Youth as Catalysts for Peace Consultation

A warm welcome to this consultation! 💫

👋 My name is Hannah and I work as a Programme Analyst at UNDP. Antara and I will be your moderators for this week. We are excited to hear your views, thoughts and responses to the questions! 

💻️ You can respond to the questions in any order (please include the question's number you are responding to in your comment).

Please feel free to respond in any language of your choice by clicking the Select your language button on the top right of the page, this platform will automatically translate it. Please feel free to ask questions, answer in your own words, or add links that you think would be helpful! 🖊️

We hope to have a rich and interactive discussion. 💬 Thank you and looking forward to our fruitful discussions this week. 

Hello everyone, and thank you for joining our consultation! 🙏

I am a Communication and Advocacy Assistant at UNDP, and I will be co-moderating this consultation with Hannah throughout the week.

We are inviting all young people, practitioners, policymakers, researchers, and partners to help shape UNDP’s new Policy Brief on Youth, Peace and Security (YPS), with a particular focus on National Action Plans (NAPs).

Before answering the questions, please take a moment to introduce yourself and share a little about your background or connection to YPS. ☮️

And if you know someone who could contribute to this discussion, please share the consultation link and invite them to join us. The more diverse perspectives we hear, the stronger the final policy brief will be! 💪

We look forward to hearing from you. 😊

Young people are not just the hope for peace — we are already building it every day in our communities. Yet too often, we are invited to speak but not trusted to lead. If the world truly wants youth to be catalysts for peace, it must move beyond consultation and give us real power, resources, and responsibility.
These are my honest reflections and practical proposals:
1. Trust us with real decision-making power
Create permanent local Youth Peace Councils where young people from different backgrounds sit together, identify tensions early, and design solutions with community leaders. When youth are co-owners of the process, peace becomes more practical and more lasting.
2. Connect peace with livelihoods
Hunger, unemployment, and lack of opportunity are silent drivers of conflict. Peace programs should include skills training, small business support, and paid community work. A young person with a stable income and a sense of purpose is far less likely to be drawn into violence.
3. Equip us to fight online hate and misinformation
Social media can destroy trust faster than any weapon. Train young people as digital peacebuilders — teaching fact-checking, countering hate speech, and creating positive content in local languages. This is one of the most urgent and cost-effective investments we can make.
4. Leave no one behind
Rural youth, young women, persons with disabilities, and minority groups are often the first to suffer from conflict and the last to be heard. Every consultation and every peace initiative must reach them through local languages, offline methods, and safe spaces. Inclusive peace is the only peace that lasts.
5. Fund youth-led solutions directly
Give small, flexible grants to youth groups so they can start their own peace projects — community dialogues, sports for peace, arts initiatives, or local mediation. When young people are trusted with resources, they deliver creative and sustainable results that top-down programs often miss.
Peace will not come from speeches alone. It will come when young people are treated as partners, not symbols. Give us the tools, the trust, and the space — and we will build the peaceful communities the world so desperately needs.

Based on my analysis of Pakistan’s formal frameworks and on-the-ground realities, I can answer your question directly. But first, I must validate your premise: Pakistan’s weak economy and poor governance have indeed crippled its institutional capacity, turning youth policies from transformative tools into symbolic bandaids.

Here is a frank assessment of the YPS-related mechanisms in Pakistan, their effectiveness, and the hard truths behind their failure. 
 

Tokenism – Youth are consulted but ignored in budgets/laws.
· Corruption & nepotism – Funds stolen, opportunities go to connected elites.
· Economic desperation – 29% youth unemployment + 25% inflation means survival trumps participation.
· State repression – Young activists are booked under anti-terror laws, silencing peacebuilders.
· No accountability – Policies have no enforcement or tracking mechanisms.

Rare successes happen outside the state – community jirgas and digital activism have forced local fixes because they bypass corrupt bureaucracies.

I try every possible way to frame the crippling and corrupt pakistan’s political system. This damage the overall potential and stability of youth of pakistan

My name is Martin Mburu, a peacebuilding researcher and experienced in grassroots peacebuilding, community conflict resolution and YPS. My focus goes to question 3. 
The young people around the world are no longer marginalized, they are already mobilizing and challenging the ruling class. They are doing this using the social media and other online platforms. This shows that young people have the capacity and knowledge to initiate change in their countries. 

Young people are the only way to peace. They know the routes, ways and means to end violence in their countries. For the longest time, young people have been viewed as the problem and security threat, but now they are the resource since they are good in reporting realtime happenings. This means they are key when it comes to early warning and early response. The question now is, how do we build on this to ensure we support them fully? 
1. Trust us with your money and resources. Young people only need the resources to actualize their ideas and knowledge towards meaningful change in their communities. Give them the chance to show their skills and experiences through funding and equal partnerships. 

2. Gives us real power. Let's young people make the decisions. Stop using them as flower girls in the meetings. Have the youth to decide and implement their ideas without micro-managing them. This is the only way they will learn and impact when they know that they are the ones who choose it. 

Hello Hannah & Antara,  

My name is Toluwanimi Ajise From Nigeria, I am a Cybersecurity GRC professional, Global Shaper at Global Shaper Community. I have expertise in youth development, monitoring and evaluation, community engagement, peace building, policy, advocacy and governance.

Currently I serve at the Institute For Integrated Transitions (IFIT) in Plateau State, Northern Nigeria, where I support community led peace building programs in rural communities and engage directly with the communities affected by crisis, insecurity and social tension in the Northern part of the country.

This experience has shown me how complex community challenges are, and how limited short-term interventions can be when there is no strong policy support behind them.It has also made me realize that many of the realities I see on the field are not fully reflected in decision-making processes. This gap is what I want to help address.

It’s a pleasure to be here. 

1. Yes, I know at the national level, Nigeria has a Youth, Peace and Security National Action Plan, which is an important recognition of the role that young people can play in preventing conflict and building peace. I also know that there have also been efforts to take the YPS agenda to the subnational level.

I am currently based in Plateau State and work in the peacebuilding space, I am particularly interested in how these commitments translate into what happens at the state and community levels. Here in Plateau there is the Plateau State Peace Building Agency, established in 2016, which provides an important institutional structure for peacebuilding, conflict prevention and dialogue in the state. I see this as valuable because it gives peacebuilding a more permanent place within the state's governance structure rather than treating it only as a response to crisis.

There have also been efforts to engage young people around peace and security issues in the state. For example, youth groups and the Plateau Youth Council have engaged with peacebuilding institutions like with the organization I serve with by creating opportunities for young people to discuss issues affecting them and explore how they can contribute to peace.

However, I think the bigger question is what happens beyond the consultation or engagement. Because from my perspective, there is still a gap between young people being recognized as stakeholders and young people having sustained influence over decisions. A young person can be invited to a dialogue, contribute an idea and even be part of a programme, but that does not necessarily mean they are involved when priorities are decided, resources are allocated or implementation is reviewed.

I believe this is where YPS National Action Plans need to become more practical. Young people should be involved not only in developing the plans but also in implementing and monitoring them. There should be clear mechanisms for young people to know what happened to their recommendations and how their contributions influenced decisions.

For me, the success of a YPS policy should therefore not be measured only by whether a plan exists or how many young people participated in a consultation. We should also ask: 

1. What decisions did young people influence?

2. What resources reached youth-led initiatives?

3. And what changed in their communities because of their participation?

I believe these would go a long way to helping YPS policy. 

Chamo-me Sulemani Waron. Sou congolês, refugiado desde criança, actualmente a residir no campo de refugiados , maratane, província de Nampula, Moçambique; e a viver a minha causa de activismo em Pemba, Cabo Delgado, uma das regiões de Moçambique mais afectadas por conflito armado nos últimos anos. Sou também Embaixador Global da Juventude-Theirworld.

Sobre as barreiras (Tema 3): Vivi em três países diferentes por causa do deslocamento forçado. Em cada um, comecei do zero, sem reconhecimento do que já tinha construído no país anterior. Isso é uma barreira real: um jovem refugiado não tem "currículo cívico" que atravesse fronteiras. Em Cabo Delgado, onde o conflito ainda deixa marcas visíveis na confiança das comunidades, jovens como eu enfrentam duplo obstáculo — o de serem jovens, e o de serem vistos como "de fora", mesmo estando na linha de frente do trabalho comunitário.

