Статьи

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31713/ve320265

Abstract

The article substantiates the conceptual foundations of youth participation in public governance and administration, taking into account the need to distinguish between terms characterising the interaction between youth and public institutions. The study’s relevance stems from the growing role of youth as active participants in shaping and implementing public policy, as well as the widespread use – in both academic and administrative practice – of the terms participation, involvement, and engagement, which are often treated as interchangeable. The study aims to clarify the relationships between these concepts and define their roles in fostering active youth citizenship. The methodological framework comprises terminological analysis, content analysis, the comparative method, a systems approach, and conceptual modelling. Based on an analysis of scholarly works, legal acts, and materials from international organisations, the study identifies the commonalities and distinctions among the primary forms of youth participation in public processes. The research proposes the following terminological distinctions: participation, involvement, engagement, influence, and co-creation. Participation is defined as the fact of youth taking part in public processes; involvement as the degree of their inclusion; engagement as the nature and intensity of communication and collaboration; influence as the capacity to affect the content and outcomes of public decisions; and co-creation as the joint formulation of decisions, policies, and public initiatives. A conceptual model – participation – involvement –engagement – influence – co-creation – is proposed; it is not viewed as a universal hierarchy or a mandatory sequence, but rather as a framework that defines the interconnected analytical characteristics of youth participation. The model has been operationalised through a system of observable attributes and indicators, establishing a foundation for the subsequent empirical assessment of youth participation mechanisms at the levels of territorial communities, youth councils, and public policy formulation and implementation. The practical significance of the results lies in the potential to use the proposed approach to evaluate not only the existence of participation mechanisms but also the extent of their actual integration, interaction, and influence on public decision-making.

Author Biography