Youth and Elections

The peaceful and powerful youth-led uprisings in the Arab world brought young people back onto the world stage as serious political actors with the right and capacities to be equally included in politics. However, young women and men are not represented in electoral processes in a way that reflects their population size and potential assets and contributions to enhance inclusive representation. Elections lie at the heart of democracy and effective and inclusive participation of all citizens—including youth—in elections and broader political processes is critical to democratic development. Expectations are high that the inclusion of youth in electoral processes will increase. Significant frustration is likely to arise if this does not happen, with a potentially destabilizing effect on democratization.

A number of stakeholders, including Election Management Bodies (EMBs), can play a critical role when it comes to including the world’s largest-ever youth population in elections and broader political and peacebuilding processes. The youth are not homogenous and do not operate in a vacuum; it is desirable for them to collaborate with a variety of state and non-state actors – especially youth organizations – to promote elections that are inclusive of young people, and especially of young women and youth from marginalized groups.

Creating an enabling and empowering environment for youth participation in electoral processes and the building of peace is a vital part of strengthening democratic governance. As this topic area illustrates, strategies to support youth participation ideally span all phases of the electoral cycle. This entails strategically addressing the:

1. legal framework: reviewing the legal framework (constitution, electoral law, regulation, jurisprudence and managerial rules) and its effects on youth political participation
2. pre-electoral phase: recognizing and supporting youth as community, political leaders and engaged citizens
3. electoral phase: mobilizing youth as voters, candidates, observers and active participants in all aspects of the electoral process
4. post-electoral phase: supporting youth voices in the legislature and government and strengthening youth agency

OVERVIEW

Participation of all citizens in formal political processes is fundamental for democracy. If a segment of the population is deprived of the right to vote or is disengaged, the representativeness and legitimacy of these processes is undermined. Although young people participate in political processes in multiple ways, their representation in formal political processes is limited. There is a growing recognition, however, that young people’s involvement is critical to making elections more representative. EMBs and other electoral stakeholders have a crucial role to play in empowering youth to participate in formal political processes. Indeed, the emerging consensus has seen many electoral assistance agencies adopt a youth focus in their programming.

As a first step in fostering increased youth inclusion, participation, and representation in electoral processes, EMBs could employ young people across all levels of their organization, including in their strategic planning. This would improve EMBs’ knowledge about the needs of young voters; move EMBs towards diversity in regard to age; leverage young people’s flexibility, creativity and willingness to learn; and allow young people to have ownership of the political process. 

Another way of fostering youth inclusion, participation, and representation in electoral processes is for EMBs to support youth-focused and youth-led organizations, and to partner with CSOs and other electoral stakeholders that empower youth. Such alliances are particularly important for EMBs to establish in their efforts to work with youth as partners and leaders in ensuring peaceful elections.

A youth empowerment perspective on all the electoral processes they manage throughout the electoral cycle involves EMBs:

• keeping reliable data on youth participation, including through youth-led data collection
• making registration processes as convenient and appealing as possible for all youth, especially for first-time voters
• exploring options to counter youth-specific obstacles to voting (and identifying obstacles to voting/participation as a first step to countering obstacles) and by fostering safe and inclusive spaces for youth
• seeking to work with youth to maintain electoral integrity through monitoring the electoral process

Constitutional and legal frameworks remain some of the strongest tools to develop and mandate youth-friendly electoral policies and practices. Well-crafted legislation can support targeted structural interventions that foster inclusivity for young people and other groups. Legal and voluntary quotas for youth participation are one option for certain contexts reforms that respond to the diverse circumstances of young people; and the eligibility ages at which youth can vote and run for political office all influence youth engagement in the electoral cycle. Legislative frameworks to scrutinize and manage political finances can support a level playing field for young people, particularly youth from marginalized groups and young women, who might otherwise be disadvantaged in settings that favor wealthy, mature, male candidates and political elites.

It is vital that EMBs, political parties and governments have a clear understanding of international electoral standards and legal frameworks in order to develop youth-sensitive policies that address barriers and enable youth to participate in the political life.

EMBs have a role to play in helping political parties be more inclusive of young people. Democracies are based on inclusion and broad representation, yet youth, women and other groups are often excluded from representative institutions due to the inherent biases and practices that exist in traditional political parties. As a key electoral gateway, political parties influence the extent to which young people are active in representational politics, but their failure to successfully engage young people can lead to distrust, disengagement and marginalization.

To mitigate this deficit, political parties—sometimes in collaboration or with the support of EMBs—can adopt measures to improve youth participation. These include codes of conduct that prescribe peaceful youth engagement; mentoring and leadership programs to counter exclusionary practices and foster youth networks; subsidies to facilitate access by youth to political finance; and candidate and party quotas to build robust youth representation. Strong party youth wings can also provide a voice and connections for young people entering the political and electoral cycle.

Beneficially, active youth players are a positive channel through which parties can reach out to a youth cohort. Globally, EMBs have established cross-party networks to provide skills and training for young people, equipping them to perform effectively and sustainably in the political cycle. EMBs also play a role in ensuring peaceful participation by young people, including developing measures to combat youth involvement in election-related violence which is prevalent in conflict and post-conflict contexts. Meaningful youth participation in political parties is essential for healthy and inclusive representation models in the future. EMBs can collaborate with political parties and other actors to facilitate cross-party dialogue and initiatives.

As mandated providers of civic and voter education, EMBs play a vital role in encouraging young people to be interested and involved in the electoral process. Youth are not a homogenous group, and—in their diversity—will be receptive to different approaches to learning about democracy and electoral processes. Collaboration with other electoral stakeholders, including the media and—importantly, young people themselves—will produce the most effective methods for reaching targeted subgroups. In their approach to informing and educating young voters and prospective voters, EMBs will be alert to the intersectional nature of marginalization and disadvantage. They will also be keen to learn from their intended audience – as young people themselves are creators and implementers as well as beneficiaries of civic and voter education.

Likewise, young people are creators as well as consumers of media. The media and EMBs together contribute to the achievement of SDG 16, target 10, “to ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements.” To achieve this target, the media, as well as informing and educating, play a “watchdog” role in relation to how electoral processes are reported. Ethical codes of behavior are in place to discourage inflammatory statements, and to hold up standards of accurate and balanced coverage of electoral processes. 

Alongside traditional media, social media has grown as a primary source of information, especially for youth. Platforms such as Facebook and YouTube are ubiquitous. There is still a digital divide, however, and providers of civic and voter education should collect data on internet use and accessibility, considering possible regional and gender divides, even in countries with otherwise high internet penetration rates.

Education has the transformative potential to build peace, and EMBs and other stakeholders, recognizing the educative role youth can play in this process, particularly in conflict and fragile contexts, can collaborate with youth organizations to provide civic and voter education for responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making at all levels.

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

The core principle for meaningful and effective youth political participation is “nothing about us without us.”

Any strategies to enhance meaningful and effective youth political participation should be grounded in a rights-based approach and avoid tokenistic activities.

Exemplary engagement with youth to foster meaningful and effective youth participation is:

Genuine: Ensure that you are engaging with young people for the right reasons and that you are approached as partners focusing on an adherence to the values and contributions of young people. This requires recognizing young peoples’ right to participate and valuing the contributions of young people.

Respectful and rights-based: Applying a rights–based approach, which recognizes young people as agents of change and strengthens avenues for youth participation in governance processes. Youth should be approached as active agents who have the right to participate and be heard. Engagement should enable young people’s ownership and leadership in governance processes 

Transparent: This means being clear about the purpose of youth engagement, whether youth-led or when organizations collaborate with youth on processes. 

Accountable: In order for participation not to be a one-off event, mechanisms need to be in place to ensure follow-up, implementation of youth decisions, and accountability to youth constituencies. This requires the development of standards of practice and accountability for youth engagement/development work, including responsibility for reporting back to youth and a framework for monitoring and evaluation as appropriate. It also requires that young people take an active role in monitoring and accountability by establishing channels whereby youth participation can have a visible impact on outcomes. 

Youth friendly, relevant and purposeful: Activities to enhance youth political participation should be as youth-driven as possible. Young people themselves can decide on their priorities, methods, and tactics. The environment and working methods can be adapted to youth capacities and needs – meeting youth where they’re at. Depending on the target age group and context, activities might focus on, among other options: informal, results-oriented projects; low access barriers; easy language; being issue-driven; being competitive with a game element; or technology if educated youth are targeted. It means young people take on valued roles, addressing issues that are relevant to them, and influencing real outcomes. To be relevant, they can link to specific concerns of youth such as unemployment, the environment or HIV and AIDS. 

Inclusive: Ensuring all young people are able to participate, regardless of age, background, religion, gender, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, ability, geography, and mental health. This requires an acceptance and embracing of diversity, and efforts to build upon young people’s diversity and experiences. Appropriate methods can be applied to give marginalized groups of youth equal chances to participate. This also requires being sensitive to gender dynamics and power relationships. Being inclusive requires the removal of barriers, including economic barriers, to enable youth engagement. 

Flexible and open to innovation: Commitment of youth and adults working with youth to be open to new ideas and have a willingness to take risks and challenge existing established processes and structures. 

Capacity-developing: Strengthen youth agency by supporting capacity development for young people, youth organizations, networks, and movements, to enhance mutual responsiveness, trust, and collaboration. 

Sustainable: Sustainability of financial resources for best-practice youth engagement initiatives can help to ensure these are not limited or one-off events or processes. Apart from financial sustainability, youth engagement should be supported by older adults who are the decision-makers and who value and prioritize youth. Intergenerational collaboration reduces the risk of increasing youth voice without establishing a receptive environment. Youth may need to be continually recruited for engagement processes, since they out-grow their membership of the “youth” category quickly. Successful youth engagement leads to decision makers seeking youth involvement and leadership in addressing challenges and designing solutions. 

Voluntary and safe: The safety of all persons in any process, program or organization is paramount. Further, if engaging with young people under the age of majority (i.e. 18 years old), then the engagement would need to comply with legislation specific to working with children. This might involve an organization working with minors to have codes of ethics and standards of practice for working with children, and/or complying with ‘Working With Children’ legislation, if it exists, and putting other measures in place to ensure it is a child-safe environment. Above all, the principles of “In the Best Interest of the Child” and “Do No Harm” should govern engagement by adults with minors. 

(The above is adapted from United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Enhancing Youth Political Participation through the Electoral Cycle (2013), and from Restless Development and PLAN International UK, “Principles Guiding for Decision Makers” (2018), http://restlessdevelopment.org/file/guiding-principles-pdf.) 

These guiding principles are not exhaustive; they are a starting point, and can be strengthened, expanded and applied to your own experiences of engaging with youth. 

See Annex: Guiding Principles for Supporting Young People as Critical Agents of Change in the 2030 Agenda (https://www.youth4peace.info/GuidingPrinciples/Youth2030) 

See Annex: Guiding Principles on Young People’s Participation in Peacebuilding (developed by the UN Inter-Agency Network on Youth Development’s (IANYD) Subgroup on Youth Participation in Peacebuilding, co-chaired by the United Nations Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO) and Search for Common Ground) 

https://www.sfcg.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/SFCG-Guiding-Principles-Inforgraphic.pdf 

 

CONTEXT

In 2017, the world’s population was 7.4 billion – more than half of which were aged between 20 and 44. The median age of world population was 29-30 years, meaning that most of the people alive are yet to reach age of 30. The youth population continues to grow – and grow fastest in the poorest nations. This growth of youth numbers is being called the “youth bulge”.[i] Despite their large and growing numbers, youth are underrepresented in decision-making bodies and electoral processes. It is not surprising that “youth issues” are on the development agenda.

There are more youth today than at any other time in human history and never before have so many of them been involved in movements for change worldwide. They are taking to the streets and using online social networks and communities to connect, express their voices and campaign for change. They are protesting against authoritarian regimes, corruption and inequalities. They are fighting for sustainable development and a better future for current and new generations. Youth are demanding political representation and a say in government policy.  However, they are often excluded or disengaged from formal political processes.

By the middle of the 20th century, the rise of representative democracy and the human rights movement resulted in women in most countries eventually being given the rights to vote and be elected. Although the Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirmed “universal and equal suffrage” as a basic human right, it excluded children and young people. In the second half of the 20th century, a youth rights movement grew, with young people fighting to make decisions autonomously or to have the legal minimum ages at which rights are acquired lowered. Many countries lowered the voting age from 21 to 18. Since then, there has been a movement to lower the voting age still further, and in some countries the voting age has been lowered to 16. There are international recommendations to align the eligibility for public office with the voting age, and in some countries, there have been successful movements to lower the age of eligibility.

The extension of the franchise and age of eligibility for public office has taken place against a backdrop of intense focus on voter turnout, which is seen as a general measure of the health of a democracy. Lower voter turnout by younger people in many countries has been the subject of much study and has frequently been framed as evidence of youth disengagement from formal political processes. Calls for more effective civic education to empower young people is one common response to low voter turnout; another is a more enabling environment to attract youth to formal political processes.

The idea of a distinct category known as “youth” is a rather contemporary phenomenon. Youth are neither a homogenous group – being diverse in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, socio-economic background, abilities, and identification with and membership of a minority group (such as LGBTQI) – nor a static one; there are always people joining the cohort or leaving it. Furthermore, a large number of young women and men are living in conflict areas and are highly represented among displaced persons. There is no consensus about who qualifies as youth. The UN defines youth as between the ages of 15 and 24, and the UNSC Resolution 2250  defines youth as between the ages of 18 and 29. Despite it being difficult to speak about “youth”, given the above, statistically they are at the highest risk of social exclusion, and many young people face barriers to accessing, enjoying or exercising their human rights, including their political rights. Youth is not only defined by age, it is also a socio-cultural term that is defined in some cultures as a life phase marked at the beginning and end by certain biological or socio-cultural experiences. This can play into and is contextually relevant to the political sphere in some cultures.

In the political arena, youth are subject to pervasive and sometimes contradictory myths. They are often being portrayed in either/or terms – as victims or perpetrators of violence, or as apathetic or engaged – when the reality is far more complex and defies such stereotyping. 

The widespread involvement of citizens in political decision-making and implementation is considered essential to a vibrant democracy. Political participation or engagement (the terms are often used interchangeably) can refer to a wide range of activities, including formal participation – such as voting, joining a political party, or standing for public office – and informal participation, including such “bottom-up” activities as signing a petition, and purchasing or boycotting products for political reasons.

From the late 20th century, there has been a trend among youth towards increased informal participation and decreased formal participation. Young people are expressing dissatisfaction with old-style politics and disengagement from formal political processes. They are, however, involved in “participatory politics” – grass-roots, interactive, peer-based activism designed to influence issues they care deeply about. The internet and social media, which they have grown up with, have transformed how they participate and communicate, and they are leveraging technology to enhance the scale and reach of their messages and demands. In light of this, youth discourse questions the definitions of what constitutes political participation and what it means to be politically and meaningfully engaged.

Notwithstanding such questioning, the low number of young people voting and becoming candidates remains a concern to many, including young people themselves. There is an emerging consensus that increasing youth political participation has both instrumental and intrinsic value for both youth and wider society.

Since the first International Youth Year in 1985, there have been a number of declarations targeting youth, and there has been a growing interest in youth participation. Various international human rights conventions provide the framework for political participation of citizens; the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) made the participation of children in decisions about their own lives an internationally recognized right. In the years since, the UN has shaped the agenda on youth participation and called for governments to invest in the potential of youth.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted in 2015, names youth as “critical agents of change” and prioritizes them across its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Young people played an important role in defining the agenda for these goals. SDG 16 specifies commitment to “promote peaceful and inclusive societies, provide access to justice for all, and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.” This makes the goal important for all stakeholders working on youth political empowerment.

EMBs’ and other electoral stakeholders’ aspirations for inclusive elections are reflected in SDG 16.7: “Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making at all levels.” Empowering youth to be included, to participate, and to be represented requires EMBs to a) mainstream youth engagement throughout the electoral cycle and b) ensure that strategies and activities to meet this target are driven by the needs expressed by young people and built upon consultative processes.

Covering governance, inclusion, participation, rights and security, SDG 16 can only be met if all segments of society are involved in decision-making processes at all levels. Therefore, the targets are particularly important for all stakeholders who are working on youth political empowerment—from taking measures to prevent conflicts throughout the electoral cycle and supporting youth as active agents for peace to working with the media during the electoral cycle to help ensure that the fundamental freedoms of expression and association are protected. See Annex: About SDG16

UN Security Council Resolution 2250 on Youth, Peace and Security (2015) emphasizes participation of youth in peacebuilding at all levels of governance, in peace negotiations, and in relevant interventions. Further, UNSCR 2418 calls for full implementation of the SDGs and notes the progress study recommendations.

Perceptions of youth are shifting. Instead of seeing youth as a “problem to be solved,” a discourse around young people as strategic agents in development is emerging. A common theme is the multiple roles that youth can play as beneficiaries, partners, and/or leaders in the development of peaceful and democratic societies.

The UN, international NGOs, CSOs and other IGOs, including youth-led organizations, have raised awareness about youth participation and have increased coordination of and collaboration among those actively engaged in youth and peacebuilding issues. The message for governments, EMBs, international development organizations, and other electoral stakeholders is to collaborate with youth, and especially to reach out to young people on the margins of society, who are generally excluded from decision-making processes in favor of urban, educated, and employed youth.

A number of EMBs and electoral development agencies have already adopted a youth focus in their programming, recognizing young people as a critical force for making elections more inclusive. Just as agencies have become more focused on gender equality and women’s empowerment, and on the empowerment of people with disabilities, and other typically marginalized groups in society, they are increasingly giving youth their targeted attention. An enabling environment with a legal framework free from restrictive barriers to young people is a prerequisite for youth participation, as is an educated citizenry provided with effective civic education. EMBs have a crucial role to play in carrying out this agenda.

 

KEY CONCEPTS

Five key concepts are presented and discussed below as a framework for the topic area.

Youth

For statistical purposes, the United Nations General Assembly defines youth as between the ages of 15-24, without prejudice to other definitions by member states.[i] However, since in many countries people below the age of 35 who are active in politics are considered young, this topic area uses a more flexible definition of youth — people between the ages of 15 and 35.

Electoral Cycle

This topic area is grounded in the electoral cycle approach – one that emphasizes the importance of long-term activities aimed at developing capacities for inclusive political participation. It covers the pre-electoral, electoral, and post-electoral periods. As such, the topic area provides strategies and good practices for youth and EMBs to create an enabling environment for participation, to empower young men and women to raise their voices, to engage in electoral operations, and to become active change agents for peaceful elections.

See Annex: Electoral Cycle and Youth. See also Annex: Tips for Engaging with Youth Throughout the Electoral Cycle.

Gender-sensitive

This topic area takes into consideration the diversity of various groups of women and men as well as their specific activities and challenges. Young women in many societies face “double discrimination” (based on both their age and gender) throughout the electoral cycle. Therefore, this topic area stresses the importance of developing and implementing targeted strategies and activities to enable and empower young women to participate.

Intersectionality

Young people face numerous barriers to participating in development and political processes that affect their lives. Intersectionality acknowledges the interplay of these barriers. Because systems of discrimination and disadvantage based on social categorizations such as age, ethnicity, class and gender intersect, the oppressive effects of these systemic inequalities are compounded. This topic area recognizes that young people experience discrimination based on their age and that where their age intersects with disadvantages and marginalization based on socioeconomic status, gender, disability, sexual orientation, and ethnic minority identity, young people bear the burden of multiple inequalities.

Good Practices

This topic area provides various practices and strategies on how EMBs have fostered youth participation throughout electoral processes. It is evident that successful strategies in one country might not be effective or useful in other socio-political contexts. As such, examples provided should serve only as a source of inspiration for EMBs on how youth can be empowered throughout the electoral cycle.

default

Young men and women participate in political processes in multiple ways. However, the representation of young people in formal political processes remains limited. Participation of all citizens in formal political processes is important for democracy; furthermore, young people themselves are calling for better integration into these processes. A consensus is emerging that increasing the participation of young people has both instrumental and intrinsic value for both the young men and women themselves and for the wider society. 

EMBs and other electoral stakeholders have a crucial role in encouraging and providing a safe environment for the participation of young people in representative political processes, and also in wider policy and political processes that directly impact young people’s lives.

Increasing the participation of youth requires EMBs and other electoral stakeholders to understand the obstacles that hinder youth participation in formal political processes. It also requires them to challenge persistent negative assumptions about young people and appreciate the active roles young men and women are already playing, particularly in regard to addressing different forms of violence.

Youth as Agents for Change

Never before have so many young people been involved in movements for change worldwide. They are taking to the streets and using online social networks and communities to connect, express their voices, and campaign for change. They are protesting against authoritarian regimes, corruption, and inequalities. They are fighting for sustainable development and a better future for current and new generations. 

However, the political representation of young women and men remains limited. They are increasingly demanding more meaningful participation in decision-making processes, so they can have more control over how their lives and futures are shaped. Although young people are involved in activism in the digital space, protesting, volunteering to improve their communities and innovating for social good, their participation in and influence on formal politics is limited. Voter turnout is in decline in all democracies and is concentrated among youth. Young people are underrepresented in political decision-making positions and their involvement in political parties is dwindling. 

See Annex: Global Youth Statistics.