Sobre liderança e paz (Tema 4): Apesar disso, tornei-me Embaixador Global da Juventude da Theirworld, um título que só existe porque decidi agir mesmo sem ter as portas abertas. Isso prova algo importante: jovens deslocados não são apenas vítimas do conflito, são construtoras de confiança nas próprias comunidades que os acolhem. O que falta não é vontade juvenil, falta infraestrutura institucional que reconheça e sustente essa liderança antes que ela dependa apenas de esforço individual.

A minha recomendação é: Os Planos de Acção Nacionais deveriam criar um estatuto formal de reconhecimento para jovens refugiados ou deslocados como autores legítimos da paz e não apenas beneficiários de programas, mas parceiros na sua construção.

In India, young people have opportunities to participate through mechanisms such as the National Youth Policy, NYKS, NSS, youth parliaments and state-level youth engagement programmes. From my experience, these spaces can give young people a voice, but their impact often depends on whether their recommendations actually reach decision-makers. Youth participation is strongest when young people are involved in designing and implementing initiatives, rather than being invited only for consultation.

I have seen this through youth-led organisations, MUNs, youth consultations and community volunteering, where young people can discuss governance, education, social justice and development issues openly. These platforms are valuable because they build confidence and allow young people to organise, but they are still uneven in accessibility, especially for young people from disadvantaged or rural communities.

The biggest barriers are tokenistic participation, limited institutional follow-up, lack of awareness, and unequal access to decision-making spaces. Young people are often heard, but not always given the authority or resources to act on what they propose.

For me, the most important change would be to create formal youth participation mechanisms with a clear requirement for governments and institutions to respond to youth recommendations. Young people do not simply need a seat at the table, they need a meaningful role in shaping what comes out of it.

Thank you for this opportunity 

Halo semuanya! Salam Mulaikum, Om Swastiastu, Namo Budaya, Peace be upon you! 

My name is Saka Sora Walesa, a High-school Student from West Java. As you can see from my background.. I'm a nobody, from a random place on one of the most populated islands in the world answering a question UNDP is asking youths. 

In my opinion, youths today really do need to be given a voice, I totally agree with that, but we must first make sure that before Youth gives their opinion on matters of peace, and security they need to be taught on how to be brave. 

Why is that important? Because as you can see on my comment, as I said before, I'm a nobody from millions of people, I'm a nobody from hundreds of more educated and prestigious youths, but I have the bravery to put forth what I think is needed and what it isn't. That is what the world today needs, not only in the matters of peace and defence, but on a tutorial on how they channel their opinions. 

So if the UNDP asks: what big change I would like to see happen in governments, the UN, and organizations to give us voice is a simple change. 

Give youths the bravery needed to speak up. Give us simple open large-scale workshops/events where we can train to speak up, Give us opportunities to ensure speaking up isn't something frowned upon, but something that is our rights, make sure that speaking up is not something considered taboo. 

This is something I feel everyday, especially living in Indonesia, where we have a problematic government. Only a minority of youths have the bravery to speak up, while the rest, although restless of the current situation, stay silent. 

So a final question should be asked: What's the point of giving youths voice to speak, when they don't have the bravery to take that opportunity?

Hello everyone! 

I’m Ianja from Madagascar, and I would like to respond to Question 3 and Question 4, drawing from what I observe among young people in Madagascar and, more broadly, in Africa.

Question 3 – What are the main barriers preventing young people from meaningfully contributing to peace and security, and how can these barriers be addressed?

From my perspective, one of the main challenges is actually a paradox: many young people are willing to engage and contribute to their communities, but willingness does not always translate into meaningful participation in public action.

The issue is not necessarily a lack of motivation. Very often, young people lack the resources, knowledge, institutional access and practical experience needed to turn their ideas into action.

In Madagascar, I see at least four important gaps behind this situation.

First, there is a gap between political institutions and ordinary citizens, including young people. Many young people do not really understand how public institutions work, how decisions are made, or where and how they can effectively contribute.

Second, there is a trust gap. Politics is often perceived as something belonging to elites, associated with corruption, exclusion or interests that are far removed from everyday realities. This can discourage young people who would otherwise like to engage.

Third, there is a civic capacity gap. Civic education and leadership development are not always structured enough to prepare young people to participate meaningfully in public life. I strongly believe that we cannot reform what we do not understand.

Fourth, there is an organisational capacity gap. Youth organisations and local civic structures often have the willingness to act, but not always the funding, tools, technical support or institutional connections needed to implement their ideas effectively.

This is why I think we need to go beyond simply “giving young people a voice”. We also need to build their capacity to act.

That means investing in leadership and civic education, but also in practical skills such as mediation, dialogue, negotiation, conflict prevention and community problem-solving. But training alone is not enough. Young people also need opportunities to practice what they have learned.

Question 4 – What can be done to strengthen young people’s meaningful participation and leadership in peace and security?

For me, the answer is to combine training, experimentation, resources and real institutional responsibility.

For example, youth committees could work alongside local executives and community institutions, not only as consultation bodies, but as spaces where young people can identify local problems, propose solutions, test small initiatives and learn from implementation.

Small and flexible resources could allow youth-led initiatives to move from ideas to experimentation. At the same time, young people could be given opportunities to work directly with local authorities and community leaders, so that they can understand how decisions are made while also bringing new ideas and innovations into existing institutions.

This could create a different relationship between young people and institutions: not simply young people asking institutions to listen to them, but young people and institutions learning to co-design and co-implement solutions.

I believe this is also something that National Action Plans on Youth, Peace and Security (YPS NAPs) could integrate more strongly.

NAPs should not only ask whether young people participated in consultations. They should also ask:

Were young people trained?
Did they receive resources?
Were they given opportunities to experiment?
Did they influence decisions?
And what changed in their communities?

For me, meaningful youth participation therefore requires more than a seat at the table. Young people need the capacity, resources, institutional space and responsibility to make that seat meaningful.

That is where I believe we can move from youth participation to genuine youth agency — the capacity of young people not only to be heard, but to understand, act, innovate and contribute to lasting peace in their communities.

Hello Hannah, Antara and everyone

​My name is Tasneem Alkhabeer. I am from Sudan, a Youth Empowerment Advocate, deeply involved in volunteer and humanitarian work, and an active member of various youth networks.

​The issues we are discussing reflect a reality I have lived in my home country, especially after the war. However, this is not just about Sudan. It is the story of displaced youth and marginalized young people in conflict zones all around the world who are completely isolated from opportunities.

​Most international programs and opportunities today are tailored for youth who already have impressive CVs, polished LinkedIn profiles, and strong internet access. But what about the millions of passionate young people who do not even know what LinkedIn is? And what about displaced youth in IDP and refugee camps? We must ask ourselves from a purely humanitarian perspective if merely providing a tent is enough. Basic survival is critical, but without skills, training, and institutional backing, we are leaving an entire generation behind.

​Question 3 – Main Barriers:

Based on my experience, the biggest barrier is the disconnect between high-level policy dialogues and real action on the ground. We are constantly invited to consultations, causing consultation fatigue because these discussions rarely lead to tangible outcomes. For marginalized and displaced youth, the barrier is even higher. Bureaucratic complexities, heavy UN jargon, and strict application requirements automatically exclude those who lack formal experience or digital resources.

​Question 4 – One Key Change:

If I could ask for one critical change from governments, the UN, and partners, it would be to democratize youth participation and bridge the gap between policy and real action. We can achieve this by:

​Redefining Humanitarian Response: Integrate youth empowerment, capacity building, and leadership training directly into emergency responses. A tent provides shelter, but education and opportunities build a future.

​Inclusive and Equitable Access: Design entry-level programs specifically for grassroot youth and those without formal experience or professional networks, rather than repeatedly selecting the same privileged profiles.

​Moving to Co-ownership: Shift from symbolic consultations to actual co-ownership by giving young leaders active roles and simplified micro-funding to execute local projects.

