GRASSROOTS​
Many of those interviewed were eager to share successful forms of grassroots policymaking as
throughways into deepening youth participation in democratic processes. Methods discussed
range from building local assemblies to facilitating community data collection and self-census.
Such activities can be key components in a ‘feedback loop’ model of governance, where
emphasis is placed primarily on building “a culture of feedback among stakeholders,” “building
trust and an environment conducive to collaboration between citizens, government and other
stakeholders.” 29

1. In Nepal, the Civic Action Team facilitates community sourced data, created and gathered
by the community—in this case, more than 1500 migrant workers who are vulnerable to
exploitation—which is later analyzed and used to amplify the voices of that community through
infographics, local radio stations, and town hall meetings. This form of community self-census
gives local government and communities material to come together and “discuss findings,
validate data and co-create solutions to challenges,” moving towards real time mechanisms
of grievance redressal.

2. In Taiwan, a youth labor organization called YLU95 (Youth Labor Union 95) has found success in
using community self-census methodologies not only to spread awareness about local labor
protection laws’ but also to build solidarity and political consciousness around their identity
as young workers—an especially precarious category insofar as they are largely employed
in temporary, part time work without benefits. The chairperson of the organization describes
one successful effort to survey a college campus town, building solidarities through community
geo-mapping.

“We surveyed students with part-time jobs about their employers’ compliance with labor laws
and their general working conditions. From there we have a physical map of the university
campus and surrounding commercial areas that show students comparisons between their
wages and highlight locations where illegal practices and dangerous working conditions had
been reported.”

The exercise of bringing young people together towards political self-understanding and
collective grievance expression builds a foundation of political discourse that is integral to
democratic cultures of political action. Organizers at the YLU95 remember this pilot program
as the first key step towards recruiting students and workers into programs that aim to bring
democracy into the workplace and into the classroom.

3. Turning to Kenya and Uganda, we interviewed Anne Rose Osamba, a champion of young
people for peace and gender equality, on her experiences in successful local assemblies.
With years of experience in facilitating need assessments, Osamba has found that baseline
surveys—on, say, school and work opportunities—are an essential way to connect local
policymaking efforts to the grassroots. Conducting these surveys in informal spaces can inform
local assemblies on critical issues and choice points in the community. One of these surveys,

29
 oni Khanal, “Lessons from Civic Action Teams on Building Accountability” Feedback Labs, February 13, 2020.
S
URL: https://feedbacklabs.org/blog/2020/02/13/lessons-from-civic-action-teams-on-building-accountability-through-feedback/

27
 for instance, “incubated the idea of bringing services for national identity card applications
directly to young people instead of having to go to physical offices themselves.” Such insights
became central to that local assembly in efforts to “demand accountability from politicians
since the incubators helped structure the assembly by clear goals, helped connect them to
formal mechanisms, and educated young people on a combination of methods like advocacy,
movement building, and analysis of power dynamics.”

Organizers and civic engagement practitioners are innovating on mechanisms of grassroots

policy making everyday—these are but a few bright spots that illustrate the wide reach of
such programs. In Nepal, Taiwan, Kenya and Uganda, communities are using self-census and
community survives towards a variety of democracy initiatives: in developing more effective
local assemblies, engaging youth in local governments, steering political leaders towards
integrating robust mechanisms of democratic participation, building youth solidarity and
political consciousness, and creating spaces where young people can learn about what
democracy really is.

28
 5. YOUTH POLITICAL IDENTITY IS TIED TO ISSUES, NOT PARTIES
Young people are increasingly engaging in emerging, transnational activism for democratic
change. These movements are elevating common challenges, like fighting authoritarianism and
climate change, promoting solidarity between like-minded groups, and exploring best practices,
like bringing attention to issues through digital activism and the arts. Young people identify more
with issues than with traditional political parties.