Young people and voting

Although official voter turnout figures are not consistently available from electoral authorities across regions, data collected by surveys conducted in different regions are sketching a discouraging picture.[i] Findings mentioned in “Youth Civic Engagement,” a 2016 UN World Youth report, reveal that voter turnout has decreased in all democracies since the 1980s and that the turnout decline is concentrated among youth.[ii] Survey results from a sample of 33 countries indicate that close to 44 percent of young adults aged 18–29 years “always vote,” compared with almost 60 per cent of all citizens.[iii] The corresponding rate is more than 70 per cent among those over the age of 50. See Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), 2018, Youth Participation in National Parliaments. (ACE Election Materials)

Young people in political decision-making positions

Globally, youth participation and representation in institutional political processes and policy-making is relatively low. People under the age of 35 are rarely found in parliaments, public administration, and decision-making bodies such as committees on peacebuilding and constitution building. In one-third of countries, eligibility for the national parliament starts at 25 years or higher (as high as 45 in some places).[i] Even when the voting age is 18 years of age, eligibility to be a candidate is often higher. See Lowering the Age of Eligibility to Run for Office. 

Young people in political parties

While in the past political engagement of citizens was mainly channeled through activism in political parties (membership, voluntary work, door-door campaigning, attending meetings etc.), the last decade has shown that political parties are facing difficulties in attracting new party members, and in particular young people.[i] The 2016 UN Global Youth Report shows that political party membership is less prevalent among those under the age of 30 than among older adults. Only 4.1 percent of 18–29-year-olds are active party members, compared with 5 percent of all adults.[ii] See Youth and Political Parties.

 

The importance of youth participation in formal political processes

For political systems to be representative, all parts of society must be included. When young people are disenfranchised or disengaged from political processes, a significant portion of the population has little or no voice or influence in decisions that affect group members’ lives. A key consequence is the undermining of political systems’ representativeness.

To make a difference in the longer term, it is essential that young people are engaged in formal political processes and have a say in formulating today’s and tomorrow’s politics. Inclusive political participation is not only a fundamental political and democratic right but also is crucial to building stable and peaceful societies and developing policies that respond to the specific needs of younger generations. For young people to be adequately represented in political institutions, processes, and decision-making, and in particular in elections, they must know their rights and be given the necessary knowledge and capacity to participate in a meaningful way at all levels.

When there are obstacles to participating in formal, institutionalized political processes, young people can rapidly feel disempowered. Many tend to believe that their voices are not going to be heard or that they will not be taken seriously even if they are heard. The problem becomes circular as politicians may lose interest in responding to the aspirations of young people if they cannot win their votes. This in turn leads to young people being increasingly excluded from taking part in decision-making, or in debates about key socio-economic and political issues, despite their sensitivity to the demands for social equity and justice, environmental protection and cultural diversity.

In new and emerging democracies, the inclusion of young people in formal political processes is important from the start. See Annex: A Spotlight on Countries in Transition. Young people’s active contributions can bring democratic values to life, leading to the overturning of authoritarian practices. In countries where young people have led protests that have forced authoritarian regimes from power, they are likely to feel significant frustration if they are not included in new formal decision-making procedures. This can destabilize democratization and accelerate conflict dynamics.

EMBs and other electoral stakeholders have a role to play in promoting young people’s participation in formal decision-making processes. For this role to be effective, it is necessary to understand the interconnected nature of the obstacles to participation in these processes that young people encounter.

default

Significant obstacles to youth political participation occur at different levels and in different areas, including structural, individual, and organizational ones. Also, and importantly, election-related violence has a negative impact on youth participation in elections.

Obstacles at the structural level

The following issues are hindering young people’s participation at the structural level: 

• Age requirements to vote or run for office. The first barrier for youth participation is the minimum voting age requirement set for national elections at 18 in most countries, which disenfranchises younger citizens. The second barrier for youth participation is the minimum age for eligibility to run for office, which is often set higher than the age to vote. 

•  Age restriction in campaigning in some of the countries. As youth (15-35) encompasses “minors without voting rights’, “minors with voting rights’ and “young adults with voting rights’ some electoral laws penalize political parties who use minors for campaigning. It can be a challenge to both protect youth and encourage their participation at the same time. 

•  Increased costs for candidate nomination and campaigning and the lack of political finance regulations make it even more difficult for youth to start a political career. Similarly, if parties are not giving financial support to young candidates at the same rates as for older candidates, they are disadvantaged. 

•  Social and cultural traditions. In most societies, politics has been for centuries a domain of older, often male and wealthy citizens, a situation that has resulted in the systematic exclusion of young people from political debates and decision-making and thus contributed to the under representation of youth. Despite a broad consensus that young people have an important role to play in political processes, the participation of youth in politics remains a sensitive issue in some regions. While participation of all citizens at the local level is the cornerstone to build healthy democracies, it is often at the local level that young people are not given the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. 

• Young women are in many countries subject to “double discrimination” based on their age and gender. They also often experience additional obstacles compared with men. Because of social conventions and/or insecure or unsafe environments, women still face serious barriers to get registered as voters and to cast their votes. Some age eligibility for candidacy (such as between 25-30 years old) can negatively affect women’s decision to run for the office, as this age bracket is sometimes the age where women “are expected” to get married or have children. They are also underrepresented as staff in EMBs, particularly in senior positions.[i] Despite gender quotas established by many EMBs for boards or commissioner posts, other senior leadership positions are still mainly or even solely male-dominated. 

 

Obstacles at the individual level

The following obstacles hinder young people’s participation at the individual level: 

•  Distrust in political institutions. A growing number of citizens (including young people) have little trust in formal political processes, political institutions and leaders, perhaps because they feel they are not representative of their interests.[i]
• Lack of confidence and trust in EMBs. The composition of EMB leadership is in many countries a controversial issue. If stakeholders, political parties, do not agree with the composition of an EMB, there is an increased risk that they will boycott the elections and demotivate citizens from participating, which can lead to a low voter turnout.
•  Lack of access to/knowledge about political processes. Young people are grappling with understanding the complexities of democratic societies and formal political processes. The UN 2016 Global Youth Report shows that nearly 53 percent of young college graduates say they always vote in national elections, in comparison with about 44 percent of all 18–29-year-olds.[ii] Other groups that are likely to lack the required knowledge to participate are marginalized youth such as minorities, unemployed youth, and those living in isolation and/or poverty. A weak understanding of democratic principles and electoral processes makes it more difficult for youth to perceive elections as routes to express their grievances, demand change, and hold governments accountable.
• Social and economic exclusion/marginalization. Finding a sustainable job has become a daily struggle for many young people in all parts of the world. They have to cope with precarious working conditions such as part-time, short-term, temporary, and low-paid employment situations, all of which make it hard to find a work–family balance, rent a house and access health care services (among other important priorities).[iii] Living conditions are even harder for young women, youth growing up in poverty and conflicts, youth without education certificates, and unemployed youth.

Obstacles at the organizational level

At the organizational level, inadequate or ineffective youth policies of EMBs, political parties and parliaments are factors in the limited participation of young people in formal politics. 

• Limited data on youth political participation. Data collection is essential to understand the complexities of youth political exclusion and to develop comprehensive youth strategies and targeted interventions to foster youth participation throughout the electoral cycle. Many EMBs do not have either (or both) quantitative and qualitative data on youth electoral participation. EMBs may not have easily accessible data. Even if they do have data, such as citizens’ birth dates in voter registration systems, they may lack the capacity (time, skills, resources) or inclination to analyze the data in ways that are useful for these purposes.
• Lack of an exclusive EMB youth policy and sustainable funding. 

o   Provisions for youth involvement are often grouped with other underrepresented groups such as minorities, indigenous peoples, women, and disabled people. As a result, EMBs do not adequately profile their initiatives targeting youth. 

o   EMBs’ youth initiatives are mostly tied to voter education initiatives, which are strengthened and supported when elections are drawing closer yet are abandoned or ignored after elections are held. Voter education programs are often not extended beyond the election period, even though such activities are most effective when integrated into broader civic education programs that focus on broader concepts such as democracy, participation, and representation. 

o   Youth engagement projects are not always seen as a priority. As a result, already scarce funds available for the organization of elections are often diverted to other areas of work. 

o   EMBs often don’t coordinate with the formal education system on the delivery of civic and voter education and/or engagement with youth initiatives. 

• Low representation of youth in EMB structures. Strict recruitment policies (e.g., required years of experience) and a lack of training opportunities for young people within EMB structures contribute considerably to the underrepresentation of youth in higher levels of decision-making.
• Voter registration. In some countries, complex registration processes and the costs related to obtaining the necessary documentation to get enrolled constitute serious barriers for youth to get registered. Women who may not be able to leave their homes due to cultural norms and family duties face major obstacles to get registered if no special provisions and initiatives (including education and awareness among men) are established to facilitate their registration. Voter registration for youth studying away from home can be considerably more difficult as they often do not have the time and money to travel back home to get registered in their constituencies.
• Party politics: Political parties are the gatekeepers of elected positions and decide who will be placed on their candidate lists and at which position. Political parties’ nomination processes have not always favored young candidates, as they are often placed in low positions on candidates’ lists, with very limited possibilities to get elected. To counter the declining youth political party membership, youth wings have been established. Unfortunately, political party leadership has not always taken youth wings seriously, such as when these groups’ mandates are limited to supporting campaigns and/or recruiting new party members. In such instances, they often are given no power to influence nomination processes, set agendas or write party manifestos. 

• Interrupted electoral cycles: If one or more election is delayed for any reason, there might be the risk that young people, particularly first-time voters, opt out in subsequent votes. Their lack of opportunity to cast ballots in originally scheduled polls can easily transform into lack of interest for the political affairs and self-isolation from democratic processes.

Legislation that affects the environment for youth political participation

Citizen political participation requires an enabling legal environment, one that includes social and political freedoms guaranteed in democracies. In autocratic, developing and/or politically fragile countries, civic space is shrinking; there are an increasing number of countries restricting civic engagement by enacting laws that restrict freedom of expression and movement. This has a serious impact on citizen participation in political and electoral processes, especially for youth, who often use non-formal methods of participation, such as activism. 

Restrictions on expression, assembly and association limit the freedom of citizens to demonstrate peacefully, to engage in political dialogue, and to criticize politicians and candidates. The ability to share and access information and to document human rights abuses or irregularities in governmental and election processes, is fundamental to a healthy democracy. However, in the name of protecting their citizens against threats to their security, governments frequently limit access to information, and in the most extreme cases, cut off internet services entirely. 

Researchers have documented an increasing number of countries that have been suspected of or have blocked access to internet during elections. Additionally, some electoral commissions have asked phone companies to block more than a dozen social media outlets. Since young people are particularly active on social media, they are disproportionally impacted by any attempt to block these outlets. 

As they occupy the civic and political space with their online and offline forms of activism, many young people, who would otherwise try to keep governments, corporations and other state and non-state organizations accountable, are unable to do so.

Election-related violence

Election-related violence has significantly hindered the meaningful engagement of young people in electoral processes. Elections are one of the main pillars of democracy. However, elections can trigger violence when fundamental human rights such as the rights of association and expression are violated and when certain segments of society are unable to engage with from political processes. Countries emerging from internal conflicts such as civil war have an especially high potential for conflict during electoral processes.[i] The use of media including social media to intimidate and harass is an increasing form of election-related violence. See Social Media. 

In countries with a history of electoral violence, young people are often involved as perpetrators or victims of the violence. That is because they are often used as foot soldiers by politicians and armed groups that want to disrupt polling. As long as youth are vulnerable for political and military exploitation they will be hindered from fully participating in electoral processes. 

Women are affected in different ways than men by electoral violence. Voter turnout among women is much lower than among men, particularly in post- conflict countries where there is a high threat of gender-based violence and in countries with high risks of intimidation of women in public life. 

Preventing the eruption of election-related violence to preserve the integrity of elections and democratic systems is thus fundamental to a country’s long-term peace and stability. This objective is also acknowledged in Agenda 2030’s Sustainable Development Goal 16.1, which focuses on reducing all forms of violence to achieve “peace, justice and strong institutions.” Reducing the risk of election-related violence is a complex proceeding that requires “[building] general trust among key players, including media, security services, political parties, civil society, and others in crisis prevention programmes.”[ii] Therefore, EMBs, in conjunction with other electoral stakeholders, should take action to reduce the risks of electoral violence and enhance peoples’ sense of security and freedom in exercising their right to vote. 

In taking this action, EMBs and other electoral stakeholders should follow an approach that acknowledges the importance of youth empowerment, participation and inclusion. Such an approach is more likely to address young people’s underlying experiences of marginalization than one which perpetuates negative stereotypes of the youth population as a whole.

See IPU (2015) Youth Participation in Parliaments and Peace and Security (ACE Electoral Materials)^[iii]

See IDS (2018) Youth Engagement in the Realm of Local Governance: Opportunities for Peace?^[iv] (ACE Electoral Materials)^[v]

See Youth initiatives: Supporting citizen engagement with government and civic life^[vi] (ACE Electoral Materials)

 

default

Distorting assumptions about young people and how they participate in political processes are common and are often triggered by lack of understanding and/or by prejudice. These persistent assumptions inaccurately characterize the everyday experiences of most youth – who do not constitute a homogenous group – and can lead to discrimination of young people, negatively affecting their capacity to participate in political processes.

While some aspects of these negative assumptions about youth participation are grounded in reality, on the whole they are misleading. Assumptions about young people that distort the actual picture include the following: 

•  they are apathetic about and disengaged from politics – so, for example, they don’t bother voting
• they lack maturity, experience, and knowledge, implying they are not capable or intelligent enough to make informed decisions (such as when voting) and are easily manipulated
• they are “anti-state,” with a propensity for violence and extremism.

 

 

 

Are young people politically apathetic?

It is true that voter turnout tends to be significantly lower among youth than among the older population but interpreting this as evidence of apathy ignores the structural and organizational obstacles to electoral participation many young people face. It also neglects to account for the distrust many young people feel towards traditional institutions of governance. A feeling of disconnection from a process that is not viewed as an effective tool for meaningful political engagement is not apathy.

Are young people too immature to be included in decision-making?

There are arguments both countering and supporting the idea that young people lack the maturity, experience and knowledge necessary for making informed decisions. Many people who are older than the minimum age to vote in their countries could be said to lack these qualities; many who are over the minimum voting age are heavily influenced by others. See Lowering the Voting Age (ACE Forum) provides examples of countries that have challenged this stereotype of youth and lowered the voting age to make political participation more inclusive.

Do young people have a propensity for violence and extremism?

Young people can be powerful challengers of the status quo; this is a time-honored dimension of their change agency. There are, however, young men, and increasingly young women, involved in violence and extremist groups and this has given rise to a picture of youth generally as a threat to global security and stability. However, the majority of young men and women who mount challenges to the status quo do so through peaceful protest, social critique, cultural expression, and online mobilization and organization. 

In the case of young people’s engagement in violence, the key drivers have been found to be discrimination and corruption.[i] This is all the more reason to work towards inclusion of young people in formal decision-making processes, so that they may grapple in a non-violent manner with the injustices and deprivation they experience. 

The Missing Peace:  Independent Progress Study on Youth, Peace and Security – a study mandated by the United Nations Security Council’s Resolution 2250 so that effective responses at local, national, regional, and international levels could be recommended – concluded that the “overarching consequence of … negative stereotypes is that they contribute to the marginalization and stigmatization of youth by framing young people as a problem to be solved, or an actual threat, rather than recognizing the assets and resources they offer, or the hopes and aspirations they articulate.”[ii]

default

The concept of participation entails the notion that all citizens should be involved in decision-making processes that affect them. This includes direct and indirect ways for people of all ages to exercise influence as individuals, as members of networks and associations, and through various political institutions. By extension, “youth participation” can be understood as the active involvement of young people in decision-making processes and institutions that affect their environment and their lives within it.

Formal participation

Participation in formal political and electoral processes and structures includes:

• voting
• being a member of a political party (and joining youth wings)
• standing as a candidate at an election for a political position
• being part of election administration, such as a polling official
• being part of a CSO
• and observing elections.

Participation of young people in formal political and electoral processes is relatively low compared to older citizens across the globe. Voting, one of the most important formal avenues for political participation, is a clear example. Data on voter turnout from various countries suggest that young voters tend to participate less in polls compared to older citizens. Similar evidence is available for membership and leadership positions in political parties and parliaments.[i] Non-state governance mechanisms, such as tribal leadership, are typically based on seniority or lineage, and tend not to encourage youth involvement.

Informal participation

Youth are more inclined to participate in informal processes than in formal political and electoral ones. Activism, protests, and campaigns are common avenues; youth are often driving forces behind reform movements. In the current world and throughout history, there are many examples of powerful youth-led protest movements. Youth also tend to get involved in civic, service-oriented activities, such as volunteering for a social cause. Many young people are more inclined to join a tree-planting project, for example, than to join a political party talking about planting trees in the future. 

Both formal and informal engagement can be understood as political participation. Both can be beneficial for a vivid and resilient democracy. In some cases, it is important to help bridge gaps between the two.

Participation beyond formal electoral processes

Beyond formal political and electoral processes and structures there are a number of ways young people can be actively involved in decision-making processes and institutions that affect their environment and their lives within it. These include structures that enable youth to provide inputs and influence policy-making processes and structures that enable youth to learn about policy-making processes, such as:

•  national youth councils
•  youth parliaments (local, national, regional, international)
•  local processes that feed into policy-making processes (e.g. youth mayors)
•  forums (local, national, regional, international)
•  peace processes (in post-conflict contexts)
•  participatory or structured social dialogues and youth observatories
•  participatory planning (e.g. budgeting and budget advocacy), monitoring (e.g. social audits, community score cards, and other citizens’ oversight mechanisms) and research
•  youth consultations and panels 
• youth juries, mock trials
• opinion polls, online surveys/consultations, and petitions
• civil society organizations.

Opportunities for youth to participate in political processes depend largely on the political and cultural context. A democratic environment can be more favorable to participation in general. For the most part, promoting youth participation needs to be geared towards achieving levels relative to those of the rest of the population.

Example: In Ukraine, a young activist mobilized young people in her community to open a youth radio station. Co-funded by local government and USAID’s DOBRE program, it works to increase the involvement of local residents and civil society organizations in local government decision-making, while holding local officials accountable through monitoring and oversight – the youth radio station had its first live broadcast in March 2018. Allowing local voices, including those of young activists, to be heard, the radio station helps young people participate in civic journalism.[i]

A continuum of youth participation

There are several different theoretical models of youth participation. A well-known one, Roger Hart’s “Ladder of Youth Involvement,” depicts participation on a continuum, from manipulation and tokenism, which do not constitute real participation, to higher levels of participation in which young people initiate, direct, and share decisions with adults. See Annex: Hart’s Ladder of Youth Involvement.

An example of participation at the lower end of the ladder would be adding young people to a program’s discussion panel without giving them any role in the management and administration of, or decision-making about, the program. If an EMB were to establish a voter education program targeting first-time voters, a lower-rung approach might be having a consultative meeting with young members of a youth CSO and including some photos of them in the voter education campaign posters, but not much beyond that. Examples of a higher-rung approach would be to partner with various members of youth CSOs (and other CSOs that may include young people, such as disability organizations) in conceptualizing, planning, implementing, and evaluating the entire first-time voter education program.

Many structures and processes claiming to be for the benefit of youth merely give the illusion of meaningful participation. Tokenistic, pseudo-participatory activities do not effectively give young people a voice and influence in decision-making. “Tokenism is when young people appear to have been given a voice, but really have little or no choice about how they participate. It is participation for participation’s sake or for a photo opportunity. Young participants lack knowledge and capacities and are rarely mandated by their peers.”[i]

Viewing young people through different lenses

Another approach to meaningful youth participation is that of “three lenses,” A key understanding of this approach is that young people participate in different ways as beneficiaries, partners, and/or leaders.[i] EMBs and other electoral stakeholders might find it helpful to look at their engagement with youth through these lenses when deciding on strategies and programs as they work towards the goal of enhancing youth political participation. They could assess their current engagement approaches using the “ladder” continuum, deciding where they want to be, and what roles young people can play (as beneficiaries, partners, and/or leaders) to achieve their engagement aims. This may require a shift in thinking about the participation of youth as merely beneficiaries in one-off projects to sustained and youth-led processes. 

An example of using the “three lenses” approach to a voter education program targeting first-time voters would be for EMBs to consider the role of youth as:

•  Beneficiaries – e.g. the youth target group is people aged 15–17 who have not registered to vote for an upcoming election (either nation-wide or local)
•  Partners – e.g. young men and women representing various CSOs (aiming for a cross-section of youth from marginalized communities) and other community organizations (such as schools, universities, youth clubs)
•   Leaders – e.g. the personnel and committee managing the program could be drawn from the EMB (preferably led by a young employee), from the partnering organizations, and from the beneficiaries.

While EMBs and other electoral stakeholders will want to avoid tokenism, it is not always possible to engage with youth as other than beneficiaries. Whether or not an organization can partner with young people will depend on the practicalities of the particular situation under their consideration. The three lenses approach encourages organizations to view youth as potential leaders and partners, working with them in these roles when this is possible.  

Characteristics of meaningful youth political participation

Effective and meaningful youth political participation has one of three attributes.[i] First, it can be consultative, where young people’s voices are heard in an adult-assigned consultation process, where they have capacities, a mandate and information to fully perform their roles, or through a youth-led advocacy initiative. Second, it can entail youth-led participation, where young people have a direct impact on decision-making within their own youth communities, such as through youth-led NGOs, student councils, and youth parliaments with competencies and budgets. Third, it can involve youth collaborative participation, where young people effectively take part in regular political decision-making processes, including as voters, or as members of parliament, political parties, or advocacy groups.

Strategies to enhance meaningful and effective youth political participation can:

1.   Be grounded in a rights-based approach to youth political participation and avoid tokenistic and pseudo-participatory activities.

2.   Include direct components of consultative, youth-led, and/or collaborative participation, and emphasize learning-by doing and practice-what-you-preach approaches.