​Simplifying Communication: Translate complex UN frameworks and applications into clear, simple language and distribute them through accessible channels so no young person is left out.

​When we simplify policies, level the playing field, and trust young people with real responsibility, participation moves from a symbolic gesture to sustainable impact.

I’m Katrina Leclerc, a researcher, practitioner and policy advisor specializing in Youth, Peace and Security (YPS) and Women, Peace and Security (WPS). Over the past decade, my work has focused particularly on the meaningful participation of young people—especially young women—in peace and security policymaking, and on how global YPS commitments are translated into national policy and practice.

I have worked directly on the development and implementation of national peace and security policy frameworks, including supporting the development of the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s first National Action Plan (NAP) on YPS, as well as WPS NAP processes in several countries. I am the co-founder and Advisor of the Canadian Coalition for Youth, Peace & Security (CCYPS) and currently serve on the Advisory Group for the Second Independent Progress Study on YPS. I have also contributed to UN and civil society research, policy development and advocacy on the implementation and institutionalization of the YPS agenda.

My academic research (see here: https://www.leclerck.com/) similarly examines how young people, particularly young women, navigate and influence peace and security institutions and policymaking processes, with a focus on questions of participation, representation, power and institutionalization.

Below are my responses to the questions. I am happy to expand or answer additional questions at anytime. Feel free to contact me via email: [email protected]

Question 1:

In Canada, there is not currently a standalone NAP on YPS. However, YPS has increasingly been incorporated into broader peace and security policy frameworks, most notably Canada’s third National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security (see my analysis of this here: https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/YF3EICCKFSMGGFUUNEEY/full?target=10…).

This represents an important evolution: young people, and particularly young women, are increasingly recognized not simply as beneficiaries of peace and security programming but as actors whose perspectives and leadership should inform policy and implementation. Canada has also supported YPS internationally through its foreign policy, peacebuilding and development programming, including support for youth-led organizations and global YPS initiatives.

There are also mechanisms outside explicitly YPS-labelled policies that create opportunities for young people to participate in governance and policy processes. These include government youth councils and advisory bodies, civil society consultations, and youth engagement processes connected to international policy development. Civil society networks, including the Canadian Coalition for Youth, Peace & Security (see: https://www.canadayps.org/notable-advancements), have played an important role in creating spaces for young people to engage with government officials, contribute to consultations, and advocate for greater implementation of the YPS agenda.

Based on my experience, however, the existence of a policy commitment or participatory mechanism does not necessarily translate into meaningful influence. Canada has created more opportunities for young people to participate in policy discussions, but these opportunities remain uneven and are often dependent on individual departments, officials, organizations or initiatives rather than being systematically embedded across peace and security policymaking. Young people may be invited to consultations or advisory spaces without having clear information about how their contributions will influence decisions, and there are often limited mechanisms for reporting back on which recommendations were accepted, rejected or acted upon.

One of the most important factors determining effectiveness is therefore the extent to which youth participation is institutionalized. Meaningful participation requires more than inviting young people into existing spaces: it requires sustained relationships, adequate resources, accessible and inclusive participation mechanisms, and opportunities to engage throughout the policy cycle—from identifying priorities and designing policies to implementation, monitoring and evaluation (see my doctoral dissertation on this: https://ruor.uottawa.ca/items/8ed2b17c-2286-474f-b76c-0a04026d2e6f). It also requires attention to which young people are able to participate. Barriers related to geography, language, disability, socioeconomic status, immigration status and other intersecting identities can mean that the young people most easily reached by institutions are not necessarily representative of the diversity of youth experiences in Canada.

Civil society and youth-led networks have helped address some of these gaps by building relationships between young people and policymakers, developing policy literacy, creating collective advocacy platforms, and maintaining institutional memory as government priorities and personnel change. At the same time, relying heavily on civil society to create and sustain these opportunities can itself be a limitation when organizations lack predictable funding or when participation depends on unpaid or under-resourced youth labour.

Canada therefore demonstrates both the potential and the limitations of integrating YPS into broader policy frameworks. Recognition of YPS within national policy is an important foundation, but its impact ultimately depends on whether commitments are accompanied by resources, accountability mechanisms and durable structures through which young people can exercise influence. The key question is not simply whether young people are present in policy processes, but whether their participation changes priorities, decisions, resource allocation or implementation.

Question 2:

Across the contexts in which I have worked, some of the most important mechanisms for advancing the YPS agenda have been youth-led organizations, national and regional YPS coalitions, and networks that connect local youth actors with national and international decision-making processes. These mechanisms are particularly important because meaningful youth participation does not begin with the creation of a NAP. In many contexts, youth networks and coalitions precede a NAP and are among the actors advocating for its development; they can subsequently play important roles in its design, implementation, monitoring and accountability.

This is increasingly supported by evidence from the 2025 Peacebuilding Fund Thematic Review on YPS (see: https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/YPS_TR). The Review identifies national youth councils, youth networks, YPS coalitions and other representative bodies as important mechanisms for expanding youth participation at local, national and regional levels. It found that national networks and coalitions can help connect local voices, strengthen coordination among youth actors, increase their collective visibility and voice, and provide avenues for young people to contribute to national decision-making. Importantly, the Review examined support for YPS coalitions alongside support for YPS NAPs and other national youth mechanisms, demonstrating that these are interconnected components of YPS institutionalization rather than interchangeable mechanisms.

There are important examples across West and Central Africa, where national YPS coalitions and youth networks have played roles in advocating for and contributing to national YPS policies and NAP processes. The PBF review found that national representative bodies and networks can provide an important bridge between locally rooted youth peacebuilding and national policy processes. However, it also cautions against attempting to create national or regional structures without adequate local foundations: without representative constituencies and meaningful local participation, such mechanisms risk becoming superficial or tokenistic.

In Canada, one example is the Canadian Coalition for Youth, Peace & Security (CCYPS), a youth-led and youth-serving platform that connects young people, civil society, researchers and policymakers working on YPS. The Coalition has created opportunities for young people to contribute to policy consultations and research, engage directly with government officials, develop collective advocacy priorities, and connect Canadian discussions with regional and global YPS processes. This type of mechanism is particularly important in a country without a standalone YPS NAP because it can help sustain attention to the agenda across changing political and institutional priorities.

Other mechanisms include National Youth Councils, youth parliaments, government youth advisory bodies, community peace structures, youth-led civil society organizations and informal or issue-specific networks. Importantly, organizations do not need to identify themselves explicitly as "YPS organizations" to advance the agenda. Young people working on gender equality, reconciliation, climate and environmental peacebuilding, violence prevention, human rights, migration or democratic participation may be engaging directly with issues covered by the YPS agenda even if they do not use YPS terminology.

From my experience, the most effective mechanisms share several characteristics. First, they combine youth ownership with access to decision-making institutions. Youth-led spaces allow young people to determine their own priorities rather than responding exclusively to agendas established by governments or international organizations. However, autonomous youth spaces also need pathways through which their priorities and recommendations can reach institutions with actual decision-making authority.

Second, effective mechanisms connect local, national, regional and global levels. National coalitions can be particularly valuable when they aggregate locally grounded priorities rather than becoming small, capital-based groups disconnected from the diversity of young people's experiences. This is one of the important lessons emerging from the PBF Thematic Review: national mechanisms are more likely to be meaningful and sustainable when they are built upon strong local participation and relationships.

Third, participation needs to be sustained and resourced. Many youth organizations and coalitions operate with very limited institutional funding while governments and international organizations rely on them to mobilize participants, provide expertise and represent youth perspectives. Short project cycles can create active networks without providing the resources necessary to sustain them. The PBF evidence similarly points to financing and sustainability as important considerations when supporting national youth platforms, structures and networks.

A related challenge is knowledge infrastructure: significant knowledge about how YPS is being localized and institutionalized exists within youth-led organizations and practitioner networks but is not necessarily captured in formal policy documents or academic literature. One initiative I am currently co-leading to address this gap is the forthcoming YPS Library (see: https://www.canadayps.org/yps-library), a practitioner–academic collaboration. Launching in September 2026, the Library is being developed as a global repository documenting national and regional YPS coalitions and youth-led efforts to advance YPS at the country level. It builds on a global mapping of YPS coalitions and aims to increase the visibility of youth-led peacebuilding, strengthen connections across the global YPS community, and facilitate knowledge-sharing on YPS localization and implementation.