Grace Gondwe, a Zambian activist and the Founder of an organization called Be Relevant, helped
to organize young people in the midst of the 2021 Zambian election, which resulted in the election
of opposition candidate Hakainde Hichilema. Over 50 percent of the Zambian electorate is under
the age of 35, and they turned out in droves to force out the ruling party.

But according to Gondwe, this youth surge should not be associated with support for Hichilema
himself. “The issues of livelihoods and economic and financial empowerment supersedes political
affiliations,” according to Gondwe, “We know that if these guys don’t deliver, we can get them out.
We know that we have that power in our hands.”

We see this commitment to action and issues throughout the world, and it provides the potential
for youth solidarity across borders. We see this type of transnational youth activism throughout
the Arab Spring, when young people throughout the Middle East captured stories of government
brutality and shared them on social media, broadcast a common message, and shared
techniques of nonviolent resistance.

We see it currently with #EndSARS, a Nigerian youth movement protesting police brutality in
Nigeria. Rather than serving as solely a Nigerian campaign, the effort has gained transnational
attention, combining forces with #BlackLivesMatter protests across the US. In Canada, Germany,
and New Zealand, young people have used legislative and judicial processes to lower the voting
age to 16. We are seeing it with a growing movement to end vaccine nationalism.

These transnational movements are not just about shared experiences or an affiliation of political
parties, but about shared demands. The cumulative effect is pressure that was previously
unimaginable. The solutions, from climate to suffrage to global access to vaccines, are similarly
transnational in nature.

There may not be a more critical moment to focus on youth democratic engagement. Throughout
the world, the COVID-19 pandemic caused serious disruptions in education, employment, food
security, and the ability to find good-paying and sustainable employment opportunities. It is
high-time, however, to see young people not just as the victims of the pandemic, but as potential
purveyors of the keys to a new, more vibrant democratic future.

29
 4
RECOMMENDATIONS

30
 We hope that this report catalyzes a broader, more nuanced
conversation on how young people are conceiving of democratic
engagement at this critical moment in time and leads to concrete
impact and investment. Too often, young people are criticized
for being apathetic and turning away from democracy, when
the reality is more complex: young people are pushing back, in
creative, organic, and increasingly urgent ways, against formal
political institutions that they feel have led to closed civic spaces,
authoritarian leaders, and heavy corruption. We also recognize
too many recommendations on young people are too broad
in nature, and center on ensuring that they are brought to the
proverbial table.

31
 To that end, recognizing that the Summit on Democracy will involve governments around the world
making specific commitments on how they plan to promote democracy over the course of a next
year of action, we humbly offer the following specific recommendations following the themes of
the report. We are hopeful that these recommendations could be taken up by the governments
involved in the Summit for Democracy, including the United States, and other prominent funders.

We should note that governments should recognize that the terms “youth” and “young people” do
not always reflect the diversity of the youth population. Many young people hold diverse identities
who face additional barriers to participation and representation, including, but not limited to,
young women, young people with disabilities, LGBTQI+ youth, ethnic and religious minority youth,
and Indigenous youth. All young people also face different starting points to political engagement
based on their environment (for example, rural and urban youth, those affected by conflict), which
should be an additional consideration for all of these recommendations.

ELEVATE THE IMPORTANCE OF INVEST SIGNIFICANTLY IN YOUTH

YOUTH IN THE GLOBAL CAMPAIGN POLITICAL ENGAGEMENT
FOR DEMOCRACY

MEET YOUNG PEOPLE ENSURE YOUNG PEOPLE HAVE REAL

WHERE THEY ARE DECISION-MAKING POWER

GET CREATIVE CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION

32
 1. Elevate the Importance of Youth in the Global Campaign for Democracy: Too often, young
people are not explicitly mentioned as key actors in the movement for democracy, cast to the
side, or regarded as one of a host of marginalized groups.

Young people, while transient in definition, need to be elevated as a key pillar of democratic
renewal efforts and recognized for their current efforts as they work to advance democracy
today. Governments should explicitly and frequently recognize the challenges that they face,
especially in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, and look for creative and authentic ways to
engage them in real decision-making, harnessing and supporting ongoing movements which
are already bringing positive change.