3.   Meet minimum standards for youth political participation by being transparent, respectful, accountable, youth-friendly, and relevant, inclusive, voluntary, and safe.

4.   Include capacity development on the individual and the organizational level, and foster enabling environments, preferably in a reciprocal fashion (such as by developing skills for a reformed structural setting).

5.   Be grounded in an accurate understanding of the current state of youth in a given context.

Following a rights-based approach entails considering youth as potential agents of change – as part of the solution, not a problem to be resolved by others. Further, young people are not a homogenous block and other social aspects (such as gender, rural/urban dwelling, ethnicity, language, among others) need to be taken into consideration when designing interventions. An emerging challenge for EMBs and other electoral stakeholders is to find a way to facilitate youth engagement through formal institutionalized processes and simultaneously integrate less traditional forms of political engagement.

Capacity development

Capacity development can be an integral part of any strategy for meaningful participation. This is also highlighted in the international legal framework that addresses youth. The UNDP approach to capacity development “reflects the viewpoint that capacity resides within individuals, as well as at the level of organizations and within the enabling environment.”[i] These three levels form an integrated system, as illustrated in the figure below.[ii]

 

 

UNDP systemic approach to capacity development. Source: UNDP, ’Capacity Development: Practice Note’, 2008

 

default

Young women and men can and do play active roles as agents of positive and constructive change. This was validated in December 2015 by the adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2250 on Youth, Peace and Security.[i] While acknowledging the prominent threat posed by the rise of radicalization among youth, UNSC Resolution 2250 formally recognizes the positive and important contribution of young people in the maintenance of international peace and security, emphasizing that youth must be regarded as key partners, rather than as victims or perpetrators. The implementation of UNSCR 2250 requires the meaningful engagement and representation of young people in all processes of decision-making and societal transition.

More than six hundred million young people live in fragile and conflict-affected contexts today. They are among the most affected by the multiple and often interlinked forms of violence – from political violence and criminal gangs to organized crime and terrorist attacks.[ii] An estimated one in four young people are living in situations where they are exposed to such violence, although this number is likely understated.[iii] The human, social and economic costs of this violence are enormous and long-lasting.

As well as being victims, however, young people are the primary perpetrators of armed violence and conflict in some areas, particularly in fragile contexts. In such contexts, where the disenfranchisement of young people from political processes leads to widespread feelings of injustice, frustration, and mistrust, youth can be involved in electoral-related violence, which might occur at different stages of the electoral cycle, mostly during voter registration, campaigning, voting, and tabulation of results.

While young people are disproportionately affected by violence, the vast majority of them are not participating in it, even in the face of legitimate social, political, and economic grievances. Indeed, many young people throughout the world are undertaking peacebuilding and violence prevention activities, initiatives, and projects. These efforts to appease tensions, rebuild trust, and foster social cohesion range from volunteer grassroots groups to transnational networks. Some are youth-led while others are youth-focused.

In the study prepared for the UN Security Council, the Missing Peace: Independent Progress Study on Youth, Peace and Security, mandated by Resolution 2250, an array of endeavors that aim to build and sustain peace, varying in size, depth and impact were reported. The various types of youth peacebuilding engagements intersect and overlap but one way of categorizing them is by context:

• situations of relative peace – youth-led or youth-focused work to prevent the outbreak of violent conflict, including early-intervention (longer-term) models with young children, as well as more immediate prevention approaches (shorter-term interventions) with youth in divided societies

• ongoing and escalating violent conflict – interventions to mitigate the impact of violent conflict where it has emerged, and to build peace and social cohesion (e.g. peer-to-peer dialogue and disengaging and reintegrating former fighters); providing humanitarian support, food and aid (even where international organizations are in retreat because of the escalating risks of war); monitoring and documenting human rights violations during conflict

• post-conflict – engaging in efforts to ensure that various forms of violent conflict do not recur or re-emerge; recognizing continuity and change in how violent conflict transmutes and evolves over time; addressing new fault lines of exclusion, which often reflect the underlying causes of past conflict that have not been adequately resolved.[iv]

 

Example: In Tunisia in 2015, a group of young entrepreneurs ran a one-day event “Entrepreneurship against Terrorism” in which young participants were given training in leadership and business development and then, in groups, challenged to come up with alternative and innovative ways to contribute to the country’s struggle against radicalization. The winning group pitched the idea of an app to make it easier for people to report suspicious and potentially disruptive activities, such as incitements to violence. The app, based on the premise that many people are too intimidated to pick up the phone and make a call, enables a witness to report the incident, giving its exact geographical location, with one click.[v]

Example: In Somalia, Elman Peace and Human Rights Center in Mogadishu presents an alternative to militant groups by giving young people vocational skills, education, investment to start social enterprises, and leadership training aimed at compelling their peers who are still in armed groups to defect.[vi]

---

[i] Resolution 2250 was adopted by the Security Council at its 7573rd meeting, on December 9, 2015, www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2250(2015).

[ii] Inter-Agency Network on Youth Development, Participation in Peacebuilding: A Practice Note, (Inter-Agency Network on Youth Development Working Group on Youth and Peacebuilding with support from PeaceNexus Foundation, January, 2016), http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/democratic-governance/practice-note--young-people-s-participation-in-peacebuilding.html.

[iii] Simpson, The Missing Peace, 22.

[iv] Simpson, The Missing Peace, 47–48.

[v] Christine Petré, “Tunisian Youth Counter Radicalization with Innovation,” Voices and Views: Middle East and North Africa (blog), World Bank (World Bank, July 31, 2015), http://blogs.worldbank.org/arabvoices/tunisian-youth-counter-radicalization-innovation.

[vi] Extremely Together, “Ilwad Elman: Including Youth is a Priority,” (Extremely Together, May 18, 2016, http://www.kofiannanfoundation.org/blog/ilwad-elman-including-youth-priority/.

International Legal Framework

International electoral standards form the foundation for legal electoral frameworks. The rights to participate fully in a country’s political and electoral processes are basic human rights recognized in an extensive body of international and regional legal instruments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR, 1948)[i] and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966).[ii]

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child[iii], adopted in 1989, established conditions for nations to endorse young people’s participation, but only relates to people under 18 years of age, and its main emphasis is on the protection of children.[iv] The only international treaty focusing specifically on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of young people is the Ibero-American Convention on the Rights of Youth. It was signed in Spain in October 2005 and came into force on 1 March 2008. Article 21 of the Convention enshrines the right to political participation of young people.[v]

The Committee on the Rights of the Child released a “General Comment on the implementation of the rights of the child during adolescence,” (GC20, 2016). This General Comment builds on the definitions outlined in the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child and advocates for specific minimum ages as well as for the removal of other age limits entirely. While it does not mention age limits for voting and candidature, it does emphasize the realization of the rights of youth given their evolving capacities as they transition into adulthood.

Alongside the conventions, there are a number of global, regional, and national policies, which support and advocate for meaningful youth participation in decision-making, and offer concrete suggestions for how national, bilateral, regional, and multilateral agencies can increase political participation of youth. These have undoubtedly helped bring youth issues to the forefront of government priorities and into the focus of EMBs. See Annex: Timeline of International Youth Participation in Democracy and Peace, which includes more details on the international and regional frameworks in place to foster the political participation of youth.

During the 2010s, the international community re-affirmed its commitment to youth participation in several resolutions, charters and action plans. Examples are the African Youth Charter[vi] and the EU Strategy for Youth[vii], both of which highlight the value of increased information and capacity development to ensure that young people are equipped with the necessary knowledge and skills to become active citizens and leaders in their communities. With the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, 193 United Nations Member States pledged to ensure “no one will be left behind” and to “endeavour to reach the furthest behind first.” It is acknowledged that youth are among the left behind across the countries and the needs to empower youth in the field of governance is emphasized.

International instruments and frameworks provide a solid foundation for countries to develop legislation, policies, and practices to foster the full participation of youth in their political and electoral processes. A clear understanding of the international legal framework can likely help EMBs to ensure that electoral laws and processes comply with international standards and that youth-sensitive strategies and program are developed accordingly. See Annex: International Normative and Policy Framework

default

National Legal Framework

A youth-friendly legal framework is crucial in enabling youth political participation. In one-third of countries, laws stipulate an eligibility age to run for parliament at 25 years or higher, creating a gap between the legal age of majority and/or voting age, on the one hand, and the age at which an individual can serve in elected office.

Since national governments and parliaments can review the legal framework, they can consider:

 

• aligning the minimum voting age and the minimum age of eligibility to run for office where appropriate (i.e. where the voting age is 18 or above, as it may be controversial in cases of voting age set below 18)
• introducing youth and women’s quotas in electoral laws (bearing in mind that this may only be appropriate under certain electoral systems). If this is introduced, it should be done in a manner that effectively ensures the inclusion of women and youth and avoids a “pool” quota of specialized groups (for example youth, women, people with disabilities), which could cause competition among them.
• identifying and addressing context-specific legal barriers to youth participation, such as to make it easier for youth-led organizations to register as legal entities.

Constitutions

Formerly written in closed-door meetings by mostly male and elder legislators, constitutions are now usually drafted in more open and transparent processes that include all citizens. The increased involvement of historically excluded groups often has resulted in the incorporation of special provisions to foster political participation of youth. 

In 2012–2013, UNDP supported a nationwide dialogue between National Constituent Assembly (NCA) members and citizens and CSOs in all 24 of Tunisia’s governorates. A total of 80 Assembly deputies were provided with training in both legislative and constitutional drafting, and in public consultation techniques. More than 6,000 citizens, 300 CSOs and 320 university representatives provided input during the dialogue. A national survey of 1,100 young people provided detailed information on the desires and expectations of Tunisian youth, the segment of the population whose exclusion sparked the 2011 revolution.[i] Article 8 of the Constitution acknowledges the role of youth with this language: Youth are an active force in building the nation. The state seeks to provide the necessary conditions for developing the capacities of youth and realizing their potential, supports them to assume responsibility, and strives to extend and generalize their participation in social, economic, cultural and political development.

Constitutions with special provisions for historically marginalized groups lay a strong foundation to foster broad and comprehensive electoral processes. Because constitutions are the highest law within legal systems, they give relevant stakeholders (including EMBs) a possible instrument to develop targeted interventions to promote the participation of historically excluded groups, which can include youth. 

Youth policies and strategies

The increasing focus on youth participation by international actors such as the United Nations and other development organizations has, since the beginning of the 21st century, given rise to a number of events, declarations, and calls for actions to enhance the quality of youth participation in decision-making processes. In responding to this agenda and the 2015 SDGs, national governments have written or updated their youth policies and strategies: 127 countries in 2016 had a national youth policy (up from 99 countries in 2013).[ii] National policies provide an operational framework for multiple actors to develop concrete actions to facilitate meaningful participation of youth in decision-making processes. 

Many countries have developed national strategies and action plans but there are often challenges surrounding their implementation. Commonly there is a lack of resources allocated to their implementation, and a lack of horizonal accountability and lack of political incentives. Morocco provides an example of a comprehensive plan and strategy, including concrete action plans, preliminary indicators of implementation outcomes, and extensive an M&E plan 

While having a national policy does not on its own guarantee effective youth participation, it is a starting point. National youth policies can mandate government actions, set targets, and provide impetus for organizations to increase youth participation in a range of decision-making processes and strategies. These processes include youth parliaments, youth participation in consultative forums, dialogues, peace-making processes, and policy-making bodies.

Quotas for Youth

Although young people between the ages of 15 and 24 constitute about one fifth of the world’s population,[i] their participation and influence in formal politics remain limited. The rights to participate in a country’s political and electoral processes are recognized as basic human rights, yet youth are grossly underrepresented in parliaments and governments across the globe. Several countries have responded by implementing quotas for youth to increase their participation. Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Rwanda, Sri Lanka, Tunisia and Uganda, among other countries, have adopted some kind of quota to bolster the representation of youth. These quotas take various forms, but most fall into the following categories:

•  reserved seats (constitutional and/or legislative)
•  legal candidate quotas (constitutional and/or legislative)
• voluntary political party quotas.[ii]

 

A few countries have reserved seats to promote inclusion in legislative bodies. Illustrative examples for countries with reserved seats for young people include: 

• Kenya, with 12 members nominated by political parties to represent special interest groups (youth, persons with disabilities, and workers) with the relevant list to be composed of alternating male and female candidates
• Uganda, with five seats for people under 30, one of whom must be a woman
• Rwanda, with two members of parliament elected by the National Youth Council.[iii] 

Written into the reformed Rwandan Constitution of 2003 are reserved seats in the legislative branch of government. Of the 80 members of the Chamber of Deputies, the lower house of the legislature’s 24 seats are reserved for female politicians, two for youth representatives, and one for the disabled community.[iv] While the implementation of a youth quota guarantees youth representation, a common critique in Rwanda is that the youth “representation does not effectively meet the needs of the population” and is therefore still minimal in its impact.[v] 

It is good practice for political parties and EMBs encouraging the adoption of youth quotas to acknowledge and take into account the percentage of youth in the country, as well as the intersectional nature of all population groups, so as to provide adequate representation to all. However, quotas are not necessarily the best solution to the problem of under-representation – they need to be considered carefully in light of other measures and may only be appropriate with certain types of electoral systems. 

In countries with constitutions or laws providing quotas for young candidates, political parties are obligated to fill all their candidate lists with a minimum number of young people. Several countries have adopted them; impacts vary, and usually depend on the position in which young people are placed on political party lists and the type of electoral system used. Candidate quotas can be an effective means to increase youth representation under the condition that young people are placed in electable positions. This can work in a ‘closed list’ proportional representation electoral system but would not have much of an impact in cases of “open list’ proportional representation electoral system. Yet there is a risk they will have no real impact in terms of increasing the representation of youth in a parliament if young people are placed too low on the political party candidate list in the case of a closed list proportional representation electoral system. 

As youth quotas are a relatively new form of intervention, research conducted on the implementation of gender quotas are an informative source for the success of political quotas over the long term. 

Example: Using the reserved seats quota system, Kenya has introduced gender quotas for women, with 47 seats in the national assembly, and 12 seats for special interest groups, including youth, persons with disabilities, and workers. In the senate, two seats are reserved for youth, one male and one female. Quotas also apply at sub-national level. Kenya has also aligned the eligibility age for candidates with the voting age.   

See Voluntary party quotas. See also Legislated Quotas in Topic Area: Parties and Candidates.  

For reforms to be implemented correctly, there is a need to understand that young people are not a homogenous block and that other social aspects (such as gender, rural/urban dwelling, ethnicity, and language) need to be taken into consideration when designing interventions. The inclusion of youth in political processes is a complex, multidimensional challenge that has to be addressed with a variety of tools, depending on objectives and context. With this in mind, the following reforms have been identified: 

• Encourage the introduction of youth quotas in electoral laws by means of reserved seats and/or legal candidate quotas (if appropriate – as they are not the only or necessarily the best solution).
• Encourage political parties to embed voluntary quotas for youth in their internal party regulations and place young candidates in electable positions.
• Recognize and consider the intersectional nature of population groups and take this into consideration when designing interventions. 
• When implementing youth quotas, stipulate conditions surrounding the placement of youth candidates on party lists and nomination for electable positions (where relevant to the existing electoral system).

 

 

 

 

 

Lowering the Voting Age

Most countries have a minimum voting age of 18 years; however, since the turn of this century, several countries have had ongoing debates about reducing the voting age to 17 or 16, and several jurisdictions have legislated to lower the voting age. See Annex: List of Jurisdictions and their Voting Age. 

The following countries have different minimum voting ages:[i] 

•  16 years: Argentina, Austria, Brazil, Cuba, Ecuador, Germany (only in some local elections), Malta, Nicaragua, Scotland 
•  17 years: Indonesia, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Timor-Leste 
•  19 years: Republic of Korea 
•  20 years: Bahrain, Cameroon, Nauru 
•  21 years: Côte d’Ivoire, Gabon, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, Pakistan, Samoa, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Tonga 
•  25 years: United Arab Emirates

 

The arguments for lowering the voting generally revolve around comparisons with non-electoral rights and responsibilities, international comparisons, level of political awareness and interest among the young, and the issue of maturity. 

In general, those in favor are convinced that lowering the voting age to 16 – in combination with stronger civic and voter education programs in schools – could increase the political participation of youth. The advocates for a lower voting age seek to strengthen their case by noting that 16-year-olds participate in political debates on social media and events, work, pay taxes, rent houses, and join the armed forces in some countries. Consequently, given their contributions to society, they should have the right to vote and hold representatives accountable for decisions that are affecting their daily lives. Research shows that 16-17-year-olds are more likely to vote than 18-20-year-olds—so giving them the vote when slightly younger enables them to vote when it is most convenient for them.

 The main arguments raised by opponents of lowering voting ages to 16 or another age younger than 18 are that younger people lack the maturity to grapple with complex political processes and that they would most likely be influenced by the positions of their parents or other adults. The relationship between age, maturity, and intelligence is complex and contentious. Developmental assumptions about what young people are capable of understanding and what motivates their behavior can influence public debate. The assumption that young people do not have enough life experience or maturity on which to base important decisions (such as voting), and also that they are easily manipulated, is hotly debated.

See Annex: Arguments For and Against Lowering the Voting Age.

There is a school of thought that believes there should be no fixed minimum age; that it should instead be for the individual to decide the age at which he or she is ready to vote; the suggestion being that if you are interested enough, you are mature enough.^[ii] But most supporters of change accept that there should be some fixed age at which voting is permitted, usually 16 or 17.^[iii]

This debate intersects with the discourse on the rights of children and adolescents and specifically on the issue of legal minimum age legislation, which can be contentious, contextual, and contradictory. In setting age limits, states have to balance protection with empowerment and rights. Human rights law says that there can be restrictions on who can vote in an election, as long as those restrictions are based on objective and reasonable criteria. All states have limited eligibility to vote based on age, no country allows people under 16 to vote in national elections, and only a minority allow young people aged between 16 and 18 the right to vote in national or municipal elections, some with conditions such as being employed or married.^[iv]

Several of the countries that have lowered the voting age have opted for an incremental approach, introducing the new legislation in one local district, for example, as a test-case before expanding to other districts. This approach was adopted in various jurisdictions in Austria, Germany, Norway, and the United States, but only Austria has expanded the legislation to all elections.

Since the 2010s, several jurisdictions have attempted to lower the voting age to 16 or 17 years of age – some have been successful while other attempts have been short-lived. Most attempts have been in jurisdictions in developed countries, and most have been unsuccessful; these include: Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the Council of Europe, the United Kingdom (the Welsh Assembly and the Northern Ireland Assembly want to give their 16-year-olds the vote but need UK government approval^[v]) and the United States (including California, Florida, Alaska, and two districts in Washington DC). Norway experimented with a lowered voting age in 2011 in selected municipalities as a pilot. Despite the growing momentum in many of these countries, there is also considerable resistance to lowering the voting age among the public and politicians.

There has been limited data (at least that is available in English) in relation to the experience of those jurisdictions that have lowered the voting age. And even with the more recent experiences, there have only been one or two election cycles in which to assess the impact of the legislation on patterns relating to voter turnout, voting behavior, and other potential consequences of the legislation. Future research is needed to examine the short-term and long-term impacts of such electoral reform.

The early data is, however, fairly consistent: “Studies from a municipal election in the United States, as well as national elections in Denmark and Austria, have shown that 16- and 17-year-olds are avid political participants and that voting at 16 and 17 is habit-forming. Socialized into a culture of participation early on, 16- and 17-year-old voters may age into more politically active older people than those who do not vote for the first time until they are 18 or 19.”[vi]

For more on the topic of lowering the voting age, see ACE Spotlight on Voting Age.

Lowering the Age of Eligibility to Run for Office

States and governments around the world have committed to constitutions and charters that recognize and support youth participation in electoral cycles, as well as action plans that develop knowledge and skills in young people to enable them to be active citizens and leaders. Yet youth representation remains persistently low in leadership, party membership and legislatures: 50 per cent of the global population is under 30 years, yet only 2 per cent of parliamentarians are under 30.[i] A key factor is the gap between the minimum age at which young people can vote, and the minimum age at which they can run as political candidates – often significantly higher.

While the minimum voting age is more or less aligned across countries, the age at which citizens can stand as a candidate varies widely. The average global minimum age to stand as a candidate is 22.2 years, about four years older than the almost universal minimum voting age of 18.[ii] A study conducted by the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) in 2018 concluded that in most countries citizens must wait several years after gaining the right to vote before being eligible to run for parliamentary office – usually until age 21 or 25, but in some countries as late as 35 or even 40.[iii]

Such criteria have created enormous gaps between the youth electorate and political leaders in countries with large youth populations, creating a “youth bulge.” In Zimbabwe for example, 20 per cent of the population is aged between 15 and 24,[iv] but people are not eligible to run for office until they are 21 years old for the lower house and 40 years old for the upper house.

Such age gaps between voters and political candidates can have the following consequences, among others:

• youth votes will not lead towards a higher representation of young people
• the lack of trust widens between young people and political institutions
• a perception arises and persists that participation is not going to make any difference
• elected leaders have no or only limited accountability towards the youth electorate.

Proponents of lowering the eligible age for candidacy maintain that it can lead to greater diversity and more choice for voters; equal representation rights for young people who are expected to assume adult responsibilities at voting age; fresh ideas and perspectives; and greater youth participation. Those against a lower candidacy age argue that maturity and experience are lacking in younger candidates, they may become “captives” of a political party, and they may not be equipped to withstand the pressures of the political environment.

However, many countries are recognizing age gaps as a barrier to enhanced youth participation and are reflecting on reducing age requirements to run for office. France, Austria[v], Belgium and Kenya, for example, have all lowered the required minimum age for becoming a candidate.