Finally, I would distinguish between representation and influence. The existence of a youth council, coalition, advisory body or consultation process should not itself be treated as evidence of meaningful participation. The relevant questions are whether young people can shape the agenda; whether they have sustained access to decision-makers; whether diverse and marginalized youth constituencies are represented; whether their recommendations affect policies, budgets or implementation; and whether mechanisms exist to hold institutions accountable.

This distinction is particularly important for YPS NAPs. Youth coalitions should not simply be mobilized to participate in consultations or validate a plan once its major priorities have already been determined. Ideally, youth-led organizations and coalitions should help identify priorities, participate in drafting and decision-making, contribute to implementation and monitoring, and have the resources and political access necessary to hold governments accountable for the commitments contained in the NAP. In this sense, strong youth networks and coalitions are not peripheral to YPS institutionalization; they are part of the participation infrastructure that makes institutionalization possible, while initiatives such as the YPS Library can help build the knowledge infrastructure needed to connect, document and learn from these experiences.

Question 3:

From my research and practice, one of the most persistent barriers to meaningful youth participation is that institutions often conceptualize participation primarily in terms of access and presence rather than influence and power. Considerable progress has been made since the adoption of Resolution 2250 in creating spaces for young people within peace and security processes. However, being invited into a room, consultation, advisory group or policy process does not necessarily mean that young people can influence its priorities, decisions or outcomes.

This is a central finding of my doctoral research, which examines the participation of young women at the intersection of the YPS and WPS agendas (see link above). My research looks particularly at what happens once young people enter institutional policy spaces: who is invited, under what conditions they participate, whose knowledge is considered legitimate, and whether participation ultimately translates into influence. One of the challenges I identify is that institutions can simultaneously expand opportunities for participation while reproducing forms of tokenism and exclusion within those opportunities.

This is particularly visible in the tendency to treat “youth” as a homogeneous constituency. Young people experience peace and security institutions differently according to gender, race, socioeconomic position, disability, sexuality, geography, language and other intersecting factors. Young women, for example, may encounter age-based hierarchies within WPS spaces while simultaneously confronting gendered hierarchies within YPS spaces. Other young people may be effectively excluded because participation requires travel, unpaid labour, fluency in institutional or diplomatic language, access to technology, or familiarity with international policy processes. As a result, institutions can repeatedly engage a relatively small group of young people who already have the resources and networks necessary to access these spaces.

Another significant barrier is adultism and institutionalized age hierarchies. Young people are frequently positioned as beneficiaries, emerging leaders or representatives of a future generation rather than as political actors with expertise and legitimate claims in the present. Their knowledge may be valued as testimony or “lived experience” while adults and institutional actors retain authority over analysis, priority-setting and decision-making. This creates a paradox in which institutions increasingly seek youth participation while retaining control over the terms, boundaries and consequences of that participation.

These dynamics informed the Beyond Tokenism toolkit (see: https://www.canadayps.org/beyond-tokenism), which focuses on moving institutions beyond simply counting youth participation toward examining the quality and influence of that participation. A central lesson from this work is that tokenism should not be understood only as an individual bad practice—for example, inviting one young person to speak on a panel. It can be embedded in the design of institutions and participation processes themselves. Who establishes the agenda? At what stage are young people invited? What information and resources do they receive? Are they compensated? Can they disagree with institutional actors without jeopardizing future opportunities? Is there a mechanism for their recommendations to influence decisions? Do institutions report back on what they did with young people's contributions? These questions provide a much more meaningful assessment of participation than simply asking how many young people were consulted.

There are also important structural barriers to implementation of the YPS agenda itself. YPS remains inconsistently institutionalized across governments and international organizations, often relying on a small number of committed individuals rather than being embedded across institutions. Dedicated financing remains insufficient, particularly direct and flexible funding for youth-led organizations. Youth organizations and YPS coalitions are frequently expected to provide expertise, mobilize constituencies and participate in consultations without the predictable resources available to larger institutional actors. Changes in personnel or political priorities can therefore quickly weaken relationships and mechanisms that have taken years to develop.

National Action Plans can help address some of these problems, but a NAP does not automatically resolve them. There is a risk of equating the adoption of a YPS NAP with institutionalization when the more difficult questions concern implementation, financing, accountability and redistribution of decision-making power. A well-designed NAP should establish durable mechanisms for youth participation throughout its governance structure, identify responsible institutions, allocate resources, support youth-led implementation, and create monitoring and accountability mechanisms through which young people themselves can assess progress.

Overcoming these barriers therefore requires shifting the question from “How do we include young people?” to “What needs to change within institutions for young people to exercise meaningful influence?” This places responsibility for meaningful participation on institutions rather than assuming that young people need additional capacity before they are ready to participate.

In practice, this means involving young people from the earliest stages of agenda-setting rather than consulting them on predetermined priorities; providing sustained and flexible financing to youth-led organizations and YPS coalitions; compensating young people for their expertise and labour; removing financial, linguistic, geographic and accessibility barriers; creating mechanisms that enable diverse youth constituencies to participate rather than relying repeatedly on the same representatives; and establishing clear feedback and accountability processes that demonstrate how youth contributions have affected decisions.

It also requires recognizing young people as knowledge producers and policy actors, not simply consultation participants. Young people should have opportunities to co-design policies, produce and interpret evidence, participate in implementation, monitor commitments and evaluate outcomes. Governments and international organizations also need to invest in the capacity of their own institutions to work meaningfully with young people. Too often, “capacity-building” in YPS is directed toward young people, when institutional actors themselves may have limited understanding of YPS, meaningful youth participation, adultism or tokenism.

Ultimately, the challenge facing YPS is no longer simply whether young people are present in peace and security processes. Increasingly, they are. The more important question is what happens to power once they enter those spaces. Meaningful implementation of the YPS agenda requires moving beyond creating opportunities for participation toward changing the institutional conditions that determine whose knowledge matters, who sets priorities, who controls resources and who ultimately has the authority to make decisions.

Question 4:

I find it difficult to identify a single change, because meaningful youth participation is not something that can be achieved through one mechanism, policy or institutional reform. If anything, I would encourage governments, the United Nations and other partners to think less about finding the next mechanism for youth participation and more about how the YPS agenda itself is understood, sustained and produced.

One area that I believe deserves considerably more attention is knowledge creation and production. Much of what we know about YPS continues to be produced by institutions, researchers and organizations that study young people or consult them, rather than by young people themselves. Young people are frequently invited to contribute their experiences or perspectives, but they are less consistently recognized and resourced as researchers, authors, analysts and producers of knowledge. This matters because knowledge production shapes policy: it determines which issues become visible, how problems are framed, which forms of evidence are considered credible and, ultimately, which responses are prioritized.

This was an important motivation behind Youth Leading Change: Emerging Sites of Knowledge in Peace and Conflict, a book which I co-edited with Helen Berents and Erika Yague (see: https://www.leclerck.com/youth-leading-change). The volume deliberately sought to challenge conventional hierarchies of expertise by bringing together youth peacebuilders, practitioners and researchers and creating space for different forms of knowledge about YPS. One of the lessons I take from that work is that meaningful participation cannot be separated from questions about who gets to produce, interpret and legitimize knowledge about peace and security.

There is also an important question of institutional memory. Young people and youth-led organizations have generated an enormous amount of knowledge since the adoption of the YPS agenda, yet much of it remains dispersed across organizations, project reports, networks and individual practitioners. When projects end, funding cycles change or individuals leave organizations, that knowledge can easily disappear. Strengthening YPS therefore also means investing in ways to document, preserve, connect and build upon what young people and youth-led organizations have already learned, rather than continually beginning again with new consultations, mappings and short-term initiatives.

More broadly, I would like to see the next decade of YPS move beyond repeatedly demonstrating that youth participation matters. We have a substantial evidence base, almost a decade of implementation experience, multiple UNSC resolutions, NAPs, coalitions and youth-led peacebuilding initiatives. The question should increasingly be what institutions are learning from that experience and whether those lessons are changing how peace and security policy is developed, financed, implemented and evaluated.