This can include explicitly mentioning young people’s ongoing leadership and action
in speeches on democracy, explicitly including them in nation-wide commitments to
democracy, and ensuring that departments are adequately staffed to work with young
people on issues of democracy.

2. Invest Significantly in Youth Political Engagement: Often, democratic renewal efforts

are focused on political parties and institutional reform, and youth development efforts
focus on issues like education, health, and climate justice. These are all critical investment
areas, but youth civic and political engagement is rarely prioritized for significant investment.
Governments should invest robustly, domestically and internationally, in youth political
and civic engagement efforts.

US governmental actors like USAID and the Department of State should work to advance
young people’s role in revitalizing democracy, rights and governance to address worrying
signs of disengagement and polarization. For example, the Department of State currently
runs influential programs like the Young African Leaders Initiative and the Young Leaders
of the Americas Initiative to bring leaders across the world to the US and provide concrete
training and support. These efforts should be supported, and should include additional training
around political and civic engagement. The United States government should also substantially
increase funding efforts specifically on civics education efforts abroad to ensure and build a
new generation of young democratic leaders. Domestically, Congress should pass the Civics
Secures Democracy Act, and putting up to $1 billion towards domestic civics education efforts.

Other initiatives that merit additional support include the European Democracy Youth Network
(EDYN), the International Republican Institute’s Generation Democracy network, and USAID’s
Global LEAD initiative, which aims to support one million young changemakers over the coming
five years. These initiatives should have increased access to education, civic and political
engagement, and leadership opportunities.

The US specifically could consider supporting local, youth-led political engagement and
democracy efforts through creating a large incentive fund for youth revitalizing democracy,
human rights, and governance. There is the opportunity to work collaboratively with funders
throughout the world, including international actors, and large institutional foundations focused
on democratic renewal.

3. Meet Young People Where They Are: Yes, traditional forms of political engagement are
important. But governments and elected officials must attempt to meet young people where
they are, rather than lambasting their creative methods of engaging in the political process.

33
 This should include efforts to authentically understand how young people view democracy, and
elevating ways that they are expressing their political viewpoints, especially in the digital space.
Investing in youth engagement and leadership in the digital space is especially important as a
concrete mechanism to counter increasing efforts to close civic spaces.

Specific ways to meet young people where they are include building a healthy digital space
for young people include training elected officials to engage with young people and with
technology, and positively amplifying their efforts, rather than portraying young people in
a negative light. Reforms should also be adopted to ensure that digital spaces for more
accessible for young people with disabilities. Governments should also invest significantly in
digital citizenship and literacy in existing and new initiatives, and counter increasing amounts of
disinformation, including through promoting the careful regulation of social media companies
that are at risk of spreading harmful propaganda to young people and creating safety
guidelines in particular for minors engaging online.

Additionally, governments and institutions should invest in training programs specifically for
elected officials to understand how to engage with young people. Many elected officials assert
that they would like to work and understand youth issues, but are not fluent in digital media, and
do not often reach out to youth actors. Specific training and exchange programs would better
break the aforementioned vicious cycle, and ensure that elected officials are adequately and
authentically paying attention to youth issues.

 nsure Young People Have Real Decision-Making Power: Too often young people are
4. E
tokenized in formal political engagement efforts, rather than obtaining real decision-making
power. While it may sometimes be uncomfortable to invite young people to the decision-
making table, it is necessary: they have real lived experience that is vital towards making
better policy, and are an increasingly large part of the global population, especially in places
like Africa.

Specific ways to ensure that young people are at the table can include efforts to ensure
that young people are part of formal governmental bodies, hiring them into international
and domestic governmental and ministerial positions, and committing to and putting in
place policies that make it easier for young people to run for, and obtain, elected office.
International institutions should invest serious resources into training programs for young
people to run for and obtain political office.

Another way to ensure that young people can provide real influence is to invest in youth-led
research, recognizing its value in capturing youth insights into democratic challenges and
solutions.