Elsewhere, social campaigns are increasing pressure on governments to lower the candidacy age in line with the voting age. The Not Too Young To Run campaign is a global advocacy platform through which to raise awareness on youth rights to run for elected office, and to advocate for and inspire young people to run. See Annex: Not Too Young To Run.

Example: In 2007, Turkey lowered the eligibility age for parliament from 30 to 25, following the Young MPs Now campaign, a grass-roots initiative that was run by youth organizations and youth councils. In 2017, following a constitutional referendum, Turkey again lowered the eligibility age, to 18. The 2018 elections saw the youngest ever MP candidate, an 18-year-old female high school student.

Example: In 2017, Nigerian lawmakers approved a bill lowering the age of eligibility for parliamentary representatives to 25 years. The bill, legislated in 2018, also lowers the age for the presidency from 40 to 35. The bill was the outcome of the youth-led advocacy campaign, #NotTooYoungToRun, an initiative launched in Nigeria by YIAGA, and now a global campaign to drive youth representation. In 2018 YIAGA Africa launched a new campaign, Ready to Run, to identify and support young political aspirants.

 

 

 

Political Finance Legislation

Money plays an important role in electoral processes in all countries. Without money, it is difficult for political parties in most countries to reach out to and inform citizens about their manifestos or to motivate people to register and get out to vote. 

Money only becomes problematic when costs for nomination fees and campaigning are high or escalating (which limits participation to wealthier individuals and organizations), when access to campaign financing by marginalized groups (including women, youth, persons with disabilities) is disproportionally difficult due to cultural and social barriers, when there are no legal frameworks or mechanisms in place to control donations and expenditures of political parties and candidates, and when corruption is infiltrating political parties. In these cases, money creates an uneven playing field and electoral process. 

Recognizing that political activities often require (considerable) financing, many countries have introduced state subsidies to level the playing field and encourage political pluralism. Earmarking state subsidies for specific activities and/or target groups is not new and has been used in several countries to promote the representation of underrepresented groups in political institutions. A small number of countries, including Ireland and Kenya, have drafted legislation requiring parties to use part of their funding to increase youth political representation. To ensure political parties respect regulations on the use of state subsidies, it is important to have mechanisms in place to (a) verify expenditures and activities implemented by political parties and (b) financially sanction those parties that do not comply with the regulations. 

In Kenya, according to Article 26.1 of the Political Parties Act 2011, at least 30 per cent of direct public funding provided should be used for “promoting the representation in Parliament and in the county assemblies of women, persons with disabilities, youth, ethnic and other minorities and marginalized communities.”[i] 

In Ireland, in accordance with Section 18 of the Electoral Act, 1997 (as amended), “The funding received is also deemed to include provision in respect of expenditure by qualified parties in relation to the promotion of participation by women and young persons in political activity. Public funding cannot be applied to, or be used to recoup, election or referendum expenses.”[ii] 

The political sphere in most countries continues to be dominated by wealthy and powerful individuals and groups. High and often escalating costs often limit opportunities for young people with relatively less influence or financial means, regardless of how eager they are to run for office. Proper regulations for donations and campaign expenditures should be put in place to ensure that young people from all segments in society (women, indigenous peoples, minorities, etc.) have access to funding for electoral campaigns. Otherwise, power and access remain concentrated among those from wealthy backgrounds and/or established political families. 

Weak legislation in terms of donations and spending of political parties is only one of several potential obstacles. In some countries, state and government resources are systematically used during campaign periods for the advantage of incumbents. It goes without saying that this weakens the position of opposition candidates and young people who are not associated with incumbent governments or candidates. 

Despite strong political finance regulations, many countries lack mechanisms to enforce legislation by collecting, scrutinizing, and disclosing financial reports and to address violations. In the absence of mechanisms to investigate political parties’ donations and expenditures and hold political parties accountable, it is unlikely that political parties will be penalized for not complying with the rules. Yet despite this rather obvious correlation, about 25 per cent of the countries for which data was available during research for a 2012 report lacked regulations obliging any agency to examine financial reports or to investigate potential political finance violations.[iii] 

Choice of Electoral System

There is strong evidence that the type of electoral system has an impact on the representation of women in parliament.[i] Women tend to have a greater chance of being placed on a party list as part of a team of candidates under a proportional system than to be nominated as individual candidates in a majority, winner-takes-all system. According to Ballington, “It is now conventional wisdom that in proportional representation systems, or electoral systems with a strong party bias rather than a strong candidate bias, women tend to be elected in higher numbers than majoritarian systems.”[ii] 

A “closed list” proportional representation system may also be more favorable for youth political participation, since youth face some of the same patriarchal norms as women. These consider experienced older men better suited for political leadership than women or youth. In a majoritarian system, if political parties suspect a prevalence of these norms in society, they might be more inclined to nominate men above 35 years old because they expect them to have a greater chance to win constituencies. In a proportional system, political parties might be more willing to nominate a representative team including women and youth. The team could attract additional votes from different demographic groups without turning away conservative voters. However, each electoral system has its own advantages and disadvantages, and any consideration to changing the system should be based on an understanding of the issues and the likely impact.

 

 Voting systems. Source: IPU website https://www.ipu.org/our-work/youth/data-youth-participation

 

Compulsory Voting

In about 27 countries, governments have made registration and/or voting in elections compulsory. Some of these countries impose sanctions on voters who fail to cast their ballot, others don’t. Having compulsory voting, although contentious, certainly increases participation rates of all registered citizens, including youth.

default

The Importance of Political Parties

“A healthy, resilient democracy is based on inclusiveness, which political parties and representative institutions are in a key position to safeguard. Yet parties are finding it harder to sustain an atmosphere of inclusiveness, particularly as women and youth are largely excluded from representative institutions. Younger generations are insufficiently represented in party membership, leadership and legislatures. Their marginalization from, and decreasing trust in, traditional party politics is of particular concern, as young people can make or break future models of representation.”[i]

In many countries, the relationship between youth and political parties is strained. Many young people do not trust political parties, while party leaders often complain that the youth are unwilling to get involved.

Source: The Global State of Democracy, 'Exploring Democracy's Resilience, 2017', International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance

Political Parties are the main gatekeepers for candidates to participate in elections. Parties therefore have great influence over the degree of young people’s political participation at local, regional, and national levels. In most countries, parties determine which candidates are nominated and elected and which issues achieve national prominence. They decide who will be placed on their candidate lists and at which position. Political parties’ nomination processes have not always favored young candidates, as they are often placed in low positions on candidates’ lists (in proportional representation ‘closed list’ electoral systems), with very limited possibilities to get elected. As intermediary institutions, they link the state and civil society, translating the policy preferences of citizens into political action. Individuals with political ambition are likely to seek out leadership positions within political parties. Most are of these aspiring leaders are middle-aged men.

The persistent exclusion of youth stems from a variety of factors, including: “old-boy” networks, recruitment, and promotion mechanisms based on seniority, a lack of individual capacities, and limited self-confidence and motivation. Engagement in political parties often requires long-term commitments, which is difficult for youth trying to obtain an education and to establish themselves in the labor market. Middle-aged men tend to have a greater powerbase, because they comprise a large percentage of members. In some cases, youth face more than one kind of discrimination because of their gender or because they can also belong to other marginalized groups (i.e. indigenous people, people with disabilities, and/or be lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender).

These obstacles fuel a cycle where youth are put off by the exclusionary nature of political parties and decide not to join them. In turn, because they do not join, they lack the internal powerbase to win elections and nominations. Both issues should be addressed to break the cycle: youth should be able to develop the skills and motivation to be successfully engaged in political parties, and parties should be encouraged to create space for youth. Affirmative action measures such as youth and women’s quotas and party youth wings can help move these processes forward.

Political parties could do more to encourage youth to run for office, and could consider nominating younger candidates for provincial/state elections and municipal elections. They could also advocate to have the legal age to run for office these levels of political office lowered to accommodate younger people.

 

Political Parties’ Codes of Conduct

EMBs have the capacity to facilitate the development of codes of conduct for political parties. Codes of conduct can highlight measures that political parties should take to ensure young people have the means to participate in all stages of an electoral process and are not being used to incite violence and breach peace. If mutually accepted among competing parties, codes of conduct are useful ways of building confidence, relationships, and trust among contending political forces. 

A working example of this can be seen in Zanzibar’s “Guidelines for Political Parties Code of Ethics for 2015 Election, Zanzibar.”[i] One provision, Paragraph 4b, highlights the importance of ensuring inclusiveness throughout the electoral cycle: “Political Parties will ensure equal participation of women, youth and people living with disability as voters and candidates during election.” Paragraph 4d, meanwhile, focuses on the role of political parties in ensuring peaceful elections: “Political Parties will not use women and youth groups to initiate violence and breach of peace during election.” 

Example: In Liberia in 2011, youth leaders of Liberia's political parties signed a code of conduct devised by the chairs of the youth wings of all 16 political parties along with media organizations convened by International Alert and the Liberian National Electoral Commission. It was later endorsed by the association of Liberian Community Radios, the Liberian Motorcycle Union (made up of young people, including many ex-combatants), and all 15 County Co-ordinators of the Liberian Federation of Youth at a subsequent meeting in Gbarnga. It has since been used nationally and locally throughout Liberia by these bodies to call for peaceful participation by young people during the election period. The context for developing this Code of Conduct among young leaders is that young people in Liberia have previously been manipulated towards violence, including during the long civil war. See Annex: Liberia Youth Code of Conduct. 

Candidates and Recruitment

Mentoring

Mentoring candidates from different backgrounds can serve to diversify a party’s membership and even the playing field for promotion within internal party processes. Some parties have formed mentoring networks to counteract intersectionality. In the United States and Australia, EMILY’s list has been a useful tool for mobilizing financial support and providing mentoring strategies for potential women candidates. In Australia, the Australian Labor Party established a networking group to address the lack of female representation in leadership positions within the party and within Australian state and federal parliaments. Candidates endorsed by EMILY’s List are mentored by experienced current or former women MPs, unionists, or community campaigners. The mentors give the candidates practical and personal support during their election campaign.[i] Similar activities could focus on young women across party lines. 

Leadership development and training

Among formal political organizations, such as parties and parliaments, internal mechanisms, rules, and procedures do not favor the inclusion of youth.

Youth quotas

There are, however, new legislative initiatives being taken in some countries to introduce different kinds of youth quotas for young people to be meaningfully represented in the electoral process. Quotas are not the only measure and are not necessarily the best solution to under-representation, but they can be considered along with other measures. Three types of quotas are mainly used today[i]:

1.   reserved seats (constitutional and/or legislative) (See Reserved seats) 

2.   legal candidate quotas (constitutional and/or legislative) (See Legal candidate quotas) 

3.   voluntary political party quotas. 

Voluntary party quotas

In countries with no legal provisions guaranteeing a minimum of young people on candidate lists or reserved seats for young people, political parties can opt to introduce voluntary quotas to ensure that a minimum of young candidates are represented on their lists. 

Political party quotas are part of a political party’s internal regulations and cannot be enforced by EMBs. Yet despite their voluntary nature, it is encouraging to see that many political parties have established voluntary quotas for young people. To name only a few: in Cyprus, the Movement for Social Democracy adopted a 20 per cent quota for candidates under 35 years old in 2010; and in Nicaragua, the Sandinista Front for National Liberation has had a 15 percent quota for youth in party leadership and electoral lists since 2002.[ii] 

Voluntary party-based quotas in constituency-based electoral systems, generally relating to gender, have been shown to work successfully in some parts of the world, as can be seen with the Labour Party in the United Kingdom. In the South African Development Community (SADC) region, the ruling ZANU-PF in Zimbabwe, like the ANC in South Africa and the FRELIMO in Mozambique, has a voluntary quota for both women and youth.[iii] ZANU-PF, despite being the ruling party, still lacks in its representation of women, a situation that worsens in elections where the party faces strong opposition.[iv] 

Political Finance

The distribution of financial resources can affect young people’s representation within political parties and the electoral process. High and often escalating costs often limit opportunities for young people with relatively less influence or financial means, regardless of how eager they are to run for office.  In some countries, state and government resources are systematically used during campaign periods for the advantage of incumbents. This weakens the position of opposition candidates and young people who are not associated with incumbent governments or candidates. Recognizing that political activities often require (considerable) financing, many countries have introduced state subsidies to level the playing field and encourage political pluralism. Earmarking state subsidies for specific activities and/or target groups is not new and has been used in several countries to promote the representation of underrepresented groups in political institutions. 

In the United States, EMILY’s list has been a useful tool for mobilizing financial support for pro-choice women candidates in the Democratic Party (emilyslist.org). 

In order to increase meaningful participation from young people and marginalized groups with which the youth population intersects (such as, women, indigenous peoples, ethnic minorities and persons with disabilities), proper regulation of donations and campaign expenditure is needed to ensure all individuals in parties have equal access to funding.  A small number of countries, including Ireland and Kenya, have drafted legislation requiring parties to use part of their funding to increase youth political representation. 

Although a number of countries have made laws in an effort to enhance youth representation, many lack mechanisms to enforce legislation by collecting, scrutinizing, and disclosing financial reports or to address violations. In the absence of mechanisms to investigate political parties’ donations and expenditures and hold political parties accountable, it is unlikely that political parties will be penalized for not complying with the rules. Yet, despite this rather obvious correlation, about 25 per cent of the countries for which data was available during research for a 2012 report lacked regulations obliging any agency to examine financial reports or to investigate potential political finance violations.[i]

Youth Party Wings

Many political parties have “youth wings,” extensions of parties that provide a space for young people to meaningfully participate and develop their skills alongside the main party structure. These extensions of the main party structure have been used to counter declining youth political party membership. 

Youth wings generally serve four different functions, all of which could provide entry points to enhance youth political participation.

• Youth wings are powerbases for their members, facilitating networking and the formation of personal and/or issue-based alliances.
• Youth wings can provide a training ground for young members who wish to excel within party structures. Examples of training include skill-building workshops, mentoring programmes, and policy development activities.
• Youth wings can be a place for young people to influence party policy development and leadership selection.  Assuming the youth wing has been given adequate powers, this party extension can provide a fresh outlook on potentially outdated policies and ideas. 
• Youth wings can extend outreach to young voters, in a bid to make parties more credible to young people. Youth wings can be a useful resource for creating the appropriate language, platform, material and tone in communicating political messages to younger voting bases during election and recruitment campaigns.

Political party leadership, however, has not always taken youth wings seriously, especially if they do not agree on policy. An example of not taking youth wings seriously, is when their mandates are limited to supporting campaigns and/or recruiting new party members. In such instances, they often are given no power to influence nomination processes, set agendas or write party manifestos.

When youth wings are set up correctly they can provide a space that helps to overcome the obstacles young people face in participating in electoral internal party processes.

Cross-Party and Multisector Alliances and Networks

There are international cross-party networks to ensure that young people have the skills, knowledge and appropriate networks to meaningfully participate in electoral processes. Generation Democracy is a global network of young people that is designed to empower young people to be leaders in electoral processes. Set up and funded through the International Republic Institute, Generation Democracy is made up of more than 400 young elected officials, civil society leaders, activists and journalists across 70 countries.[i]

The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), another global democratic advocacy organization, has set up the Forum of Young Parliamentarians (whose delegates must be under 45 years old).[ii] It aims to increase the representation of young people in parliaments across the globe, and ensure young MPs play a full part in the work of parliament. The IPU collects a significant amount of data through the forum to measure the experiences and involvement in electoral processes of young members of parliaments.

In Uganda, where over 70 per cent of the population are below the age of 35, seven major political party youth wings in Uganda established the Interparty Youth Platform (IYOP). While participating in a leadership training program organized by the German political party foundation, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, in 2011, the young party leaders observed the need to have in place a forum for them to dialogue, network and undertake joint leadership development initiatives. They requested the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung to facilitate the platform development process. Following several inter-party consultative meetings, a Memorandum of Understanding that establishes the framework for cooperation among the participating youth wings was agreed upon and signed. IYOP serves as a forum through which young people are able to network and engage on critical topics of youth-related development processes, including democracy and governance, youth participation, trade, climate change, energy, and peace and security.[iii]

Link between Political Parties, Youth and Violence

Despite young people’s ability to affect positive change in democratic processes, they can also be involved in and subject to election-related violence. Although the vast majority of young people are neither violent nor interested in violence, political leaders sometimes successfully manipulate and mobilize young people to initiate or escalate violent actions to support their own political objectives. In many countries with a history of electoral violence, some youth groups have developed strong ties with political parties or armed opposition groups, while in others it is youth wings of political parties that have been directly involved in violent activities.[i]

Examples of long-term interdependent relationships between political parties and armed groups can be found throughout all regions. Political parties often give gangs money, alcohol, drugs or weapons, in exchange for participating or causing political riots, generally disrupting the electoral process, and/or to buy their votes.

Election-related crime delegitimizes the processes that underpin democratic systems. To preserve the integrity of elections and prevent the eruption of election-related violence, aggressive efforts should be taken to disband party militia groups or violent youth wings of political parties that support them. EMBs can play an important role in monitoring illicit activities and ensuring that reports of possible infractions are investigated.

Multi-party dialogues are often held to encourage cooperation and build trust between the different political actors in the interests of peaceful and credible elections. In May 2018, youth from different political parties came together for a national youth collaborative dialogue on preventing youth electoral violence and building sustainable peace in Zimbabwe, facilitated by the Center for Conflict Management and Transformation and VIVA in Harare.

default

This topic area explores some examples of how EMBs and other electoral stakeholders have provided civic and voter education (CVE), through educational activities and through media campaigns, to young people, in the 2010s. The focus is on creative initiatives and the use of social media, given the latter’s exponential use in the 2010s. The topic area does not replicate the ACE Topic Area Civic and Voter Education or the ACE Topic Area Media but complements them. 

ACE Topic Area Civic and Voter Education provides a comprehensive summary of programming for voter information, voter education, and civic education.

ACE Topic Area Media provides a comprehensive summary of the ways in which media ensure democratic electoral processes. 

 

Voter information is a subsection of voter education, which, in turn, is a subsection of civic education, as shown below.

 

 

CVE is carried out by a wide variety of institutions and individuals. Schools and other learning institutions commonly deliver continuous civic education in formal curriculum and through other means, such as mock elections and student governments, EMBs and other providers of CVE use a range of techniques and approaches to inform and educate citizens about elections. Collaborations between EMBs and other CVE providers is common, and ideal, to ensure the accurate and effective provision of CVE. See ACE Election Materials: Best Practices Manual on Democracy Education in. 

The media, in its informative and educative role, is a provider of CVE. The media’s other important role in electoral processes is that of “watchdog,” a role that has expanded as more and more information is shared online, making it challenging to assess the accuracy of information. In the 2010s, social media has become the go-to method for obtaining information and news for much of the world’s youth.

It is important to note that youth are both creators and implementers as well as beneficiaries of CVE programs Likewise, youth are creators as well as consumers of media.

EMBs as Providers of CVE

EMBs have a crucial role to play in achieving SDG target 16.10 (“Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements”) through CVE activities.

All citizens, including young people, are entitled to the knowledge and information necessary to make well-informed choices and thus to participate in a meaningful way in electoral processes. As part of the CVE activities that form part of EMBs’ mandate, they need to form extensive partnerships with youth organizations, schools and universities, and political institutions and to find innovative ways to build young people’s knowledge and capacity.

The education sector and the provision of CVE programs are vital tools in the prevention of violent extremism, and for facilitating young people’s positive engagement in peace. Educating youth with critical thinking skills may be the first defense against violent extremism, by equipping young people with the skills to detect extremist propaganda, make informed decisions, and question the legitimacy of extremist content. Any civic education initiative in this age should also aim to educate people on how to spot fake news and identify hate speech on social media. This can serve as an alternative policy to completely blocking social media which can adversely impact on youth and their engagement with politics. EMBs in their advocacy campaigns should focus not just on the electoral process but also on what constitutes a fair election and what ethical standards for political parties and media etc. should be adhered to.

In the progress study The Missing Peace, mandated by United Nations Security Council Resolution 2250, reference is made to the potentially transformative power of education in building peace, and the educative role that youth can play in building peace. “Many civil society organizations, including youth-led organizations, have extensive experience in developing educational strategies and modules for peace, through both formal and non-formal means, signaling the importance of building strategic partnerships.”[i] The message to EMBs, particularly in conflict and fragile contexts, is to collaborate with youth organizations to provide CVE initiatives.

The young people consulted for the progress study pointed to a need for “value-based education for peace and teaching of critical thinking skills and non-violent methods to address conflicts, with a particular focus on the celebration of diversity.”[ii] While governments predominantly provide or oversee education at the primary, secondary and tertiary levels, other educational organizations, such as CSOs, provide informal educational initiatives. These can be youth-led or focused on youth and play a vital role in educating young people about their rights and responsibilities in democratic societies. EMBs can be part of multi-stakeholder alliance providing peace and democracy education. Youth-led CVE and peace-related education is noticeably innovative and resourceful in using art, sport, and media. EMBs can partner and/or support such initiatives.

There are a number of ways that EMBs and other CVE providers inform and educate voters and potential voters. These include:

• information and advertising campaigns
• supporting grassroots movements
• door-to-door or face-to-face interaction
• school and university curriculum, extra-curriculum and adult education
•  mock elections and other special-purpose programs
• entertainment 
• inducements.

Different countries have different ways of approaching young voters. As youth are not a homogenous group, EMBs should develop education programs taking into account the specific challenges of different subgroups related to the voting process. Non-targeted activities might lead to discrimination against certain subgroups and undermine efforts toward an inclusive electoral participation. For example, voter education campaigns relying on information and communication technologies (ICTs) often discriminate against illiterate youth, those with visual disabilities, or those living in areas with limited internet access.