For me, then, looking ahead is less about identifying one new mechanism and more about ensuring that young people are recognized not only as participants in the YPS agenda, but as people who produce its knowledge, shape its evolution and hold institutions accountable for what it becomes.

To make Youth, Peace and Security commitments effective, we must move beyond periodic consultations and establish formal, permanent youth advisory boards within local governance structures. When climate change accelerates resource competition and fuels local tensions, youth need a direct seat at the decision-making table. Institutionalizing youth representation ensures that local security strategies and climate adaptation policies are designed alongside the young people who are actively building resilience on the ground.

Babar Hashmi as a youth leader working on the ground in Southern Punjab, Pakistan, I want to highlight a major reality that often gets ignored in big policy discussions: genuine Youth-Led Organizations (YLOs) are systematically sidelined.

Whenever new funding or youth programs come up, large and well-established organizations suddenly label themselves as "youth-focused" just to capture the grants. Meanwhile, real grassroots youth groups—who actually know the local community and do the hard work—are left behind or used merely for token presence in photos and attendance sheets. On top of that, government youth policies only look good on paper. On the ground, there is no real budget, zero direct support, and endless bureaucratic hassle just to get permissions to work for peace and community development. Small youth-led groups are expected to match the heavy compliance and reporting standards of multi-million dollar organizations, and instead of building our capacity, donors simply disqualify us for not having corporate-style audit histories. Furthermore, when young people are struggling with extreme inflation and unemployment, you cannot expect them to stay engaged in peacebuilding without linking these initiatives to livelihoods.

If the YPS Agenda is to make a real impact, donors and UN agencies must reserve a direct funding quota specifically for authentic youth-led groups run by people under 35, simplify application processes for grassroots organizations, and give youth a real seat at the table where budgets are decided rather than just inviting us to one-off workshops. If we keep funding big bureaucracies to speak for youth instead of directly empowering youth-led organizations, these peace policies will never turn into real change on the ground.

When we talk about peace, I do not think we should only mean waking up one morning and hearing that all the kidnappers have been arrested or all the terrorists have been captured. To me, peace is much more than the absence of violence. Peace is being able to raise your voice without fear. Peace is giving a young person a genuine seat at the table when decisions are being made about the life and future they will live.

We often say that young people are the leaders of tomorrow. But I think we already know this; the problem is that we are not doing enough with what we know. Young people are not only leaders of tomorrow. They are capable of creating positive change today.

However, meaningful youth participation is not inviting one or two young people into a room of fifty adults to discuss the lives of hundreds of people and then calling it youth participation. It is not selecting a few young people to represent millions and presenting their presence as evidence that young people have been heard. Young people should be allowed to participate meaningfully in the policies and decisions that shape their lives.

We should also stop treating youth participation as something extraordinary. When a seventeen-year-old speaks at a conference or a twenty-year-old contributes to an important discussion, it should not become remarkable simply because of their age. It should be normal. Young people should not have to become exceptional before they are allowed to be heard.

Sometimes we give young people opportunities such as scholarships, conferences, or training and believe we have done enough. But opportunities without meaningful pathways to use them can become like giving someone a key without giving them a door to open. We keep telling young people that their time is coming, until eventually they lose the key or forget how to use it.

And this is why I believe we cannot talk about peace without talking about the lives of young people, especially children. If a child grows up knowing only hardship, exclusion, and the struggle to survive, what kind of future are we expecting that child to build?

Peace must be sustainable. We cannot build a temporary peace while leaving behind a generation that feels abandoned. The peace we build today should support the people who will come after us.

To me, that is what a better world means: each generation building something that makes life better for the next, and then trusting that next generation to continue the work.

If young people are truly the leaders of tomorrow, then we must allow them to begin leading today. We cannot prepare them for tomorrow by keeping them outside the decisions of today. We must give them the voice, trust, responsibility, and opportunities to practice leadership now.

For me, that is peace: not simply building a world without conflict, but building a world where the people who will inherit it are given the opportunity to help shape it.

For me, meaningful youth participation starts with actually listening to young people and giving them a real role in decision-making—not just inviting them to events or consultations.

At the community level, we need stronger spaces where young people can work with local leaders, civil society and policymakers to identify problems and develop solutions together. We also need better support for youth-led initiatives, including funding, mentorship, skills development and access to decision-making platforms.

What is still missing is a clear connection between youth voices and actual policy outcomes. Young people should be able to see how their ideas are being considered and what changes happen as a result.

NAPs can make a real difference if they include measurable commitments, regular youth participation and proper accountability. Most importantly, young people should be treated as partners in building peace and security, not only as beneficiaries.

Youth participation becomes meaningful when young people have a voice, a seat at the table, and the resources to turn their ideas into action.

This is Majid Rehman Graduated in BS political science with high CGPA.I am greatly involved in youth affairs as Youth activist working with Red Crescent,Alhidmat foundation and serving as Vice president in University society.Moreover, I member of Lp Youth Assembly and working with different research Think tank including Istitute of Policy Studies Islamabad and Roshni as a mentor. As my research assignment was based on topic : Hurdles in way of Youth participation in politics, empowers me to answer question no.3 so;
 

Answer to the question 3 is: Main barriers in way of youth Participation:1. Economic support 2.Government ignorance,3. Tokenism,4. Youth organisation just for consultations no Practical decision making, 5.lack of awareness amoung youth,6.Polarisation,7.Digital mis information and disinformation,8.Social barriers.

My name is Majid Rehman, a Political Science graduate from the University of Science and Technology Bannu (USTB) with a CGPA of 3.84. I am a member of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Youth Assembly and have been actively involved in youth leadership, volunteering, and community engagement through organizations such as Pakistan Red Crescent and Alkhidmat Foundation. I have also conducted research on the Hurdles in Youth Politics: Case Study of Bannu. These experiences have strengthened my interest in youth participation, peacebuilding, governance, and social change.
 

1. Laws, policies and mechanisms supporting YPS

From my experience as a Political Science graduate and member of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Youth Assembly, I have seen that young people in Pakistan do have platforms through which they can engage with governance, leadership and public issues. The KP Youth Assembly has particularly given me exposure to parliamentary-style discussion, leadership and civic participation. I have also participated in different youth, peace and development initiatives.

However, my experience has also shown me that having a platform does not automatically mean having influence. Young people are often given opportunities to speak, but there can be a gap between consultation and actual decision-making. My academic research on the Hurdles in Youth Politics: Case Study of Bannu also made me aware of challenges such as limited access, lack of opportunities, political barriers and the difficulty many young people face in turning participation into meaningful influence.

2. Groups, organizations and platforms

I have personally engaged with several platforms that create opportunities for young people to contribute to community and social issues. My involvement with the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Youth Assembly, Pakistan Red Crescent, Alkhidmat Foundation, university society activities and different youth and leadership programs has allowed me to participate in community engagement, awareness activities, blood donation drives, plantation campaigns and social initiatives.

I believe the most effective platforms are those where young people are given responsibility rather than simply being invited as participants. For example, through my university leadership role as Finance Secretary and my volunteer and ambassadorial activities, I have experienced situations where young people were directly involved in organizing campaigns, mobilizing communities and implementing activities. These experiences have shown me that youth participation becomes meaningful when young people have ownership, responsibility and the opportunity to see the results of their contribution.

3. Main barriers

From my experience and academic research, one of the biggest barriers is the gap between youth participation and actual decision-making. Young people may be invited to consultations, conferences or forums, but their recommendations do not always reach policy or implementation.

I have also observed challenges related to limited opportunities in rural areas, lack of resources, economic constraints, political polarization, insufficient awareness and unequal access to networks and decision-makers. My research on youth political participation in Bannu particularly helped me understand how these barriers can discourage young people from becoming involved in politics and public decision-making.

I believe the solution requires more decentralized opportunities, stronger links between youth platforms and government institutions, financial and technical support for youth-led initiatives, and clear mechanisms through which authorities respond to youth recommendations.

4. One change I would like to see

The one change I would most like governments, the UN and other partners to make is to move from simply consulting young people to giving them a formal role in decision-making.