5. Get Creative: These are all just suggestions: we hope that governments and philanthropic
actors, led by young people, can get creative about different ways to promote youth political
engagement amidst democratic decay.

Potential creative ways to invest in young people as the very foundations of democracy include
lowering the voting age, sponsoring multilateral conferences and summits of young people
pushing for democratic change, and curating a specific forum and form of the Summit for
Democracy specifically focused on and comprising young people. Young people are not as

34
 constrained by traditional borders as previous generations- there is the possibility of pro-
actively creating networks of youth democratic actors around the world, ensuring they are in
solidarity with each other, and learning best practices.

6. Continue the Conversation: Above all, we hope that this report sparks an ongoing conversation
on the importance of youth civic and political engagement and participation. For far too
often, young people have been seen as marginal actors in democratic renewal efforts. At
this moment in time, there is perhaps no demographic more important in a global future that
espouses and promotes democracy.

Yet critically, we need to listen to and invest in young people as they re-imagine what
democracy can actually become. Democracy as a concept can still work. But it has failed too
many young people. For democracy to succeed, young people can, and must, lead to a better,
more equitable, more democratic future.

35
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:
This report is the fruit of numerous collaborations with youth activists, civic engagement practitioners,
political organizers, and scholars. We are indebted to a long list of interviewees (produced below)
who volunteered their time and insights in the drafting of this report, without which none of this
would be possible. This report also benefited from the institutional and financial support of the SNF
Agora Institute of Johns Hopkins University, for the efforts of our small team at Democracy Moves,
the scholars and organizations that make up our vibrant network, as well as the speakers and
attendees of our 2021 international convenient on Global Youth Activism Amidst Democratic Decay.
Special thank you to the report’s signatories at NDI, IRI, Restless Development, People Powered,
Community Democracies, and Accountability Lab and especially to Rachel Mims, Meryl Miner, Ashley
Law, and Jean Manney for their invaluable feedback on earlier versions of the report.

Interviewees:
Blair Glencourse, USA, Director of Accountability Labs
Odeh Friday, Nigeria, Country Director, Accountability Labs Nigeria
Primal Tale, India, Student of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences
Emmanuel Otieno Obwanga, Zimbabwe, NA
George Bolton, UK, DPhil Candidate at the University of Southampton
Oryema Edison, Uganda, Recreation for Development and Peace Uganda
Innocent Indeje, Kenya, Regional Trainer for the Global Alliance
For Universal Health Coverage In Africa
Daniel Orogo, Kenya, Uwazi Consortium
Anne Rose Osamba, Kenya and Uganda, East African Youth Peace Network (EAYPN).
El Hadj Djitteye, Mali, Founder and Executive Director of Timbuktu Center for
Strategic Studies in the Sahel
Bonnie Devine, Colombia, La Múcura
Aqaba Simbula, Uganda, Vice Chairperson of the Bundibugyo District Youth Council
Mercy Mashable, Tanzania, Her Ability Foundation and Light for the World International
Erik Ombija, Kenya, Grassroots Transforming Network
Amina Mahia, Tanzania, Restless Development
Ronald Lubaga, Tanzania, Program Design for SRHR Advocacy Remie Sessimba,
Uganda, Open Space Centre
Williams Omonde Mutimanwa, DRC, Good Samaritan for Education
Gabriel Marmentini, Brazil, Polize

Past reports:
Rodrigo Echecopar, Chile, Latin American Network for Innovation in Politics,
Former President of the Revolución Democrática
Brian Hioe, Taiwan, Founding Editor of New Bloom
Catta Chou, Taiwan, Curator of Taiwan International Labor Film Festival and Organizer of the Youth
Labor Union 95
Ray Cheng, Chairman of the Youth Labor Union 95
María Ignacia Henríquez Pinto, President of the Federations of Students of the UC (FEUC)

36
PRODUCED BY WITH SUPPORT AND ENDORSEMENTS FROM