Targeting young women

In view of the need for increased women’s empowerment across most societies, EMBs should reflect on strategies and targeted activities to reach out to young women and eliminate existing barriers to women’s participation.

Voter education programs should take into account the fact that young women and girls might face additional challenges compared to young men and boys. Voter information campaigns should therefore highlight to women and men alike the importance of their votes and emphasize their right to vote as equal members of society. A recent document co-produced by UNDP and UN Women[iii]  put it this way:

“With respect to gender equality, it is also extremely important to convey to young women voters that the ballot is secret. In outreach messages and images, it is important that women be shown in active roles as voters, candidates and electoral staff.”

Example: The Canadian NGO “Equal Voice’” a multi-partisan organization that promotes the election of women in Canada, called on citizens to “bring a girl to vote” to the ballot in the 2011 elections in order to familiarize girls of pre-voting age with the voting process.

Intersectionality and Hard to Reach Youth

Youth who suffer multiple or intersectional discrimination, often face strong barriers to meaningful participation in society, including their ability to access information and education. Targeted CVE campaigns pay attention to these often hard to reach youth, matching the media and approach with the specific needs of the target group. Peer-to-peer approaches are frequently used to educate and inform marginalized groups.

Example: In Australia, the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) has a range of engagement strategies to reach youth who are the hardest to reach, using peer-to-peer approaches including:

• young Indigenous Australians – by partnering with Aboriginal organizations (such as the Korin Gamadji Institute)
• multicultural youth – through the Youth Active Citizenship project
• hard-to-reach youth, such as the homeless, youth not in education or employment, and youth with disabilities – through VEC’s “Be Heard Democracy Ambassador” programs.

See Annex: VEC Some Youth Inclusion Programming

Example. In Kenya in 2017, IFES leveraged community social networks to implement targeted voter education campaigns and outreach in informal settlements to two traditionally marginalized populations in Kenya – women and youth voters. See Annex: Voter Education Outreach in Informal Settlements

Example: Elections Canada launched “Inspire Democracy” in 2014 with the goal of building a community of youth-serving organizations knowledgeable about the issue of declining youth voter turnout and helping Elections Canada provide voter information to young people in preparation for the 2015 federal election. It includes three core activities:

1. The development and launch of the Inspire Democracy website in April 2014. The website shares research on youth engagement, as well as engagement tools, links to engagement organizations and infographics in an effort to make research findings relevant and accessible to stakeholders.
2. National workshop series. A total of 10 workshops, each 1.5 days in duration, were held in major cities across the country from April to October 2014, with the goal of providing youth-serving organizations with a better understanding of youth engagement issues and brainstorming ways they could engage youth during the 2015 election. Over 130 organizations participated in the workshops and the final  
3. Inspire Democracy newsletters. A quarterly newsletter was launched in May 2014 to provide youth-serving organizations, academics, and government officials working on youth-related issues with updates on new research and engagement tools and to help further build the engagement community. Go to www.elections.ca for more information.

default

EMBs and other CVE providers use a variety of ways to inform and educate voters, particularly to “GOTV” (Get Out the Vote). The campaigns can be creative, inventive and humorous.  EMBs can out-source their non-partisan GOTV campaigns, opening them up to competition. Designs for the messaging and slogans for various formats, including posters, post-cards, web-pages, peer-to-peer text messages (and other digital and direct voter contact methods) are available on online galleries. For example, see the American Institute of Graphic Arts (AIGA) website, which has activated its community of designers across the US and beyond to Get Out the Vote every four years since 2000.

CVE messages and activities can take place in public, often during special events – for example, festivals – where young people mingle. For youth-targeted outreach, CVE providers might use the International Day of Democracy (15 September), or the International Day of Youth (12 August), to motivate young voters to engage with electoral processes.

While most campaigns either specifically target young and first-time voters, or at least have some youth-specific elements, it can be difficult to reach the youth of today with traditional media. Many EMBs and other CVE providers use a multi-pronged approach – mixing traditional media with social media and other approaches to reach youth. Having grown up with the internet, many young people are hard to reach offline, and CVE providers are increasingly moving into uncharted territory to encourage the youngest members of the target group.

The U.S. has been running its Rock the Vote campaign on and off since 1990, funded by youth-focused channel MTV, featuring celebrity endorsements and an accompanying in-school programs with a mock election to encourage students to get involved.

Traditional media: television and radio

The use of traditional media (television, radio and newspapers) remains an important venue to reach out to youth even in an era of new and changing media options and outlets. In many countries, radio messages are still popular and effective among local communities, especially in remote areas where people are more likely to have access to radio rather than television or print/electronic media. 

In more urban areas, voter education information and awareness programs tend to be delivered through various television channels. Television shows, including telenovelas, are highly popular in certain parts of the world and therefore offer an excellent avenue to deliver messages.

Example: The reality show The President tasks Palestinian viewers and a panel of expert judges with selecting a candidate on the show that they hope to see become the next Palestinian president. The program is designed to promote democratic values to a Palestinian audience and to engage citizens in democratic processes.

Example: In Cambodia in 2012, gearing up for local and national elections, the “Strengthening Democracy Program/Component: Youth Multimedia Civic Education Initiative” aimed at reaching 3 million young voters. It was a series of television and radio broadcasts developed in partnership with BBC Media Action, informed by a baseline study on youth knowledge, attitudes, and practices in the context of public affairs.^[i]

Example: In the UK, public service broadcaster Channel 4 called on young adults to “pop” their “voting cherry” in a sexual innuendo-laden television ad encouraging young people to vote in the 2017 general election. Young television personalities reminisced about their “first time,” which took place in locations such as a library, a primary school, and a village hall. The creators strove to convey their message – that exercising your democratic right is one of the most important things you can do – in an entertaining way.

Example: In the UK, during the leadup to the 2015 general election, political satirist Armando Iannucci worked with the CSO “Speakers for Schools”. He wrote in his newspaper column afterwards that he had not expected his audience to be interested in a speech on voting but was amazed by the students’ eagerness to listen and ask questions. “What was clear talking to these [students] was that they were hugely interested in the political process and political causes, but not political parties.”[ii]

Example: Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), Kenya’s election management body, together with IFES, ran a dynamic outreach strategy targeting youth voters ahead of the 2017 general elections. The “Youth Vote” (YVOTE) campaign was a digital media and face-to-face outreach initiative whose objectives were to educate, engage, and motivate young people prior to the general elections. See Annex: IFES Case Study – YVOTE Public Affairs Campaign.

ICTs to empower youth

Faced with barriers to have their voices heard in traditional media and communication outlets, such as television and media, young people are increasingly ignoring them altogether. More than ever, young people around the world are using ICT tools and platforms to organize for change, make their political opinions publicly known, and mobilize support. They have adopted more direct and interactive communication tools, such as Facebook, Twitter, text messages, promotional videos, podcasts, and blogs, decisions that have eliminated the use of intermediaries in communication and allowed youth themselves to be “the news makers.”

These youth preferences and trends underscore why EMBs should capitalize on the power of ICTs to provide incentives for young people to participate in electoral processes, as well as to reach out to them in relatable ways.

Social media

As more and more of the world is experienced online, social media platforms are playing larger roles in the distribution of information about electoral processes, especially for young people. According to a study by the American Press Institute, “millennials” (in the study, Americans aged between 18 and 34) receive 74 per cent of their news from the internet and – of that percentage – 88 per cent from Facebook alone.[i] A number of politicians in Western countries have embraced Twitter and Instagram.

For many young people, social media is their first point of contact with friends, family, news, research, and information. It is a way for young people to build new connections and make their voices heard. EMBs need to pass their information through social networks on which young voters are particularly active, such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, Bambuser, Vimeo, Tik Tok, WhatsApp, blogs, Flickr, LinkedIn and Google+. Highly targeted approaches are needed to engage the young electorate in electoral processes. This is increasingly important due to misinformation and hate speech circulating in the online space. Given the scale and scope of youth engagement with social media, which will likely continue to grow in the foreseeable future, these platforms have the potential to become valuable and effective tools to inform young people about all aspects of elections, including in real-time. 

To date, the level of engagement of EMBs with social media platforms and their online followers has remained rather low. A survey conducted by International IDEA in 2013 revealed that out of 172 countries and territories, only 55 EMBs (31.9 percent) had Facebook pages, and of these 55 only 49 showed any sign of current Facebook activity. The corresponding number for Twitter showed that 47 EMBs (27 percent) had Twitter accounts. The number of Twitter followers ranged from a high of 250,117 (with Latin American EMBs being the most active Twitter users) to a low of only two.[ii] 

Many EMBs, however, have started to capitalize on the advantages offered by the digital world, including by acknowledging the important role social media play in reaching out to youth. What they often find is that developing and implementing successful social media strategies is time-consuming and requires staff with strong communication skills who are familiar with different social media platforms. As social media is a competitive environment — and many EMBs have only recently using social media tools — it often makes sense for them to reach out to young social media experts to assist with developing strong social media campaigns combining different platforms. The examples below show successful online campaigns. 

Example: In the run-up to the 2014 elections, the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) of South Africa launched the IXSA (“I Vote South Africa”) campaign to encourage youth registration, participation and engagement. The campaign was rolled out on television, radio and the internet, and featured celebrities and other citizens discussing their commitment to vote. The Commission recruited a team of three social media content creators to further engage with youth on Facebook, Mxit, and Twitter. The number of users who ‘liked’ the Commission’s Facebook page increased from 1,400 to 10,000 during the first 24 hours of the campaign. Similarly, the first 10 days brought about 16,000 new followers to the Commission’s Twitter account. By March 2015 the Commission had attracted 220,000 and 70,000 followers to its Facebook and Twitter accounts, respectively.[iii] 

Example: Faced with an underrepresentation of youth in voter lists and a low registration percentage,[iv] the UK Electoral Commission teamed up with Facebook in 2016 to inform young people about registration procedures. One week before the deadline for registration in 2016, a reminder was added to the Facebook news feed of people eligible to register to vote, directing them to register via the gov.uk portal. Additionally, the Electoral Commission, in collaboration with the National Union of Students, in 2016 launched the online campaign #RegAFriend, which is intended to give people the opportunity to get their friends registered to vote.[v] 

Example: In preparation for New Zealand’s 2017 election, publisher Newshub released a short series called Ticked Off on Facebook in order to specifically reach the “missing million” young people old enough to vote but choosing not to. The series featured short videos on the different political parties and the structure of the country’s parliament, as well as how to vote.[vi] 

Example: Before the 2017 Indian election, the Election Commission of India partnered with Facebook to add a reminder to vote as an attachment to the site’s automated birthday wishes when users turned 18. The reminder – available in 13 languages – was accompanied by a “Register Now” option linking to the National Voters’ Services Portal.[vii] 

Example: In Kyrgyzstan before the 2016 election, the National Democratic Institute worked with the Political Processes Program to run a competition in which entrants made Facebook posts encouraging their friends and family to vote. Some videos were viewed more than 150,000 times, an impressive number considering there are about 168,000 Facebook users registered in Kyrgyzstan. Competition winner Dastan Niazov’s message was clear: “We have to make our voices heard now … I am going to vote, and you?”[viii] 

YouTube is another popular platform with youth, reaching more 18–49-year-olds than any single cable network on mobile devices alone.[ix] YouTube has a higher reach for sharing videos than its competitors, with users watching approximately 1 billion hours of content each day – more than Facebook video and Netflix combined. 

Example: National Democratic Institute’s Citizen Participation and Political Parties teams hosted an online discussion called a TweetTalk on International Youth Day in 2018. Participants shared ideas and examples of how political parties can support youth political participation through the hashtag “#YouthParty” on Twitter. “The goals of the TweetTalk were to connect the political party development community, academics, NDI Staff, political party members, and members of the democracy development and youth inclusion communities; and to give those communities a platform to share ideas, best practices, and lessons learned about how parties can support youth political participation.” More information is available at https://www.demworks.org/crowdsourcing-ideas-international-youth-day-tweettalk-youth-and-political-parties. 

Example: In preparation for the U.S. election in 2016, 80 percent of presidential candidates created content specifically for YouTube in addition to the previously successful 30-second ad campaigns shown on television. Many “YouTubers” (internet celebrities whose main or only platform is a YouTube channel) used their platform to make public their political views in the lead-up to the election and encouraged their audience to vote accordingly. 

Example: In 2016, 53 percent of the Mexico’s population was younger than 30. The International Republican Institute (IRI) supported the #MeGustaQueVotes (I Like that You Vote) campaign, which used social media to educate youth about the importance of understanding candidate platforms and engaging continuously in political dialogue.[x] 

Although their rising prominence is usually a positive development, social media platforms are also used in negative and destructive ways — e.g., to misinform the public with selective and incomplete coverage, spread rumors and false information, and call for violent protest. EMBs and the media must be prepared to swiftly counter false information and take necessary actions against those who are behaving irresponsibly by misleading citizens throughout an electoral process. 

Furthermore, there are many barriers affecting the use of social media. Cost and lack of access to smart phones, cost of accessing data, and an imperfect national signal grid are foremost among these.

Campaigning to prevent election-related violence

In many countries with a history of electoral violence, international and national organizations, EMBs, CSOs, youth organizations, and peace activists have been launching offline and online campaigns to strengthen youth’s resistance to political manipulation and violence and to promote peaceful participation in elections. 

Example. The 2015 presidential election in Nigeria was one of the most hotly contested on social media. The government’s National Orientation Agency initiated the #Wagepeace2015 campaign, which sought to mitigate and counter risks of electoral violence. The agency encouraged stakeholders in the private and public sectors, international organizations, community development, and civil society groups, and individual peace activists to utilize the #Wagepeace2015 platform to send out messages to the public via the #Wagepeace2015 Twitter and bulk SMS messaging as well as the broadcasting of peace messages on radio and television.[i] These messages encouraged non-violent political behavior proactive action to counter hate speeches. After voting stations closed, #NigeriaDecides was used by thousands of Nigerians to discuss the elections while awaiting final results. Both presidential candidates also used their Twitter and Facebook accounts to send messages to the population to patiently await the results and refrain from using violence.[ii] 

Although EMBs, peace activists, and youth organizations are increasingly using online platforms to campaign to prevent election-related violence, traditional media actors also remain important partners of their anti-violence campaigns, in particular to reach out to citizens who are not active online. EMBs can therefore use national and local radio and television channels for broadcasting their peace education messages through public service announcement, dramas, and talk program. 

Example. In Burundi, where radio is the most popular medium, Search for Common Ground created Intamenwa (Indivisibles): Mobilizing Youth for Peaceful Elections, a radio drama series exploring political manipulation and youth violence through the story of a fictional football team.[iii] 

Example: In Kenya, IFES designed a social media and digital communications-driven program during the general elections of 2017 to better integrate approaches for conflict mitigation, outreach and communications programming for peace and nonviolence. Social media was complemented by two television ads. See Annex: “Taifa Letu – Our Nation” Social Media Campaign for Peace and Nonviolence. 

Example: The Youth Theater for Peace (YTP) program promotes sustainable conflict prevention and a culture of peace at the community, regional, and national levels through a participatory theatre methodology called Drama for Conflict Transformation (DCT). 

Suggestions for EMBs working to prevent election-related violence include: 

•      Push strongly for legislation outlawing party militia groups and sanctioning parties that maintain them and/or violent youth wings. If such laws are already in place, advocate publicly for their enforcement.
•       Introduce new technology and social media for election monitoring and crisis management. Engage young people in the development and implementation of online platforms and text-messaging mechanisms to monitor elections; to convey messages about election results, possible intimidation or violence; and to inform citizens about election-related updates.
•        Establish and/or facilitate youth-inclusive platforms for dialogue and discussions about preventative measures.
•        Incorporate violence prevention topics in general voter/civic education programs and discussions about preventative measures.
•      Incorporate violence prevention topics in general voter/civic education programs and develop special activities aimed at preparing parties and candidates for potential election loss. 

In summary, the use of social media platforms can offer a range of advantages for EMBs. It allows them to do the following, for example: 

•        Engage with new audiences. By using social media platforms, EMBs can successfully connect with youth who are less likely to be reached through traditional voter education programs.
•      Directly access an existing audience of followers, who can then share the information provided by EMBs within their own respective networks in an ongoing and ever-expanding process.
•      Increase transparency and accessibility. Social media can enhance the ability of EMBs to disseminate impartial, accurate, and timely information and respond promptly to queries and requests through both formal and more informal platforms. In addition, exchanges held on an EMB’s social media platforms — either between the EMB and its followers or between the followers themselves — are visible to a wide audience and contribute to increased accessibility to information and transparency around the electoral process.
•    Have two-way interactions through user-generated content and communication, thereby allowing EMBs to not only share information with, but also to gather real-time information from, the electorate.
•        Optimize costs. The use of social media is cost-effective. The money saved by using social media can be used for vital activities on the ground instead of on advertising in traditional media. 

 

Example: In New Zealand #ForFuturesSake campaign, launched in 2017, uses social media to encourage youth voters. “Statistics show Māori aged 18–29 have the lowest rate of enrollment than any other age group with only 55 percent of the total estimated population in this age range voting at the last election.” Social media influencer William Waiirua Cribb said, at the launch of the campaign, “social media is the way to go these days. Not many people are watching TV and it’s all Snapchat Instagram Facebook so it's a really good platform to encourage youth to vote. This is the first year of a four-year programme to raise awareness and participation of Māori in electoral processes. The programme will be monitored and the results of that will help inform future years of the programme.”[iv] 

Websites, mobile applications, and games

Social media platforms are effective and efficient mechanisms to send voters a quick heads-up and inform them in real-time on latest news and developments. However, the content that can be distributed through social media platforms is limited. Therefore, while the use of social media has many advantages, social media strategies should be seen as complementary to user-friendly websites that offer a one-stop shop for all election-related information. 

Today, in many contexts – especially in developing countries – it is more likely that young people have regular access to smartphones than to desktop computers or laptops. EMBs therefore should develop mobile-responsive websites. 

Despite the many benefits of the mobile web, election-specific smartphone apps are becoming increasingly popular. The main advantage of apps is that they do not require internet connection and allow people offline access to content and functions, something which is particularly important for people living in rural areas with a limited, slow and/or unstable internet connection. The MyINEC app developed by Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has become a one-stop shop for all INEC information. It enables subscribers to use their mobile phones to access election-related news, such as for example information on candidates and political parties[i]. 

Additionally, apps are being developed for interactive games. Games are an interesting feature to present elections in a fun and interactive way and to introduce first-time voters to the electoral process. However, the development of good games is rather costly. If funding allows, EMBs can reach out to external services to develop interactive games or to adapt those already used elsewhere. 

Example: Three weeks before Tunisia’s first free democratic elections in 2011, UNDP teamed up with the country’s Radio Mosaique FM to launch “DemocraTweet,” an educational game about voting aimed at mobilizing youth to actively participate in the electoral process and to educate them about the importance of voting to ensure their rights and freedoms. Game players learned about the democratic system, the role and tasks of the National Constituent Assembly and the institutional framework for elections. The game also included information on the electoral process, including election procedures, and the importance of a large voter turnout if the results are to be accepted by Tunisians.[ii] 

Example: In 2014, the Election Commission of India (ECI), with support from the EC and UNDP, developed the video game “Get Set Vote,” which is available on its website (eci.gov.in). The game – available in English and Hindi – is designed to engage citizens of all age groups to learn about democracy and the electoral process in an interactive manner. The concept is easy: with 10 levels of mazes, players receive at each level pieces of information on democracy, registration, assistance from ECI and so on. The information provided becomes more specific with every level and the mazes get more challenging as the game progresses.[iii] 

Example: In Japan, a newspaper company offers ‘candidate matching’ website. Voters answer a series of questions, and then will be matched with candidate whose policies or platform are closest to the voter.[iv] 

Text messages

Mobile phones are widely available, both in developed and developing countries. The number of mobile phone users in the world is expected to pass the 5 billion mark by 2019.[i]  We Are Social and Hootsuite (social media marketing agencies) reports reveal that in 2018 there are more than 4 billion people around the world using the internet; nearly a quarter of a billion new users came online for the first time in 2017. Africa has seen the fastest growth rates, with the number of internet users across the continent increasing by more than 20 percent per year.[ii]

Using text messages to increase voter turnout. Given the wide use of mobile phones, using text messaging to get more young people to polling stations is extremely efficient and cost-effective.

Example: In Norway, results from a pilot project in which selected voters in 27 municipalities received two text reminders before the 2015 election showed that sending out such reminders increased turnout among young people under the age of 30 by 5 percent, but had far less effect on the elderly.[iii]  One of the text messages was sent out before election day, while the second came on election day and gave information about the opening hours of polling stations.[iv] 

Example: In Liberia’s 2017 election, the Initiative for Democratic Alternatives conducted a project aimed at increasing voter turnout of youth on election day through the use of text messaging. It sent out multiple text messages e.g. number of days to elections, number of voting precincts, etc. with the slogan: Register, Vote and Cast a Ballot.[v] 

Text messaging is cost-effective. Research conducted after the November 2006 elections in the United States demonstrated the effectiveness of using text messages sent to mobile phones to mobilize young voters.[vi]  The study found that text message reminders to new voters increased an individual’s likelihood of voting by 4.2 percentage points. This option’s mobilization effect of 4–5 per cent was associated with a cost of only US$1.56 for each vote generated, which compared favorably to other, more costly means, as seen below: 

Text messages                US$1.56/vote
Phone calls                      US$20/vote
Door-to-door canvassing US$30/vote
Leafleting                       US$32/vote
Direct mail                      US$67/vote

Online tools for continued communication and advocacy. Avenues that ensure continued communication with the youth electorate are likely to build trust of young people in politics and help to transform political institutions into more open and inclusive institutions. Online platforms allow citizens to engage with their political leaders at community, municipal, provincial, and national levels by providing them with the opportunity to collaborate and openly share information, thereby bringing to the fore the power and agency of citizens to contribute to and influence political dialogue. 