Young people should have structured and continuous opportunities to participate in local and national discussions on peace, security and development, with clear mechanisms showing how their recommendations are considered and implemented. In my view, meaningful youth participation means that young people are not only invited to speak but are also trusted with responsibility, resources and a genuine role in shaping decisions that affect their future.

Hello Everyone, Myself Pratik I am a M.Tech student from India.

1. National and Local Frameworks

Yes, there are some government programs and youth groups for young people. They give opportunities to join peace, development and social activities. But sometimes young people are not included much in decision making. More awareness and support can make it better.

2. Youth Civic and Political Engagement

Youth councils, NGOs, student groups and social organizations help young people to participate. Social media and community meetings are also useful. They are effective when young people can directly share their ideas with decision makers.

3. Barriers to Youth Participation

Main problems are lack of awareness, money, guidance and proper opportunities. Sometimes young people are not taken seriously by authorities. We need more youth programs, information and equal chances for participation.

4. Youth Leadership in Peace and Security

I want governments and other organizations to give young people more opportunities to speak and take part in decisions. Youth should be given proper platforms, training and support to become leaders in peace and security.

Thank you so much for listening my view

Halo Hannah dan Antara,

Perkenalkan, saya Aprillian, siswa kelas 12 di SMA Negeri 1 Pare, Kabupaten Kediri, Jawa Timur, Indonesia. Saya tertarik pada isu hubungan internasional, pembangunan berkelanjutan, kepemudaan, serta peran generasi muda dalam membangun masyarakat yang damai dan inklusif. Saya mengikuti diskusi ini terutama dari perspektif seorang pelajar yang hidup di daerah semi-perkotaan dan melihat secara langsung bagaimana ruang partisipasi pemuda tersedia, tetapi belum selalu terhubung secara kuat dengan proses pengambilan keputusan.

Saya akan menanggapi keempat pertanyaan yang diajukan.

1. Kebijakan dan mekanisme yang mendukung agenda Youth, Peace and Security

Indonesia sebenarnya telah memiliki sejumlah landasan hukum dan kebijakan yang memberikan ruang bagi pemuda untuk berpartisipasi dalam pembangunan. Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2009 tentang Kepemudaan merupakan salah satu dasar utamanya. Pemerintah juga terus mengembangkan kerangka pelayanan dan pemberdayaan kepemudaan, termasuk melalui Peraturan Menteri Pemuda dan Olahraga Nomor 6 Tahun 2026 tentang Pelayanan Kepemudaan.

Selain kebijakan kepemudaan secara umum, terdapat pula mekanisme perencanaan pembangunan seperti Musyawarah Perencanaan Pembangunan atau Musrenbang. Di Kabupaten Kediri, proses perencanaan pembangunan berlangsung secara berjenjang dari tingkat desa atau kelurahan, kecamatan, hingga kabupaten. Dokumen pemerintah daerah juga secara eksplisit mengakui pentingnya partisipasi masyarakat dalam proses tersebut.

Namun, menurut saya, terdapat perbedaan antara "memiliki ruang untuk berpartisipasi" dan "memiliki pengaruh terhadap keputusan". Seorang pemuda dapat diundang dalam forum, menyampaikan pendapat, dan mengikuti kegiatan, tetapi belum tentu mengetahui apakah pendapat tersebut benar-benar memengaruhi prioritas anggaran, program pemerintah, atau keputusan akhir.

Dalam konteks YPS, persoalan ini menjadi semakin penting. Indonesia memang telah mengintegrasikan sebagian prinsip YPS ke dalam kebijakan lain, terutama agenda pencegahan ekstremisme berbasis kekerasan. Program BNPT dan UNDP yang diluncurkan pada 2026, misalnya, secara eksplisit mengintegrasikan agenda YPS dan pemberdayaan pemuda dengan upaya membangun ketahanan masyarakat serta mencegah ekstremisme kekerasan di ruang digital.

Namun, Indonesia masih membutuhkan kerangka YPS yang lebih terpadu. Diskusi nasional mengenai YPS pada awal 2026 juga menyoroti bahwa kebijakan yang berkaitan dengan pemuda, perdamaian, dan keamanan masih berjalan secara sektoral dan belum terintegrasi dalam satu kerangka YPS nasional yang komprehensif.

Bagi saya, keberhasilan kebijakan tersebut seharusnya tidak hanya diukur dari jumlah pemuda yang hadir dalam konsultasi. Kita juga perlu bertanya: apakah rekomendasi mereka ditindaklanjuti, apakah mereka memperoleh sumber daya untuk melaksanakan gagasannya, dan apakah terdapat perubahan nyata di masyarakat?

Sumber-sumber:

• https://jdih.kemenpora.go.id/peraturan/detail/71/undang-undang-republik-indonesia-nomor-40-tahun-2009-tentang-kepemudaan
• https://jdih.kemenpora.go.id/peraturan/detail/817/peraturan-menteri-pemuda-dan-olahraga-republik-indonesia-nomor-6-tahun-2026-tentang-pelayanan-kepemudaan
• https://www.undp.org/id/indonesia/press-releases/bnpt-dan-undp-luncurkan-program-penguatan-ketahanan-pemuda-terhadap-ekstremisme-kekerasan-di-ruang-digital

2. Ruang dan organisasi yang memungkinkan pemuda berpartisipasi

Di tingkat nasional, terdapat organisasi kepemudaan, komunitas masyarakat sipil, forum anak, organisasi sekolah, serta berbagai forum konsultasi pemuda. Di tingkat lokal, mekanisme seperti Musrenbang (Musyawarah Perencanaan Pembangunan) dan organisasi masyarakat, termasuk Karang Taruna, dapat menjadi pintu masuk bagi keterlibatan generasi muda.

Di Kabupaten Kediri sendiri, dokumen perencanaan daerah mencatat keberadaan organisasi kepemudaan dan Karang Taruna sebagai bagian dari indikator pembangunan kepemudaan. Pemerintah Kabupaten Kediri juga memiliki arah kebijakan untuk meningkatkan kapasitas dan partisipasi masyarakat, termasuk pemuda, dalam perencanaan, pelaksanaan, dan pemantauan pembangunan desa.

Sebagai siswa SMA, saya melihat sekolah juga dapat menjadi ruang penting bagi praktik YPS dalam skala kecil. Organisasi siswa, forum pelajar, kegiatan sosial, kegiatan lintas komunitas, dan pendidikan kewargaan dapat menjadi tempat belajar mengenai dialog, penyelesaian perbedaan, kepemimpinan, dan pengambilan keputusan secara demokratis.

Menurut saya, mekanisme yang paling efektif bukanlah mekanisme yang sekadar meminta pendapat pemuda, melainkan mekanisme yang memberikan umpan balik. Pemuda perlu mengetahui apa yang terjadi setelah mereka memberikan rekomendasi. Bahkan apabila rekomendasinya tidak dapat diterima, pemerintah atau lembaga terkait sebaiknya menjelaskan alasannya.

Prinsip sederhana yang saya anggap penting adalah: jika pemerintah meminta pendapat pemuda, pemerintah juga harus memberi tahu pemuda apa yang dilakukan terhadap pendapat tersebut.

Sumber-sumber:

• https://e-sakip.kedirikab.go.id/uploads/planning/d08f4ce773a328aaa72a69f913892cba.pdf
• https://e-sakip.kedirikab.go.id/uploads/planning/4d484f961c9eb3b989c906e628306bb3.pdf
• https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Download/210282/rencana-pembangunan-jangka-menengah-daerah-kabupaten-kediri-tahun-2021-2026.pdf

3. Hambatan utama terhadap partisipasi pemuda

Menurut pengalaman dan pengamatan saya sebagai pelajar di Kabupaten Kediri, salah satu hambatan terbesar bukan semata-mata ketiadaan forum, tetapi kesenjangan antara forum partisipasi dengan proses pengambilan keputusan yang sesungguhnya.

Pertama, masih terdapat kesenjangan informasi. Dokumen perencanaan Kabupaten Kediri sendiri mengidentifikasi bahwa akses masyarakat terhadap data dan informasi pembangunan masih menjadi persoalan dan kondisi tersebut dapat berdampak pada rendahnya partisipasi masyarakat.

Kedua, partisipasi pemuda masih dapat bersifat konsultatif. Pemuda mungkin diberi kesempatan berbicara, tetapi belum tentu memiliki kewenangan, anggaran, atau mekanisme tindak lanjut yang jelas.

Ketiga, terdapat kesenjangan geografis dan sosial. Kabupaten Kediri bukan hanya terdiri atas pusat-pusat permukiman, tetapi juga memiliki wilayah perdesaan yang luas. Kesempatan mengikuti forum yang berada di tingkat kabupaten atau bahkan provinsi tidak selalu mudah diakses oleh pemuda yang tinggal jauh dari pusat pemerintahan. Partisipasi digital dapat membantu, tetapi tidak semua pemuda memiliki tingkat literasi digital, akses informasi, atau kepercayaan diri yang sama.

Keempat, isu YPS sendiri belum cukup dikenal di kalangan pelajar. Banyak anak muda sebenarnya telah melakukan kegiatan yang berhubungan dengan perdamaian, toleransi, solidaritas sosial, lingkungan, dan pencegahan konflik, tetapi mereka mungkin tidak mengenal kegiatan tersebut sebagai bagian dari agenda Youth, Peace and Security.

Kelima, terdapat persoalan keberlanjutan. Forum pemuda dapat menghasilkan gagasan yang baik, tetapi gagasan tersebut akan kehilangan dampak apabila tidak memiliki pendanaan, pendampingan, indikator keberhasilan, dan mekanisme evaluasi.

Karena itu, saya tidak berpikir bahwa solusi YPS hanya dengan "memberi lebih banyak ruang kepada pemuda". Kita perlu memastikan bahwa ruang tersebut memiliki hubungan institusional dengan proses pengambilan keputusan.

4. Perubahan yang paling saya inginkan

Jika saya hanya boleh memilih satu perubahan, saya ingin pemerintah dan mitra pembangunan membangun mekanisme partisipasi pemuda yang bersifat permanen, terstruktur, dan memiliki kewajiban memberikan tanggapan terhadap rekomendasi pemuda.

Menurut saya, bentuknya dapat berupa Youth Peace and Security Council atau mekanisme sejenis yang terhubung dengan pemerintah daerah. Anggotanya harus berasal dari latar belakang yang beragam, termasuk pelajar, mahasiswa, pemuda desa, organisasi kepemudaan, kelompok lintas agama dan budaya, serta kelompok pemuda yang selama ini kurang terwakili.

Forum tersebut tidak perlu mengambil alih kewenangan pemerintah. Fungsinya adalah memberikan perspektif pemuda secara sistematis, mengidentifikasi potensi ketegangan sosial sejak dini, mengusulkan solusi, serta memantau pelaksanaan kebijakan yang berkaitan dengan pemuda, perdamaian, dan keamanan.

Yang paling penting, pemerintah perlu memberikan "respons wajib" terhadap rekomendasi tersebut. Misalnya, setiap rekomendasi harus dikategorikan menjadi diterima, diterima sebagian, ditunda, atau tidak dapat dilaksanakan, disertai alasan yang dapat diketahui publik.

Dengan mekanisme seperti ini, partisipasi pemuda dapat bergerak dari consultation menuju meaningful participation.

Saya juga percaya bahwa YPS tidak boleh dipahami hanya sebagai agenda yang berkaitan dengan konflik bersenjata. Bagi seorang pelajar di Kabupaten Kediri, perdamaian juga berarti kemampuan masyarakat untuk menyelesaikan perbedaan tanpa kekerasan, melawan misinformasi dan ujaran kebencian, menjaga toleransi, membangun kepercayaan antarkelompok, serta memastikan bahwa anak muda memiliki kesempatan untuk berkontribusi dalam pembangunan.

Indonesia memiliki modal sosial yang besar. Tantangannya sekarang adalah mengubah modal tersebut menjadi mekanisme kelembagaan yang membuat suara pemuda benar-benar memiliki konsekuensi dalam pengambilan keputusan.

Bagi saya, pemuda tidak membutuhkan kursi simbolis di meja pengambilan keputusan. Kami membutuhkan kursi yang memungkinkan kami ikut memengaruhi apa yang terjadi setelah rapat selesai.

Terima kasih banyak.

Sumber-sumber:

• https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/promoting-youth-peace-and-security
• https://www.undp.org/latin-america/publications/safe-territories-guide-formulation-local-youth-peace-and-security-plans
• https://www.undp.org/indonesia/adventures-tolerance-indonesian-youth-roadshow-peace-diversity
• https://asean-aipr.org/activities/discussion-series/asean-ipr-discussion-series-2023-session-2-lessons-learned-in-developing-national-action-plan-nap-on-youth-peace-and-security-yps
• https://amanindonesia.org/launching-policy-brief-intersections-of-women-peace-and-security-wps-youth-peace-and-security-yps-and-humanitarian-action-across-southeast-asian-nations/

Hi everyone! I’m Nazish Abro from Pakistan — a climate activist, journalist, and storyteller. 

I work on climate change and its impact on rural women and vulnerable communities, with a particular focus on biodiversity and coastal migration. I regularly organize and participate in seminars, webinars, and community initiatives to raise awareness and promote climate action.

I’ve had the opportunity to work with organizations such as UNICEF and Penny Appeal, and I’m also a Climate Tank Winner from Pakistan for my Floating Wetlands Project, which focuses on innovative solutions for water and environmental challenges.

I’d love to connect, exchange knowledge, and learn from others working for a more sustainable future.

Follow me on Instagram: @nazish_abro1
Let’s connect and make an impact together! 

Hello everyone,

My name is Maher Al-Medaani, a young media professional from Jordan. Through my work with youth initiatives and media, I have seen how important it is for young people to have a real voice in decisions that affect their communities.

Question 3: What are the main barriers preventing young people from meaningful participation, and what needs to change?

From my experience, one of the main barriers is having the wrong people in the right places. Sometimes young people are selected to represent youth without having the communication skills, experience, or connection with other young people needed to truly represent their voices.

Another challenge is the limited number of spaces where young people can genuinely influence decision-making. There are youth councils, youth parliaments, meetings, conferences and other opportunities that allow young people to meet decision-makers. However, I do not always see sustainability in these opportunities. Sometimes they are available repeatedly to the same group of young people, while others do not have the same access.

Most importantly, participation should not stop at listening to young people. Their recommendations should have a clear pathway to influence decisions and be followed up through concrete actions. Youth participation should be continuous, inclusive, and connected to real decision-making—not only a one-time event or consultation.

Question 2: What spaces, platforms, or institutions currently enable young people to meaningfully influence decision-making?

In Jordan, there are several spaces that create opportunities for young people to engage with decision-makers and contribute their ideas. One example is the annual Tawasol Forum, which brings together young people, decision-makers, experts and different sectors to discuss issues that matter to young people and the future of Jordan.

There are also youth programmes, volunteering initiatives, conferences and community activities that give young people opportunities to share their ideas, develop their skills and connect with people who can influence decisions. I have personally found these spaces particularly valuable through my involvement in media, creative work, volunteering and youth opportunities.

However, I believe the challenge is not only creating these spaces, but making them sustainable and accessible to a wider range of young people. Young people should have continuous opportunities to participate, not only during a specific event or programme. Their ideas should also be followed up so that participation can lead to visible outcomes and real change.

For me, meaningful youth participation means moving from simply giving young people a space to speak, to creating consistent pathways where their ideas can be heard, considered and followed up.

Question 4: What is the one change you would like governments, the UN, or partners to make to strengthen youth participation?

In my personal view, we need a sustainable youth participation pathway that guarantees access to young people from all backgrounds, including vulnerable groups and refugees. Youth participation should not depend only on specific conferences, events, or opportunities that are repeatedly offered to the same people.

I believe this pathway could carry a simple message: “I speak for myself — don’t speak for me.”

As a Syrian national who has been active in youth and community work for around ten years, I have experienced the challenges of having a voice while living in a country of asylum. I have also represented the voices and experiences of refugees in Jordan, yet I have never had the opportunity to travel or participate in an international UN opportunity where I could directly bring these perspectives to decision-makers.