Example: An interactive online platform introducing the Lebanese legislative process to youth was created on the parliament’s website. It allows youth/children and citizens at large to send inquiries and learn more about the parliament and its members.[vii] 

Example: In Germany, the Pirate Party created a continuous, real-time political forum in which every member has equal input on party decisions, and used LiquidFeedback, available as open-source software powering internet platforms, for proposition development and decision-making.[viii] LiquidFeedback helps groups (such as societies or organizations, political or not) make decisions without the limitations of a traditional internet forum. It aims to create an accurate representation of the opinions held by the members of the group without them being distorted by social hierarchies and knowledge disparities. Any of the 6,000 members who use the forum created by the Pirate Party can propose a policy. If a proposal picks up a 10 per cent quorum within a set period of time, it becomes the focus of an almost “gamified” revision period. Any member can also set up an alternative proposal, and over the ensuing few weeks these rival versions battle it out, with members voting their favorites up or down. 

Example: In the United States, the Countable app allows citizens to receive summaries of bills going through Congress, connect with representatives, share ideas, and take action (countable.us).

The digital divide

The “digital divide” refers to the real discrepancies that exist between social groups in terms of access to digital technology. EMBs and other CVE providers need to pay attention to how different sections of a society access and relate to social media, websites, and apps before embarking on outreach strategies. They need to find out the exact nature of their target audiences in terms of who accesses which technologies. There are global inequalities to consider, with young people from poor areas facing significant barriers to engaging online because they are unable to access computers readily pay for internet connection.

Media as Watchdog

As well as providing CVE, media provide another important role in elections, that of monitoring reporting of electoral processes. 

SDG 16, target 10 – “Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements” – is a critical enabling condition for the implementation of all 17 SDGs.[i] To contribute to the achievement of this target, EMBs and the media have a tremendous responsibility to ensure that all citizens stay informed about all stages of the electoral process (e.g., campaigns, voting, and tabulation) in a transparent and unbiased manner. Violence can easily be sparked by lack of information, false or incomplete information, and unsubstantiated rumors. 

In several countries, biased media or incomplete factual coverage during electoral processes have contributed to creating an atmosphere of fear by disseminating rumors, giving credence to hate speech, and calling for violent protest. 

See Media and Elections (ACE Topic Area hyperlink) 

Schools

See ACE Topic Area: Civic and Voter Education

CVE forms an important part of educational activities. While civic education is a continuous process that is not specifically linked to an electoral cycle, voter education is tied closer to individual electoral periods. Despite this broad conceptual distinction, civic and voter education are mutually reinforcing. By partnering with ministries and authorities responsible for education, EMBs can ensure that youth are reached outside electoral periods and that the necessary knowledge is transmitted from an early age.

CVE can be taught in the spheres of school ethos, the formal curriculum, extra-curriculum programs and through community service. Students can get engaged in decision-making processes through meaningful youth voice forums and volunteer opportunities. EMBs can support schools in numerous ways in bringing democratic values into practice by setting up mock elections, debates, class and through student elections, among other strategies.

EMBs in several countries have established collaborations with schools to deliver effective voter and civic education.

Example: In Honduras, the EMB signed an agreement with the Ministry of Education to provide trainings to teachers in primary and secondary schools to organize elections for student boards. By organizing elections in schools from an early age, students are learning about democracy and electoral processes.

Example: In the lead-up to the 2018 national elections, the Fijian Elections Office (FEO) collaborated closely with the Ministry of Education in developing a nation-wide voter education curriculum for 16-year-old students. The roll-out of the programs included: teacher training; development of a learning module (student workbook and teacher manual); accompanying resources, including a mock election kit and a dedicated website; and integration of the new curriculum into the updated national curriculum. Every Year 10 Fijian student participated in the programs, which consisted of 10 classes delivered intensively over a two-week period. See Annex: FEO Voter Education Case Study.

Example: In Bhutan, 153 “democracy clubs” were established in 2012 in schools and educational institutes to engage and teach students on their roles and responsibilities in a democratic society. The clubs work as “mini election commissions” in which they organize activities to teach students about the country’s electoral system and seek to increase youth participation in decision-making processes.[i] As part of an effort to further expand the role and impact of the democracy clubs, student representatives from 153 clubs in 2015 signed a constitution establishing a children’s parliament.[ii]

Useful voter education materials

 

Many established EMBs develop a range of CVE materials for children, youth and other target groups, as well as research papers on the topic of CVE, which are freely available on their websites. Materials are available in English from the EMBs in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, various states in the U.S., South Africa, Kenya and from CVE organizations and clearing houses. Also, educational organizations and electoral assistance organizations, such as IFES and UNDP, also provide free educational materials. ACE Electoral Materials includes examples published in the 2010s.

For example, from the Mexican election commission (in English):

 

• “Strategy for the training of children and young people in the exercise of their citizenship”
• “Educate for democracy” (curricular support program)
•  “We the young ...” citizen project (curricular support program for secondary and high school)

See ACE Election Materials: Final report of the observatory for civic education programs and promotion of youth vote in the federal electoral process (published by Mexico Instituto Nacional Electoral).

See ACE Election Materials: Civic Education in the Kyrgyz Republic (American University – Central Asia, Social Research Center).

 

 

Universities

Universities and similar centers of higher education are useful for encouraging deeper participation. Elections at these institutions for student structures are a very important learning ground for politics. In addition, they are important as centers for registration and civic education. Also, many universities and other institutes for higher learning offer politics and elections subjects in their undergraduate and graduate programs. 

Student government and specifically student unions at university level can be a medium for channeling the needs and demands of young people to an executive (school or university administration). The idea is that mimicking positions of political parties in youth wings, students are engaged with school administrations and see student unions as a meaningful way to political participation. People who have actually run in student union elections have been found to have a higher probability of running for political office later [i] 

Example: In Georgia, IFES’s Democracy and Citizenship course, which was piloted at six Tbilisi universities in the 2011–2012 academic year and expanded to 22 universities and seven cities by 2014, introduces Georgian students to fundamental concepts of democratic citizenship, good governance, civil society, civic participation, and human rights. Students enact these concepts into practice through civic action projects where they are challenged to think critically about the needs of their communities, and to research, develop, and implement plans for civic action that address social problems they themselves identify. The course is a semester-long accredited subject. 

Example: Kenya: Campus Ambassador Program. As part of its work in Kenya, IFES, through the Global Affairs Canada–funded “Kenya Electoral System Support” program, provides grants to youth-based organizations whose focus is encouraging greater and more meaningful youth participation in Kenya’s electoral process. To achieve this, IFES works with two local partners, Kubamba Trust and the Universities and College Students’ Peace Association of Kenya, to develop dynamic campus-based initiatives in institutions of higher learning, which have approximately 2 million students, many of whom are participating in the electioneering process for the first time. See Annex: Kenya Campus Ambassadors. 

Example. In Ukraine, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Global Affairs Canada and UK Aid developed an innovative, semester-long, university-level civic education course “Democracy: From Theory to Practice.” The course (piloted at eight Ukrainian universities in September 2018), was developed by Ukrainian and international experts, is tailored for Ukraine, and is based on IFES’s global university-level civic education methodology: Strengthening Engagement through Education for Democracy (SEED). Through SEED, IFES in 2011 introduced an innovative, university-level civic education course in Georgia that is currently offered at most accredited universities in the country.^[ii] See Annex: IFES Local Solutions for Sustainable Civic Education at Georgian Universities.

default

A number of further education and informal education providers offer opportunities for youth to enhance their knowledge and understanding of electoral politics, as well as offering programs that fit into the broader area of democracy education. Many of the most effective programs link the intended learning with the practice of democracy in real-life processes. 

Learning programs encompass a broad range of formats, such as democracy camps and capacity development workshops. 

Example: Transparency Maldives in partnership with IFES ran 6-day Democracy Camps with young people to enhance the participants’ knowledge on civic education, rights and responsibilities of a citizen, democracy, human rights, and various social issues. See ACE Election Materials: IFES Maldives Democracy Camp Booklet. 

There are Master programs in electoral administration such as the Master in Electoral Policy and Administration (MEPA), offered by the Scuola Superiore Sant’ Anna University in Italy. ^[i] The EMB in Moldova offers a MA in Political and Electoral Management. 

There are several informal learning programs that target youth or could be tailored to youth. See Annex: Civic/Voter Education for Young Adults and Annex: IDEA Youth Democracy Academy flyer. 

Example: Promoting Political Leadership of Youth with Disabilities in the Dominican Republic. In 2018, IFES delivered a participatory course to youth with disabilities based on Building Resources in Democracy, Governance and Elections (BRIDGE) “Disability Rights and Elections” module and the “She Leads” women’s empowerment curriculum. Classroom learning is supplemented with hands-on learning and visits to Dominican government institutions and guest lectures from regional experts. See Annex: IFES in Dominican Republic. 

Example: In Myanmar, IFES supported a training program for youth 15–21 years old who were to be first-time voters in the 2020 elections and had no previous civic education either in schools or through other trainings. “Your Voice, Your Vote, Your Future” is a two-and-a-half-day civic education training program that focuses on three key areas: knowledge development, leadership development, and community mobilization. The first two days of training covered topics such as “Elements of Democracy,” “Decision-Making Processes,” “Introduction to Elections” and “Building Your Self-Confidence.” See Annex: Your Vote, Your Future: A Youth Civic Education Program in Myanmar.[ii] 

Example: In Kosovo, a wide-ranging integrated social media, web and activity-based program was developed and implemented by youth-led CSO Peer Educators Network (PEN), assisted by IFES and with the concurrence of the Kosovo Election Commission, whose staff participated in some of PEN’s activities. See PEN’s final report on this in ACE Electoral Materials: Final Narrative Report PEN IFES, and a video overview of the program at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btBMU5zdyu8.   

Major components of the program were: 

• The social media (Facebook https://www.facebook.com/speakinthenest/) and web platform “Fole ‘n Fole” – featuring news, quizzes and videos. Youth were encouraged to contribute to the platform through monthly prizes for video selfies and other contributions; participants’ status upgrades, depending on the number of contributions made, gave access to events with political leaders. Much of the content was video-based: a full-time video journalist was employed to film and post the program’s activities and interviews with youth.
• Meetings of youth with local mayors, and national political party leaders
• Public debates between prominent politicians and youth
• Development of a “Superchangers Guidebook” for youth engagement (see ACE Electoral Materials: “Superchangers”) 
• Mock elections in schools in cooperation with Kosovo State Election Commission municipal offices
• Community-based project development workshops for youth organizations
• Development of a multi-player video game simulating election activities: “Aktivomania,” where participants could role-play as candidates, observers, election staff or voters, and try to win constituencies. This is downloadable for Android and Mac mobiles.

Additionally, IFES implemented a youth research internship program in which young undergraduates developed quantitative and qualitative studies on youth-related election issues. These were done in cooperation with the Election Commission, which provided full access to its data. See ACE Electoral Materials: Youth Voter Turnout, Impact of Hate Speech on Youth, and Participation of Youth in Political Parties (also available through the IFES website) 

Example: In Timor-Leste’s 2017 and 2018 elections, the National Election Commission (CNE), with IFES assistance, produced music videos featuring Marvi, the most popular young Timorese pop star, promoting youth electoral participation.  

See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV8OuvoE6d4 for the 2018 election video and https://www.facebook.com/2018EdukasaunSivika/videos/645585595651064/ for the 2017 election. 

In 2018, CNE produced another video with IFES assistance that explained how, when and where to vote, featuring well-known young sports stars. See https://www.facebook.com/2018EdukasaunSivika/videos/765310710345218/. 

These videos were posted to multiple social media platforms: CNE, the Technical Secretariat of Election Administration (STAE), UNDP, various CSOs including the Timor-Leste Youth Parliament Alumni (APFTL), and diplomatic missions. They were also broadcast on state and private TV stations and in movie theatres. The audio from the videos was used on national and community radio stations, and on loudspeaker trucks in all local government areas. CNE also organized a youth entertainment segment in its televised election candidate debates, and in 2018 STAE produced theatre-based voter education events in universities in the week before the election. 

The Youth CSO Timor-Leste Youth Parliament Alumni (APFTL), assisted by IFES, developed and implemented a social media and community event–based program of civic education for youth. APFTL met regularly with the CNE and STAE to coordinate messaging and arrange CNE and STAE participation in APFTL activities, and works cooperatively with the Secretary of State for Youth. Major activities have been:

• A civic education social media platform for young people – https://www.facebook.com/pg/2018EdukasaunSivika/. This features election information and news, and is increasingly using video selfies and vox pop video interviews with young Timorese, and also promotes CNE and STAE activities 
• Community radio talk-show programming, featuring local youth representatives 
• Youth Democracy Festivals in each municipality, featuring some interactive workshop content, quizzes with prizes, live music, dance, theatre, competitions for (mainly) school and university groups designing election-related posters and news magazines for youth, and in Dili a national band competition for an election song.   
• Close regular liaison with teachers, and high school and university-based events to promote voter registration and electoral participation
• Targeted SMS blasts to youth in the three weeks before election day 
• In the post-election phase: setting up a Youth Parliament Watch program, coordinated with other governance CSOs. This has included workshops for young people in all local government areas, training them to monitor the activities of their representatives.  

 

Sport

In most societies it is unlikely that youth not enrolled in schools, illiterate youth, young people without access to the internet and young people not interested in electoral processes, will be attentive to traditional voter education programs. EMBs thus need to identify more creative solutions to connect with them. Sport is a great tool to reach some of these groups of young people. EMBs frequently use popular sports players in their media campaigns. Using sports players from marginalized groups has also proved effective to reach those marginalized groups represented by the sports player. 

Example: Kenya: KESOFO, a sporting NGO in Kenya, was formulated in 2006 as a way of forestalling incidents of post-election violence. Targeting youth, KESOFO aims to promote peace and tolerance, through a programs incorporating civic education, peaceful elections, voter education and election-violence monitoring using soccer as its medium.[i]

Artistic and cultural activities

One way of reaching out to marginalized youth is the use of cultural activities in the form of music, theatre, street art and comics. They offer the possibility to convey electoral messages in a playful manner to targeted audiences. 

Many EMBs are already thinking progressively by using arts and culture in voter education activities. 

Example: In Tunisia, UNDP in 2011 sponsored the recording of the song “Enti Essout”[i] (“You are the Voice” or, more idiomatically, “It’s Your Call”), which became the unofficial anthem of the elections. The song was a collaboration among a diverse group of Tunisian musicians, from folk singers to rap artists, and was distributed for free on CD and made available for free download from the internet. 

Example: In the 2016 national Mongolian parliamentary election, Women for Change, a CSO, implemented an interactive art installation as part of its voter education and political accountability programs. Young people were invited to paint 500 ceramic hand sculptures and provided with non-partisan information about voting registration, the democratic process, and the importance of including young people’s voices in politics. See Annex: Raising Voter Awareness in Mongolia. 

Example: In 2014, UNDP supported the Independent Election Commission of Afghanistan with promoting civic and voter education through mobile theatres throughout the country. Mobile theatres targeted illiterate people in particular and emphasized the importance of elections in the democratic process as well as a voter’s ability to influence his or her future. 

Example: In 2018 in Bougainville, the election management body (Office of Bougainville Election Commission) set up an awareness/voter education booth at the Bougainville Chocolate Festival (a cultural festival which attracts potential voters from throughout the region). 

Example: In Japan, when the country was preparing to introduce legislation to lower the voting age from 20 to 18, in 2016, the government (through the Ministry of Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts, and Telecommunications) enlisted a heroine of the popular comic books as a spokesmodel for its teen education efforts. 

Information centers

Through the establishment of information centers, EMBs can strengthen citizens’ knowledge and understanding of democracy and electoral processes and motivate them to participate in elections. To make information centers appealing for youth, EMBs could set up exhibitions using different forms of art (video, photo, music, multimedia installations, story-telling) and create an interactive experience with games and mock polling exercises. 

Example: In 2012, with support from UNDP, the Election Commission of Nepal established the Electoral Education and Information Center (EEIC). As of April 2016, some 22,000 visitors had visited the EEIC, of whom 18,000 were high school students. At the EEIC a 25-minute documentary, Democracy and Election, is shown to the visitors, highlighting Nepal’s election history. The center has a thematic area, installed with interactive games to educate visitors by engaging them in touch-enabled games they can play to learn more about electoral processes. 

To increase outreach and promote electoral education in remote areas, mobile EEIC kits are taken to rural and marginalized areas to give users the opportunity to learn more about Nepal’s political history, democracy, and electoral process through seeing, touching, and hearing methods. See UNDP Youth Participation in Electoral Process: Handbook for Electoral Management Bodies, UNDP, 2017. 

Other examples of information centers are:

• Australia: National Electoral Education Center https://education.aec.gov.au/visit-us/
• India: India International Institute of Democracy and Election Management (IIIDEM), also runs Electoral Literacy Clubs https://eci.nic.in/eci_main1/iidm.aspx
• South Korea: Korean Civic Education Institute for Democracy, comes under the umbrella of the National Election Commission of South Korea http://www.civicedu.go.kr/eng/
• Thailand: Democratic Education Center, https://www.ect.go.th/dec/main.php?filename=index
• Nigeria: National Orientation Agency in Nigeria, a government agency that acts both as a vehicle for civic and voter education and as a conduit to feed public sentiments and views back to decision-makers http://www.noa.gov.ng/
• Georgia: Center for Electoral Systems Development, Reforms and Trainings http://www.electionreforms.ge/eng
• Zambia: Voter Education Resource Center (correct spelling)

See ACE Consolidated Replies: Civic and Electoral Education Centers

Mock (or simulated) elections

Civil and voter education comes alive with mock parliaments, elections, political debating and so forth. In many countries, EMBs, schools and other providers of CVE run mock elections for various age groups which are integrated within the regular curriculum, or organized in the lead-up to an electoral event. Mock elections allow young and first-time voters to explore the practical workings of electoral procedures. Mock elections can be held purely as a teaching or practice exercise, but they can also be a tool to help non-voters have a voice if held alongside the real election. Mock elections are also a “safe” place for youth with disabilities or young women, who would otherwise not have access to electoral processes, to learn about voting. 

Example: Kids Voting USA is a non-partisan, grassroots-driven voter education program committed to creating lifelong voting habits in children, increasing family communication about citizenship and encouraging greater adult voter turnout. Kids Voting USA started in 1988 and by mid-2018 over 1 million young people had participated in the program throughout the US. Kids Voting is a similar program in Canada. Mock elections take place at polling places on Election Day, and results can be reported along with the official results of the actual election. 

Example: The EMB in Mexico (Institute Nacional Electoral – INE) has done several elections for children and youth for over a decade.[i]  

Example: In Jordan, at the local level, mock elections in Madaba provided an opportunity to 23 young men and women, aged 18–24, to simulate the first local elections to be held under the 2015 Decentralization Law and Municipality Law, which took place in 2017. The young participants shared good practices to support the candidates in campaigning and discussed the implications of the decentralization reform. The Election Day mobilized 2,251 voters to cast their ballot under the supervision of the Independent Election Commission (IEC). See Annex: Mock Elections Jordan. 

Competitions

Competitions and other inducements and various forms “edutainment” are used by EMBs and other CVE providers to attract and motivate young voters to register and vote. See ACE Election Materials: International IDEA’s Engaging the Electorate: Initiatives to Promote Voter Turnout from Around the World for examples. 

Example: In Georgia, the 2018 Central Election Commission: Grant Competition funded NGOs to run projects to raise awareness of young voters, including youth with disabilities and ethnic minority youth; promote their civic engagement in the electoral process; enhance their theoretical knowledge; develop their practical skills; promote the sharing of acquired experience; develop electoral capacity of political parties through the implementation of training programs for their representatives. 

Example: In the Russian City of Orenburg the “vote in the morning, dance in the evening” campaign aimed at increasing electoral turn-out among young people in the city. A description of the event stated that “during the month prior to polling day in the city of Orenburg people handed out flyers (approximately 100,000), which could be exchanged on polling day at the exit to polling stations for free tickets to the cinema, theatre, circus, skating, hockey, a popular TV entertainment show, night clubs and other establishments for young people. It should be pointed out that there was no electioneering to sway young people in favor of one political party or another. The result was a very positive one indeed, with a 15% increase in the turn-out of young voters.”^[i]. 

default

EMBs’ aspirations for inclusive elections are reflected in SDG 16.7. “Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels”. Youth, being underrepresented as voters, candidates, and senior EMB staff, are missing the opportunity to influence decision-making and advocate for stronger youth policies. It is incumbent, therefore, on EMBs to work towards electoral processes that are more inclusive of youth and to be proactive in encouraging increased youth participation in decision-making at all levels. 

This section provides some entry points for EMBs to ensure that (a) youth engagement is mainstreamed throughout the electoral cycle and (b) that strategies and activities are driven by the needs expressed by young people and built upon consultative processes. 

Mainstreaming youth engagement in EMBs involves employing youth at all levels of an EMB’s organization, and throughout all electoral processes, including voter registration, voting processes, and post-electoral activities. 

EMBs can view their engagement with youth through the three lenses – that is, as beneficiaries, partners, and leaders. This may represent a shift in the way an EMB currently engages with and invests in youth; a shift from simply seeing youth as beneficiaries, to also seeing them as partners and leaders. Such a shift will involve partnerships and collaboration with, and leveraging in, other initiatives and organizations to assist with program and project implementation.

default

Youth tend to be disengaged from formal political processes. They are also under-represented in election management roles. EMBs have a critical role to play in promoting youth participation in electoral management. 

Including young people in various roles in the election management, on electoral management bodies’ advisory boards, as voting station workers, and as election observers, would improve the EMB’s knowledge about the needs of young voters as well give the young people involved a way of participating effectively in the political process. This is good all around – for youth, for EMBs, and for the wider society. 

Apart from enhancing the role of youth within its organization, an EMB also needs to assume a youth-empowerment perspective on all the electoral processes it manages throughout the electoral cycle. This involves supporting youth-focused and youth-led organizations and partnering with CSOs and other electoral stakeholders that empower youth. Adopting models of meaningful youth engagement will assist them in developing relationships that are long-lasting and sustainable for all parties. This is critical when finances are scarce. 

The involvement of young people in various EMBs structures and processes requires will, money, and may require a shift in the mind-set of senior staff. This may be especially challenging in hierarchical organizations where leadership positions are based more on seniority than merit.

default

EMBs can assess their organizational capacity to enhance youth participation and reflect on their goals and values, governance, human resources policies, and general planning. 

A first prerequisite to foster inclusion of youth in electoral processes is ensuring that young people are positioned at all levels within the structure of EMBs. Although EMBs often deploy many young people as voting staff at the time of an election, especially if they require tech-savvy staff, youth remain underrepresented at the higher level because they often do not have the experience required for these positions. Research^[i] in the European Union found no instances of the regulated participation of young people, representatives of youth organizations, or experts on youth issues within the advisory boards of EMBs. The 2015 report, “Young People and Democratic Life in Europe,”, highlighted explicitly the lack of strategies to get more young people on EMB boards.^[ii] 

The lack of inclusion of young people across EMB structures is unfortunate because employing more young people can have many advantages. For example: 

• EMBs can profit from in-house knowledge and experience from youth to understand youth challenges and develop successful strategies to engage youth in electoral processes.
• Young people are — in general — more familiar with new communication tools and as such can contribute to the development and implementation of comprehensive online voter education campaigns.

 

Organizational governance of EMBs

Assuming a youth-empowerment perspective could involve EMBs thinking of opportunities for young people to contribute to the strategic decision-making of the organization. Appropriately skilled young people can be considered for professional positions, as well as members of election management advisory and governance boards. An EMB can show its commitment to employing youth in its strategic planning – e.g. mandating that future electoral management roles must have a minimum percentage of staff under 25 years of age. It can also send a message that it is seeking to foster a youth-friendly workplace by adopting a number of youth-friendly policies. Having minimum numbers of youth employees must be balanced with the need to minimize staff turnover; it is important to retain competent staff (thereby retaining institutional capacity and knowledge).). In Fiji, the mandatory retirement age for public servants, which includes all EMB employees, is 55. This may have the advantage of ensuring continual staff turnover, which may allow younger staff to enter the workforce and/or be promoted sooner. The disadvantage may be a risk of institutional memory loss as staff leave an organization at 55. Further, it may be considered “ageist” to mandate a retirement age when this age cohort are perhaps considered to be in the prime of their careers. Striking a balance for being inclusive of both youth and older workers is a challenge for any organization.

Changing organizational culture takes time. It requires the removal of barriers to youth participation in the governance of an organization and commitment to ensuring that young people’s perspectives are mainstreamed throughout the organization.

Selection and recruitment strategies often aim for diversity and inclusion, but often fail to consider age barriers relating to employment – for both young people and older people. An intergenerational mix of employees is good for an organization in terms of inclusion, diversity, succession planning, and the different benefits that younger (and older) people can bring with their different perspectives, experiences, and phase-of-life priorities. Young people can be flexible in terms of their work patterns and can be willing to move and work in different locations around the country. They bring creativity, innovation, and a willingness to learn. To open positions to youth, EMBs can assess their human resources policies in relation to higher education requirements or other rigid requirements (such as specific experience), and instead consider a flexible approach to recruitment so as not to exclude young people who may have lower qualifications and less experience than older adults. Removing rigid barriers for employment also benefits women and other marginalized groups that face similar barriers in employment and promotion.

Frequently, young people work in volunteer or intern roles in organizations. While there is nothing wrong with this in principle, these roles can sometimes be short-term and not provide opportunities for young people to contribute to the organization’s broader strategy and policies. However, when interns combine working for an EMB with study (e.g. taking a university course or leadership course) - focusing on a specific task or project, this could be beneficial to both the organization and the intern. Youth volunteers are often used at electoral events, assisting to mobilize and direct the voters.

For EMBs considering employing more youth, in see ACE Electoral Materials: Apathy Is Boring – Youth Friendly Guide (4th edition), which has good tips.

Youth working at voting stations

Young people are also frequently employed by EMBs as voting staff and other roles on election day and during the electoral phase in general. This is a good way to “get them while they are young,” and can have a positive impact on youth – educating them about politics, building trust in government, and building their employment skills. It also benefits the EMB, which needs to employ large numbers of people over a short time, and re-employ this workforce periodically at every election. Youth also are frequently employed as “Democracy Ambassadors” or “Youth Ambassadors” – motivating and assisting youth and other groups to register and vote. 

Example: In many jurisdictions in the United States and Canada, youth aged 15, 16 and 17 are employed in “Youth at the Booth” programs. These are paid roles, providing work experience for the young people. In recent British Columbia elections, Elections BC used youth workers who they considered as tech-savvy to find voter information on the internet quickly so as to enhance voter experience at the polls. In Ohio, the Youth at the Booth program recruits high-school students. Ohio law specifically allows for 17-year-olds who are enrolled in the senior year of high school to serve as voting officers. 

Example: In Australia, 16- and 17-year-olds are employed as voting assistants by the Australian Electoral Commission – providing a training ground for them to be employed as regular voting officials after they turn 18. In the lead-up to the 2018 Victorian state election, the Victorian Electoral Commission released a video advertisement specifically aiming to recruit young people aged 16–25 – to work as casual employees at the election. 

Example: “Day Off for Democracy.” In Ohio, in the US, the election board instituted a program to engage the business community and government agencies in the election process, called “Partners in Democracy.” Participating businesses and agencies were encouraged to give their employees a “day off for democracy” to allow them to serve as election workers.[i] 

Example: In Nigeria, the EMB has used young people who are part of the National Youth Service Corps as additional officials at voting stations, helping to deepen the levels of youth interest in the elections.[ii]

Example: In Namibia, the EMB recruited young people to work as Youth Ambassadors to promote the active engagement of young people in elections.[iii] 

Example: The Victorian Electoral Commission’s “Be Heard” Democracy Ambassador was a peer-based electoral education program specifically designed for the 2018 Victorian state election, in Australia. Over 40 community members were recruited, trained, and supported to provide face-to-face voter information to groups identified as facing barriers to electoral participation. The 2018 Democracy Ambassadors were a diverse group, including: people with disabilities (intellectual and physical), people who were homeless, people from CALD (culturally and linguistically diverse) backgrounds, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, “at-risk” youths, and others. Youths were specifically targeted and mentored during the program, based on an understanding that a peer-to-peer approach to youth participation is one of the most effective methods. See Annex: VEC Some Youth Inclusion Programming. 

As social media is a vital part of any EMB’s communications strategy, creating a social media coordinator position is a good way to attract talented young people, and is preferable to simply adding these duties onto someone else’s workload. 

Example: Georgia’s Central Election Commission ‘Open Door Day’. In 2018, the Central Election Commission (CEC) in Georgia held an ‘Open Door Day’ to youth as part of their educational programming. Participants visited a photo exhibition on the history of elections in Georgia, and mock elections were held. Representatives of the CEC Training Center provided the youth with detailed information on E-day procedures and voters’ rights.

EMB youth policy, focal points, and committees

An EMB can demonstrate its commitment to youth inclusion by adopting a youth policy or an inclusion policy that clearly identifies youth as a key target group alongside women, people with disabilities, and other marginalized groups. Formal policies clearly acknowledge the value of youth engagement within the work practices, processes, and outputs of an EMB. A youth policy may also be accompanied by an action plan to ensure youth participation is achieved, monitored, and evaluated across each of the priority areas. Youth policy can be championed by youth focal points, units, and/or committees. An EMB can also create a network of youth focal points from the various geographical offices and/or departments of the EMB, which can increase the visibility and legitimacy of implementing a youth-inclusion perspective. Not many EMBs have a youth focal point, but many have an inclusion officer, and this role could also include a youth focus. If it is not possible to have an inclusion officer because of budget or recruitment constraints, existing EMB staff may be nominated as inclusion officers. It is critical that any person taking on the role of youth focal point have senior status and have enough time, training, and resources to perform their role. 

Example: The EMB in Sri Lanka has appointed one of their Assistant Commissioners as their Youth Focal Point Officer to help the EMB mainstream youth inclusion into all of its electoral processes. 

Example: In Kenya, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), supported by IFES, implemented a mechanism to improve coordination and information sharing between the IEBC and young people during the 2017 elections. The IEBC recognized the ability of young people as an important community resource. It also recognized the youths as people with a range of skills, experiences, ideas, and aspirations who can positively shape their lives and effectively contribute to the quality of communication, engagement, and outreach services in relation to voter education and electoral processes in Kenya. The composition of the Youth Coordinating Committee was approximately 30 participants representing national youth networks and organizations, regional perspectives, youth leadership, and elections. See Annex: Kenya IEBC Youth Coordinating Committee.

Institutionalizing youth inclusion

Youth perspectives can be mainstreamed throughout the entire EMB organization and throughout all electoral processes. Mainstreaming in this case means the systematic integration of youth perspectives into the work of all policies and processes. Just as EMBs are now more than ever mainstreaming gender equality, they can follow this same approach with a youth perspective. Doing so requires the allocation of a proportion of all relevant departmental budgets to youth inclusion.

Youth and security – UNSCR 2250

In 2015, the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted the ground-breaking and historic Resolution 2250 on Youth, Peace and Security (YPS). UNSCR 2250, for the first time, recognizes the important, constructive, and positive contributions of youth in the maintenance and promotion of peace and security. It further affirms young people’s important role in the prevention and resolution of conflicts and stresses the importance of engaging youth as partners and leaders in peacebuilding. It also urges UN member states to increase active and inclusive representation of youth in decision-making at all levels, as well as in institutions and mechanisms to prevent and resolve conflict and counter violent extremism. The resolution provides a platform for partners to work together and build partnerships with representatives of different sectors to generate inclusive peace processes, including the UN, governments, donors, civil society, youth-led organizations, the private sector, and the media. Such alliances need to be cross-sectoral and intergenerational. EMBs can be instrumental in establishing alliances for the purposes of ensuring peaceful elections.[i]  See Annex: Guiding Principles - Youth Engagement in 2030 Agenda Implementation.

 

EMBs and youth research

Some EMBs are able to conduct detailed research into youth participation in electoral processes, often related to voter behavior and turn-out. This research can help shape youth engagement strategies by EMBs and other electoral stakeholders.

Data Collection

To accurately assess the participation of young people in electoral processes, it is essential to have reliable data on youth registration, voter turnout, youth EMB staff, observers, candidates, and memberships of political parties. These kinds of data can help EMBs develop youth strategies and implement targeted interventions to increase youth participation. In many contexts, such data are mostly missing, and data collection remains incomplete. 

Data on youth voting 

The UNSC Resolution 2250–mandated progress study, entitled The Missing Peace: Independent Progress Study on Youth, Peace and Security, (2018) describes the significant data gap on youth participation: “despite extensive global data on overall voting behavior and registration, there was nonetheless a severe lack of disaggregated datasets for youth within the majority of government electoral databases, signaling that most governments – including in developed countries – do not effectively monitor the percentage of youth vote, or make it publicly available. Out of 202 countries and territories examined in a baseline study, only seven had available government recorded and publicly shared data on actual youth voting patterns, 91 had survey-based data available, 10 had incomplete government data, and 94 had no data available at all on youth voting trends.”[i] EMBs can address this situation by keeping robust age-segregated data on youth registration and voter turn-out.

default

Voting is a right. Therefore, political authorities and public officials have a duty to make registration processes as convenient as possible for eligible citizens. However, registration can be a major hurdle in getting young voters to participate in the electoral cycle. 

Civil registration is the basis for establishing legal identity and is necessary to obtain rights to vote. However, almost half of the world’s population are not registered at birth and do not possess legal identity documents. Without these documents many individuals, including young people, lack the legal identity needed for voter registration. 

The UN has recognized this limitation in SDG 16, target 9, which states: “By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration.”

Key obstacles to registration

Several obstacles hinder youth in gaining registration to vote:[i] 

• The lack of suitable legal identification papers, such as a citizenship certificate or passport, prevents many young people from registering to vote.
• Setting early registration deadlines may disenfranchise individuals who reach eligible voting age, commonly 18, after the deadline but before the election.
• The indirect or direct costs of obtaining identification or registering to vote can be prohibitive where countries impose charges.
• The time-consuming nature of registration can be a hurdle, especially for highly mobile people, often students and younger people, who may move frequently.
• Registering may present specific difficulties for some women, especially where registration requires attendance in person, photo identification, or proof of identity documents, which they may not hold. Requiring photo ID can cause difficulty in some cultures and contexts, where women may be uncomfortable displaying their face outside the home. Travelling to register might also place women in danger, where they are required to travel long distances or to register in isolated or violent places.
• A lack of understanding of the electoral requirements for registering and voting may prevent young people from participating.
• In some places there is a gap between the legal framework and election procedures.  For example, the legal framework might state that all citizens over 16 or 18 at the time of the election are eligible to vote, but EMB procedures end up limiting that to those who are 16 or 18 at the time of registration. EMBs need to amend their procedures to ensure that during registration all who turn of age by the time of the election date, rather than by the time of registration, can register to vote. Sometimes the language in the legal framework needs to be adjusted, but usually it’s a matter of effective EMB procedures to ensure that those who turn of age between the end of registration and election day are not excluded.  

 

First-time voters

First-time voters are a unique and important group. First-time voting can help form consistent voting habits later. However, in many countries first-time voters display lower levels of registration, and consequently lower levels of voting, than other age groups. 

Successful strategies to target young and first-time voters are often youth-driven, involve contact with young people in places they frequent, use online communication tools to inform and educate, and include structural steps that make it easy for voters to enter the electoral cycle. 

Proactive measures that EMBs can use to educate first-time voters and drive registration include: 

• Provisional registers that allow first-time voters, within a year or two of voting age, to register. They are automatically transferred to the main voters list once eligible. Another option exists in countries where the voter lists are drawn from civil registries, and so additional voter registration is not required.
• Automatic voter registration or pre-registration linked to an event, such as attending a civics class or obtaining a driver’s licence.[i] Pre-registered voters are transferred to the main voters list once eligible.
• Birthday campaigns where first-time voters receive a letter from an EMB (an initiative which is likely only to be appropriate in developed countries). On their 17th birthday, when they can register to vote, Australian citizens are sent a birthday card by the EMB, signed by the electoral commissioner. Text messages are now more commonly sent than cards by EMBs, wishing citizens a happy birthday and reminding them to register. See Annex: Birthday Cards from Australia.
• National registration drives or campaigns that focus on first-time voters. 

Example: In Canada, Elections Ontario established a Future Voters Register enabling young people aged 16 and 17 years to register online as a future voter. On turning 18 they are automatically added to the Voters List. A dedicated hashtag, #GetONit encourages young people to tell their friends via social media. Pre-registration is available to youth in some jurisdictions in Canada.[ii] 

Example: In Kenya, youth between the ages of 18 to 35 account for more than 70 per cent of the population. Since 2012, close to 1 million Kenyan young people from villages throughout the country have come together to form youth parliaments, also called “youth bunges.” With support from the USAID/Yes Youth Can program, 15,000 bunges have registered with the Kenyan government and bunge members are participating in the national campaign My ID, My Life to help 3 million youth obtain a national identity card, which is required to register to vote.[iii] 

Example: In Kenya in 2017, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), assisted by IFES leveraged established peer networks to implement voter education outreach campaigns in universities across Kenya targeting first--time voters.  See Annex: Voter Education Outreach in Universities. 

Example: In Nepal, Youth CSO Youth Initiative, assisted by IFES, promoted youth voter registration in selected districts, particularly of low caste and other marginalized youth. “Youth champions” worked closely with local Election Commission Nepal offices on participation, motivation, voter education workshops, and other activities – such as meeting returning migrant youth at the Indian border with voter registration invitations, and staffing help desks at voter registration centers. The activities were driven by the CSO and implemented in close coordination with the EMB, but were not part of an EMB strategy. 

Example: In one clerk’s office (where citizens register to vote) in a jurisdiction in the US, visitors are welcomed by a 6-foot cut-out of Homer Simpson holding his Voter ID and a “Register to Vote” sign.[iv]

Driving youth registration

There are other measures that EMBs can use to encourage youth voters, and assist groups who may experience difficulty registering. These measures include:  

• Education and awareness campaigns to inform young voters, using flyers and brochures, radio and TV advertising, social media and online communications 
• Mobile registration units, “taking registration to the people,” that visit sports or community centers, schools and universities, at youth-specific events, and in remote locations. (This measure can also benefit specific groups who are otherwise unable to reach registration centers). Mobile registration units have advantages and disadvantages – and would need to be considered in light of the context. Also, in some cases mobile registration units could be counterproductive, because they could. build expectations of the voters that they will be able to cast the vote in the same location where they registered, which might not be the case.
•  Election-day registration, where voters can register and vote at the same time. This method is used in some US states. In North Dakota, voters do not need to register at all. They simply need to provide acceptable ID when voting. In cases where voter list is drawn from civil registry, voter registration is not required. As a caution, same day registration generally should be avoided and used only in exceptional cases (where it is contextually appropriate), as it potentially opens doors for electoral fraud.
•  Gender-sensitive programs that can encourage and support women to enter and participate in the electoral process
•  Online registration and voter data verification, where internet connections are available, facilitating first-time voter registration and enabling individuals to check and update their details online. Also, the ability to check your polling center location can be done online.
• A fair and transparent system for resolving electoral complaints and enquiries, with information readily available to voters, candidates, and political parties. The resolution process should be easy to follow, accessible, free of hurdles, and timely in its decisions and remedies.

 

Example: In the US, a national, online, mobile-friendly voter registration platform, Rock the Vote, has registered over 6 million new voters. Using Rock the Vote, young people can check their registration status, register or pre-register, and find out the electoral rules that apply in their state.[i]

Example: In Afghanistan and Mozambique, women-only registration teams are used to register women. In Afghanistan, Iran, Yemen, Nepal and Pakistan, separate queuing arrangements are in place, such as having separate voting rooms or venues, as well the use of security personnel from both sexes to conduct body searches. In Afghanistan, officials receive gender training to ensure that gender-sensitive processes are embedded in standard duties.[ii] 

Example: In 2016, India’s election commission established a complaint mechanism using an IT platform to manage complaints received through multiple channels in a timely integrated way and to keep the complainant informed of progress (nvsp.in). 

default

Across established democracies, declining voter turnout is a long-term trend with each generation of young people less likely to vote than the last. Voter turnout among people aged 18 to 25 continues to be lower than other age groups and they are less likely to join political parties.[i]

However, while young people appear to be disconnecting from the electoral process, they are not disinterested in politics, and they engage in various ways: socially, digitally, via youth associations, at rallies and through grass-roots movements connected to important issues, such as the environment. Democracies and governments seeking to re-connect youth with electoral politics can explore inclusive strategies and electoral processes that will attract youth and other voters, making it easier for them to engage and participate. 

Strategies and activities to make voting processes inclusive of youth can be informed by the needs expressed by youth themselves and built upon consultative processes. 

Voting processes for youth engagement

Broad issues such as disengagement from or distrust of the electoral process and lack of political awareness can affect the turnout of youth voters. Practical barriers, such as the following factors, can also increase the likelihood of young people not taking part in electoral processes: 

• complex administrative procedures to obtain required ID documents
• long distances to travel to vote
• unfavorable opening hours of voting stations during work and school hours.

Notwithstanding the fact that in some cases youth are the most mobile segment of a society, and even sometimes because of this fact, many youth, especially from marginalized groups, face access barriers to electoral processes. Young people that are transitioning into adulthood are often moving between households and employment or study locations.

In many contexts, young women and young persons with disabilities are facing particular challenges to cast their votes such as cultural norms that prescribe that women should not be involved in politics or that politics is the domain of men; concerns about the safety of journeys to voting centers and security there; illiteracy levels that are still disproportionally high among women, among other hurdles.

To counter youth-specific obstacles to voting, EMBs should explore different options to engage youth voters and make voting more convenient during elections, including:

 

• suitable numbers of well-located voting stations, with clear information on their whereabouts and opening times. Consider extended opening hours for improved accessibility
• voting stations that create a sense of energy, community, and engagement. Australian polling stations hold sausage sizzles (coined “democracy sausages”) – a tradition on election days
• first-time voters: voting for the first-time can be intimidating, so ensure messaging conveys that voting is easy, and that help is available
• early voting (advance polling or pre-poll voting), enabling voters to lodge their vote prior to election day
• multiple voting days to provide more flexibility about when to vote (although the disadvantages to this include increased potential for electoral fraud and increased costs to staff).
• absentee voting, allowing young voters to present at different polling stations if they work or study away from their usual voting district
• designated voting days, where elections are scheduled on a national holiday or a weekend, to maximize voter turnout. In Australia, where voting is compulsory, employers must give their employees time off work to vote on election day
• effective “how to” electoral materials at voting stations that help to educate youth voters on the mechanics of voting and assist them in the voting process
• voting stations on university campuses or in youth centers to make voting convenient and easy for young voters 

Example: In 2015, Elections Canada set up 17 temporary polling stations at 39 university and college campuses, 13 at Aboriginal Friendship Centers and two at youth community centers in urban areas.[i] 

Example: In the US, the Voter Friendly Campus program was launched in 2016 to help universities and institutions develop plans to coordinate administrators, faculty, and student organizations in civic and electoral engagement. It was launched to counter the declining level of student voters, and to develop strategies to mitigate the barriers to voting that exist for many US students.

Example: The electoral commission in Botswana responded to the numerous challenges young people identified, such as the long queues they faced during elections, by introducing help desks, which were managed by youth, at voting stations during the 2014 elections. The name of the voter was checked against the voters roll and the voter informed of the page number before proceeding to vote, facilitating a smoother flow.[ii]

Pre-election, EMBs may also consider targeted strategies to connect with and educate young voters, incorporating ideas from the following list.

•  Outreach campaigns for first-time voters celebrate voting as a rite of passage. These could include a letter and education material from EMBs or governments with education material and information on how to register and vote.
• Education program for young voters, within schools and elsewhere, can cover the role and purpose of elections in democracies, the election process itself, how to vote, and the rights and responsibilities of voters.
• Communication campaigns designed to appeal to young voters can use: online platforms; multimedia channels, including radio, television, and print; artistic and cultural programs, using concerts, music, plays, and street theatre.
• Other mechanisms to inform young voters include: information centers, telephone hotlines, advertising campaigns using billboards and advertising on transport, direct mailouts, and employment of youth ambassadors.   
• Social media and apps can reach young voters who use these as a primary source of communication and information. For example, in the US, the app TurboVote keeps members updated with elections and voting requirements across all US states. It sends reminders when voters need to register and vote, and it can assist with absentee votes.

Example: In the lead-up to the 2017 general elections in Kenya, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) deployed a dynamic youth outreach strategy to achieve peaceful participation and increase youth voter turnout. “Youth Vote” (YVOTE) was a digital media and face-to-face outreach initiative to educate, engage, and motivate young people. It was also designed to bring young people into active roles in governance and improve accessibility of voter information to help youth make informed choices. Peace messages were disseminated throughout the campaign’s digital ads and on-the-ground activities. The face-to-face campaign reached over 100,000 people and the digital campaign reached over 1.1 million people.[iii] See Annex: IFES Case Study – YVOTE Public Affairs Campaign. 

Example: In Tunisia, the UNDP applied a variety of innovative tools to reach out to youth prior to the 2011 elections. These included an election song, “Enti Essout” (“You Are the Voice”), which achieved more than 100,000 free downloads. Additionally, a voter education game, “DemocraTweet,” aimed to mobilize youth in partnership with Tunisia’s leading radio station, Radio Mosaique FM. It was played by 10,000 people over three weeks. Three voter education campaigns focused on registration, late-voter registration, and voter mobilization, including through media messages and billboards. The campaign reached out to illiterate and rural youth. The awareness of young people about the electoral process increased and voter turnout was 76 per cent.[iv] 

Example: The TurboVote Challenge is a project of Democracy Works, a non-partisan, non-profit organization based in the US. The TurboVote Challenge uses partners to encourage their employees, customers, and communities to participate in elections, making it easier for them to do so. See Annex: 2016 TurboVote Challenge Partner Implementation Examples. 

Other incentive and Inducements 

Example: In Japan, some restaurants and shops provide discount coupon if the voters who have voted and can show the evidence of their having voted, are given an ‘election discount’ as a way to promote turnout.[v] 

Example: In the US, an experiment was conducted to see whether young people who “pledge to vote” are more likely to turn out to vote. This experiment was testing psychological theories of political behaviour, exploring whether making commitments to follow through and perform a certain activity actually results in activity being carried out. Making the commitment indeed increased voter turnout in the experiment conducted. The experiment has interesting implications for voter turnout mobilization efforts.[vi]

Providing funds to youth-based CSOs is also a practical way of supporting youth engagement. EMBs could provide competitions for micro grants/awards for youth to develop their own awareness campaigns, for example. This builds skills that youth can apply to their future careers, and at the same time contributes to electoral processes.

Use of voter advice applications

Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) are digital tools – online questionnaires that help voters gather information on parties, policies, and candidates in the pre-election phase. VAAs deliver online data that can assist voters to identify the party or candidate that aligns with their political values and preferences. This can help to save time and also build political literacy in young and first-time voters. 

VAAs are an increasingly popular tool in democracies, being used to drive civic engagement and electoral participation, and influence voter turnout. Debate continues on the efficacy of VAAs; critics maintain that they are not capable of delivering impartial advice, while supporters credit their capacity to help voters in the decision-making process. VAAs are widely used in Europe: Switzerland’s SmartVote program matches voters and candidates, with both completing the online questionnaire. SmartVote has proven popular with young voters, and is seen as likely to influence youth voter turnout. 

Example: The Vote Compass application was developed in Canada by political scientists, and is now used by democracies around the world. Participants complete an online questionnaire, covering a series of issues. Vote Compass analyses responses and compares them against the policies of candidates. The results show the participant how their views compare to candidates’ policies. Vote Compass generally partners with a media organization to promote the initiative in the pre-election cycle (votecompass.com).

Internet Voting

Remote internet voting, or e-voting, allows voters to cast their vote anywhere, at any time, provided they have access to an internet-connected computer. It could make participation in electoral processes easier, more accessible and less time consuming, potentially leading to an increase in voter turnout. For young people studying away from home, voting via internet allows them to participate without traveling on election day. 

Internet voting also has the potential to increase the participation of young women, ethnic minorities and persons with disabilities in societies where these people face restrictions to their engagement in public life.  

However, there are many compelling reasons why e-voting has not become popular; and why cybersecurity experts and electoral experts caution against e-voting. There are three main reasons for the caution: issues with the technology, vast possibilities of fraud, and concerns about protection of voters and their votes. 

There are other considerations for EMBs in assessing whether internet voting can be implemented successfully in their context: the take-up of digital services by the population and extent to which citizens have computers and internet access, and the level of confidence in EMBs to deliver a robust e-voting solution, without which the exercise could further alienate voters. 

See Internet Voting (in ACE Elections and Technology Topic Area) 

Example: In 2007, Estonia became the first country to introduce legally binding internet voting. Over 30 per cent of voters now vote online, although voting stations are still available. The peak online voting age group is 35 to 45 years, with a smaller uptake by young voters. Research has shown that online voting is not the most popular option among the youngest group of voters, those aged 18 to 25 years.[i] Estonia is highly digitally enabled, with many government services available through online portals. Nevertheless, some cybersecurity experts believe Estonia’s e-voting system is open to abuse.[ii] 

default

Independent observers play an important role in maintaining electoral integrity through objective monitoring. They can assist in legitimizing and enhancing the electoral process, building confidence—thus increasing voter participation, improving a state’s prospects for democratization, and reducing or preventing conflict. See ACE Electoral Integrity Topic Area. 

They also undertake essential work in observing and reporting on electoral processes, identifying areas of concern and improving efficiency, and increasing transparency around the electoral cycle. 

Observers can belong to national or international organizations; they can also be citizen observers. A number of civil society groups and non-governmental organizations encourage voters to protect the integrity of the electoral process by recording their observations and reporting them to electoral authorities and regular observers. 

In response to declining youth participation, and with increasing use of technology in electoral observation, many organizations are seeking to work with youth observers.

Benefits of youth as observers

Involving young people in electoral observation is an effective way for EMBs to increase youth engagement and build youth capabilities in the electoral process. In addition, there are clear benefits for EMBs in employing youth observers: 

• Many young people have the necessary technical skills and feel comfortable using new technology to monitor electoral processes
• Young people are well-placed to pay extra attention to the participation of young people during elections. This means they can provide invaluable support in collecting age-disaggregated information and reporting on youth-specific challenges
• Youth observers are likely to have useful influence in convincing other young people to vote, thereby having a positive impact on that age group’s turnout
• Young people are not typically well represented at higher levels within EMBs. Integrating youth into organizations early and building their administrative skills may assist them to move up within EMBs. 

Example: In Nigeria, the Independent Electoral Commission of Nigeria (INEC) partnered with the National Youth Service Corps to support the recruitment of young people in the electoral process, training them in a range of functions for the 2015 elections. In the lead-up to the 2019 elections INEC has entered into a partnership with the Youth Initiative for Advocacy Growth and Advancement (YIAGA) to develop a strategic framework for youth engagement. Entry points for youth workers include as candidates, election observers and electoral staff.[i] 

Observing elections with a youth focus

Countries and organizations globally have developed multifaceted programs to target youth inclusion in the electoral process. Not only is there a focus on using youth as observers, but also on tracking youth engagement as they participate in the electoral cycle. 

The European Students’ Forum (AEGEE) Election Observation Mission provides a youth perspective on elections in Europe, by deploying student observers specifically to assess youth engagement. They do this using a variety of measures, and taking in local legislative conditions that will favor youth inclusion and participation. 

Example: In April 2018, the AEGEE Observation Mission deployed 29 young observers to Hungary for the parliamentary election.[i] Observers monitored electoral activities in the lead-up to election, as voting took place in 130 voting stations and mobile voting units, and reported post-election. Among other reporting, observers recorded: the number of voters under 30; the presence of young electoral staff (underrepresented in this election); and also noted local laws that would favor youth voters, such as enabling voting outside their home constituency, or disadvantage youth voters, such as the lack of legislation permitting domestic observation, thus excluding young citizen observers.   

Example: Women for Change Mongolia, is an NGO that advocates for women and young people. Its Youth Civic Engagement program[ii] drives youth participation in the democratic process. In 2012, 2016, and 2017 Women for Change and Youth Policy Watch (a CSO) organized and mobilized a civil society observation project and acted as impartial election observers in Mongolia’s parliamentary and presidential elections as a part of the “Fair Election” civil society coalition. Two hundred young people were recruited and trained during each election to observe the process of voting, vote count and result tabulation. Equipped with new skills and training, volunteers were able to observe and assist voters at 100 voting stations across Ulaanbaatar. This equates to 30 per cent of voting stations in the nation’s capital city, which is home to over 50 per cent of the country’s population.[iii] See Annex: Youth Observers in Mongolia. 

Example: During the 2012 federal election process, UNDP Mexico managed and operated a Fund that supported electoral observation projects. The Fund’s public call for proposals clearly stated the topic of youth as one of the priority topics in the selection process. In total, five of the selected projects were not only focused on youth, but were also run by youth organizations. The projects observed a wide array of aspects and actors in the electoral process. For instance, one of them monitored the EMB’s youth participation campaigns and policies. Another one monitored youth candidacies for Congress and observed the conditions in which the Mexican youth has access to these candidacies, focusing on practices within the various political parties. Beyond the traditional observation during election day, the youth-led projects that were supported by the Fund observed a variety of actors, including the EMB, political parties, and the media, throughout the electoral process.

Crowdsourcing to monitor elections

Crowdsourcing, defined by the Merriam Webster online dictionary as “the practice of obtaining needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people and especially from the online community rather than from traditional employees or suppliers,” can be a valuable tool during elections. 

As digital technologies reshape electoral processes around the world, electoral observation is also being transformed digitally, through crowdsourced monitoring. Individual citizens are now able to use social media, mobile apps, and dedicated websites to observe and report on violence and intimidation, fraudulent voting activities, miscounts, and erroneous voter registration lists. Potentially, an entire population can act as monitors, expanding the capacity of national and international observers. 

Youth populations tend to be technologically literate, and in possession of mobile phones, meaning they are well placed to monitor election activities and report cases of violence instantly. 

EMBs could consider establishing online platforms for elections monitoring and providing training for youth and CSOs to use new tools in ways that can contribute to the prevention of conflicts and enable real-time exchanges of information on all parts of electoral processes. Social media should be used to supplement rather than replace other traditional tools of information. 

See Citizen Electoral Observation (ACE Topic Area) 

Around the world, open-source technology platforms and apps, such as Ushahidi[i], ReVoDa[ii], Get Aggie[iii], the Carter Center’s ELMO (Election Monitoring)[iv], International IDEA’s Electoral Risk Management Tool (ERMTool)^[v] and mass text messaging services like Clickatell[vi] and FrontlineSMS[vii] are being used by EMBs and CSOs to monitor elections and to manage automated communications and data. 

Example: In the 2016 US election, the crowdsourcing technology platform Ushahidi was used to monitor election issues in a “citizen-led” effort. US citizens were able to report election issues via Twitter, SMS, webform and email.  Vetting teams verified information and then published it online. The initiative was described as complementing the work of other election monitoring organizations. Ushahidi was developed in Kenya to monitor, report, and map violence in the post-2008 election. 

Example: Enough is Enough (EiE) is a non-partisan network in Nigeria that encourages good governance and accountability through active citizenship. The RSVP (Register, Select, Vote not fight, Protect) program focuses on young Nigerians (18 to 35 years) with access to technology. In 2015, EiE used the mobile phone app ReVoDa to enable Nigerians to report as citizen observers from polling units across Nigeria.  

Link to ACE Consolidated Reply: Popularizing Election Observation Among 2010 Philippine Elections 

Link to ACE Electoral Materials: Participation of Youth in Elections (Cambodia) 

default

The ability of citizens to hold their elected representatives accountable is a fundamental characteristic of a democratic society. Accountability cannot be limited solely to election day. Before and after, elected representatives need to be responsive to citizens’ demands. Avenues for communication and advocacy have to be open to all—including youth. In some countries, members of parliament and government officials may not be used to answering questions from citizens and media, but could develop capacities to do so. This helps embed the values of transparency, accountability, and responsiveness in the political culture, and foster inclusive participation. 

The following good practice recommendations are relevant for joint activities with parliaments, governments and advocacy-oriented CSOs in the post-electoral period.

Make voices of youth heard in parliament and government

Apart from youth directly being represented in parliament, there are several other entry points for increasing their access to the legislature. Parliaments often engage with civil society through committee hearings. Specific parliamentary committees and multi-party groups either focused on youth or deliberating issues impacting youth could conduct public consultations and invite youth CSOs to share their views. UNDP’s Parliamentary Development Strategy Note[i] highlights support for these kinds of activities. Helping youth have a focused impact can entail capacity development for youth CSOs, including on advocacy and public speaking. 

Example: In Jamaica, youth organizations founded a National Youth Parliamentary Watch Committee in 2009, endorsed by the Ministry of Youth. This Committee is charged with reviewing “all bills and policies before Parliament, and critically [evaluating] them for youth mainstreaming objectives.”[ii] The Turkish National Assembly has recently established a Child Rights Monitoring Committee including a website supported by UNICEF.[iii] 

Example: The internet provides numerous opportunities for direct engagement between legislators and online citizens. In Jordan, UNDP helped the Ministry of Political Development develop its social media capacities in order to communicate better with young citizens. 

Example: In Germany, the youth-led initiative “Parliament Watch” enables ordinary citizens to scrutinize their members of parliament by asking questions and accessing information about voting behavior. 

Example: In Egypt, after the fall of the Mubarak government, young people put up projectors in public places and displayed videos of human rights violations. This initiative proved an effective way of sharing information that might otherwise be available only on the internet. 

Facilitate youth-led national youth councils and/or parliaments

Youth parliaments are a useful civic education exercise for raising awareness about the functions and procedures of parliament. In some countries, youth parliaments and councils effectively represent youth and give them a voice in national decision-making. As participatory institutions, youth parliaments should have certain competencies, such as a consultative function for youth-relevant issues. The IPU stresses the importance of operating budgets for strong youth parliaments.[i] 

It can sometimes be unclear whether the opinions expressed in youth parliaments are taken into account. Frustration can arise when young people work hard with no traceable impact. From the beginning, it should be decided which minister or parliamentary committee is tasked with responding to resolutions. Youth parliaments should not be onetime events; they should allow for continuous engagement and follow-up. They can be an important contribution to overall accountability if they succeed in “shadowing” the national parliament’s work. 

See ACE Electoral Materials: IPU, A Handbook on Child Participation in Parliament (2011) and IPU (2016) Outcome document of the General Debate on Rejuvenating democracy, giving voice to youth 

Example: The Sri Lankan National Youth Parliament involves 500,000 members of youth CSOs electing members in district-wide elections. Twice a month, members meet in the capital and debate issues also being discussed in the national Parliament. Thirty youth ministers follow the work of national ministries and have working space in them. Members in general are allowed to enter the committees of the national Parliament and consult national members. The national Parliament has included the Youth Parliament’s recommendations in the national youth policy. 

Example: The Young Female Parliament (YFP) in Ghana, is a unique innovation that has been turning around the lives of young women in the Northern region of Ghana since 2009. The partners NORSAAC (Northern Sector on Awareness and Action Center) and ActionAid Ghana (AAG), aimed in this program to address the glaring disparities between young women and young men in their participation in local decision-making processes. The young women participating learn to challenge power structures that have historically oppressed females and violated their rights. YFP was successfully developed and rolled out in 19 senior high schools and tertiary institutions. 

Example: The Danish National Youth Council (DUF) is an umbrella organization with more than 70 member organizations. The council promotes the participation of youth in democracy and brings the voice of youth to decision-making processes. For instance, DUF is represented in the 2030-panel, which supports the Danish Parliament’s cross-party network on the SDGs; advices the Danish development cooperation as member of the Council for Development Policy; manages the Danish Youth Delegate Programme; and is chair of the youth climate council, which advices the minister.

Invite young people to visit and intern in national parliaments

Politicians are banned from educational institutions in some countries. In others, they are invited to schools and universities to share information with students on their political program and the workings of parliament. Many parliaments invite students to follow their proceedings.

Example: In Cambodia, UNDP facilitated such an exercise. For the first time in the history of the National Assembly, school children and youth came to the legislature and spoke with members.

Example. In 2017 and 2018, in Timor Leste, the election commission, with the assistance of IFES, set up a Youth Parliament Watch program, which was coordinated with other governance CSOs. This included workshops for young people in all local government areas, training them to monitor the activities of their representatives. See Annex: Civic and Voter Education for Timor Leste 2017 & 2018 Elections.

Some parliaments have internship schemes for students, mainly at the university level. The structure of these schemes can vary depending on the country. When designed properly, students and parliamentarians both benefit. While students will have the possibility to develop their professional skills and understanding of parliamentary procedures, legislators and parliamentary staff will have the possibility to profit from their interns’ knowledge and ideas.

Train and support young parliamentarians

Young parliamentarians need help to increase their leverage and contribute to shifts in cultural norms so that youth leadership capacities are more widely recognized. In 2010, the IPU passed a resolution by consensus calling on all parliamentarians to support young members.[i]

 

Initiate and support youth councils at local level

Youth delegates to councils can be selected in schools and/or universities, and report back to their peers. Clear agreements can be made with municipal councils regarding procedures for consultation, such as attendance in municipal youth committees and/or a specific budget for youth parliaments. Working groups and committees can be tasked with solving local issues that concern young people.

 

Example: In Yemen, NDI has successfully supported the creation of youth councils in a tribal setting. This innovative activity combines training on conflict mitigation with new avenues for youth participation and enables youth to participate effectively in their community’s decision-making processes.

 

 

Annex - Contributors

The Youth and Elections Topic Area was added to the ACE website in 2018.

The Lead Writer was Yvonne Goudie. Yvonne has over 20 years’ experience working for various agencies as a democratic governance educator and practitioner. Her specialties are election management and educating for capacity development in the intersecting areas of gender, youth and disability inclusion.

Young people were integral to the development of this Topic Area – several young people (as young as 20 years) including students, activists, and members of EMBs contributed by researching, writing, editing, and providing examples.

Contributors:

• Carla Chianese, Civic and Voter Education and Strategic Communications Specialist, IFES Kenya
• Genet Menelik, IFES Kenya
• Alan Wall, Electoral Consultant
• James Fiford and Alex Markham, Education and Electoral Inclusion Officers, Victorian Electoral Commission
• Carol Goudie, Freelance Writer and Editor
• Lani Voulgarakis, Freelance Writer and Editor
• Sally Holdsworth, Freelance Writer and Editor
• Georgia Cromarty, student
• Joe Goudie, student
• Tom Quinlivan, student
• Krushnadevsinh (Kano) Ravalji – student
• Ravneel Chand, Research Officer, Executive Directorate, Fijian Elections Office 
• Heather Szilagyi, Research Officer, Center for Applied Research and Learning, IFES
• Ashley Law, Youth Technical Coordinator, IFES
• Maria do Rosário Gonçalves, Presidente, Comissão Nacional de Eleições (CNE) Portugal
• Andre Fecteau, Elections Canada
• Ossama Kamel, Electoral Consultant
• Fida Nasrallah, Carter Centre, Tunisia
• Ilona Tip, Operations Director, Electoral Institute for Sustainable Democracy in Africa (EISA)
• Zolzaya (Zola) Batkhuyag, Director and Co-Founder, Women for Change NGO, Mongolia

 

Thanks also to:

• Therese Pearce-Laanela, Head of Electoral Processes, International IDEA
• Noëlla Richard, Youth Policy Specialist – Youth Global Programme Manager, Governance and Peacebuilding Cluster, Bureau for Policy and Programme Support, UNDP
• Julia Guadalupe Almaraz Anaya, ACE the Electoral Knowledge Network, International Affairs Unit, National Electoral Institute, Mexico

 

This topic area was managed and supervized by Aleida Ferreyra of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).