My message to the UN and its partners is that refugees should not only be seen as people who need support. We should also have a role and a voice in shaping the communities we belong to and the societies we live in, even when we are living outside our countries of origin.

In host communities, young refugees should have meaningful opportunities to express their views, engage with decision-makers, contribute to policy discussions, and help shape solutions that affect their lives and communities.

For me, meaningful youth participation means creating pathways where young people — including refugees and young people from vulnerable backgrounds — are not spoken about or spoken for, but are given the space and opportunity to speak for themselves.

Question 1: Are you aware of any laws, policies, strategies, or plans in your country that support youth participation in peace and security? How effective are they?

Yes. I am aware of UN Security Council Resolution 2250 on Youth, Peace and Security, which recognizes the important role of young people in preventing conflict, building peace, preventing violent extremism, and contributing to decision-making.

As a young person active in media, volunteering, youth initiatives and community work, I see the importance of creating spaces where young people can contribute to these areas. I have personally applied more than once to participate in sessions and opportunities related to this agenda, but I was not selected.

This has made me think about an important gap between having frameworks that recognize the role of youth and ensuring that young people from different backgrounds can actually access the spaces created around them.

I believe the effectiveness of these policies and frameworks should not only be measured by the number of programmes or sessions organized, but also by who gets access to them, whose voices are represented, and whether young people’s recommendations are followed up and translated into action.

For me, the real success of Youth, Peace and Security is when young people from different backgrounds — including refugees and young people from vulnerable communities — are not only invited to listen, but are given meaningful and sustained opportunities to participate, influence decisions and contribute to building peaceful communities.

Introduction

For young people in Egypt, peace and security are not abstract international concepts. They are closely connected to whether young people can access education, employment, public spaces, civic participation, and institutions that they perceive as responsive and fair. Egypt has a large and diverse youth population, but “youth” should not be treated as a single constituency. Experiences and opportunities differ significantly by geography, socioeconomic background, gender, disability, education, and access to digital and institutional networks.

From a Youth, Peace and Security (YPS) perspective, the central question should therefore not simply be whether young people are being invited into conversations about peace. It should be whether they have meaningful opportunities to shape the decisions, institutions, and policies that affect the conditions for peace. The distinction between consultation and influence is fundamental.

1. What are the main barriers preventing young people from contributing to peace and security?

One major barrier is the gap between being invited to participate and having actual influence. Youth consultations, forums, conferences, and dialogue initiatives can create valuable spaces for expression, but participation becomes limited when young people's recommendations are not connected to identifiable decision-making processes. If young people repeatedly provide input without knowing what happened to it, consultation can gradually weaken rather than strengthen institutional trust.

A second barrier is unequal access to participation. Young people in major urban centers may have greater access to universities, civil society organizations, international programs, technology, transportation, and professional networks than young people in rural or economically disadvantaged communities. This creates a selection problem: institutions may hear repeatedly from the young people who already have the resources and confidence to enter formal participation spaces, while those facing the greatest barriers remain underrepresented.

The same issue applies to resources. Many youth-led initiatives have ideas and community legitimacy but lack sustained funding, organizational infrastructure, technical expertise, or access to decision-makers. Short-term competitions and grants can help, but they do not necessarily create the long-term institutional capacity required for youth initiatives to become durable contributors to peacebuilding.

There is also a question of institutional trust. Trust cannot be created simply by asking young people to trust institutions. It is built when institutions demonstrate that participation produces consequences: recommendations receive responses, commitments are tracked, and young participants can see where their contributions affected policy or implementation.

Finally, youth participation can sometimes be framed too narrowly around volunteering or awareness-raising. These are valuable forms of engagement, but YPS requires a broader understanding of young people as stakeholders, partners, and—in appropriate contexts—decision-makers.

These observations should be understood as policy considerations rather than universal claims about every Egyptian young person or institution. Reliable assessment would require disaggregated national and local data on youth participation, particularly across rural and urban communities.

2. What opportunities exist for young people to contribute to peace and security?

Egypt has significant potential to strengthen youth contributions through its existing educational, civic, community, and digital structures. Youth-led initiatives can contribute to social cohesion by creating spaces for dialogue, addressing misinformation, supporting community problem-solving, preserving cultural heritage, and connecting groups that might otherwise have limited opportunities to interact.

One particularly important opportunity is to recognize local knowledge as a form of peacebuilding capacity. Rural youth should not be approached primarily as beneficiaries who need to be brought into programs designed elsewhere. They can identify local tensions, barriers, community priorities, and practical solutions that may not be visible from national or institutional perspectives.

Digital platforms also create opportunities for youth participation, but digital participation should complement rather than replace offline mechanisms. Otherwise, young people with weaker connectivity, limited digital literacy, or fewer technological resources risk being excluded.

Education is another important entry point. Schools and universities can provide structured opportunities for dialogue, mediation, civic education, research, and collaborative problem-solving. However, these opportunities should not be reduced to symbolic youth councils. Young people should be given clearly defined responsibilities and channels through which their work can reach relevant institutions.

Youth-led organizations and initiatives can also serve as implementation partners, provided that partnerships include transparent standards, appropriate safeguarding, technical support, and sustainable funding. Institutions do not necessarily need to create every youth program themselves; they can strengthen existing youth-led capacity.

3. How can institutions make youth participation more meaningful?

The most important change would be to move from consultation toward structured co-decision-making.

First, institutions should establish formal youth participation mechanisms with clearly defined mandates. A youth advisory body, for example, should not simply be invited to provide opinions. Its role should specify which policies or programs it can review, what information it receives, when it is consulted, and how institutional decision-makers must respond.

Second, participation should include a feedback and accountability mechanism. Whenever young people submit recommendations, the responsible institution should publish or communicate whether each recommendation was accepted, modified, referred for further consideration, or rejected—with a brief explanation. This would transform participation from a one-way communication exercise into an accountable process.

Third, youth influence should be measurable. Institutions could track indicators such as the proportion of youth recommendations incorporated into policy documents, the number of programs redesigned following youth input, youth representation in relevant decision-making bodies, and the geographic and socioeconomic diversity of participating youth. These indicators should measure influence, not merely attendance.

Fourth, participation needs resources. If institutions expect young people from rural or disadvantaged communities to participate, they should address practical barriers such as transportation, connectivity, accessibility, language, scheduling, and participation costs. Otherwise, “open participation” can remain accessible mainly to those who already have resources.

Fifth, youth should be involved across the entire policy cycle: agenda-setting, policy design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. It is insufficient to involve young people at the beginning of a process and exclude them once decisions are made.

Finally, youth participation should include disagreement. Meaningful participation cannot mean asking young people to endorse predetermined policies. Institutions should create conditions in which young participants can challenge assumptions, identify unintended consequences, and propose alternatives without their disagreement being treated as a failure of the consultation.

4. What should be the final recommendation to UNDP and other institutions?

My central recommendation would be to establish a measurable framework for Youth Co-Decision-Making for Peace and Security, rather than relying primarily on consultation.

Under such a framework, participating institutions would commit to five principles: representation, authority, resources, transparency, and accountability.

Representation would require deliberate inclusion of youth from different geographic, socioeconomic, educational, and community backgrounds rather than relying exclusively on already-connected youth networks. Authority would require clearly defined areas in which youth representatives can influence or co-decide policies and programs. Resources would ensure that participation is realistically accessible. Transparency would require institutions to explain how youth recommendations were considered. Accountability would require measurable indicators and periodic public reporting on youth influence.

UNDP could support this approach by developing a practical YPS participation toolkit for national and local institutions, establishing minimum standards for meaningful youth engagement, supporting youth-led organizations with longer-term capacity-building and funding, and developing monitoring systems that measure what changed because young people participated.

The most important metric should therefore not be “How many young people attended?” but rather: “What decision changed because young people were involved?”

This distinction captures the broader shift that YPS requires. Young people should not be viewed only as a demographic to be consulted, a population vulnerable to instability, or a source of volunteers. They are also holders of knowledge, community actors, innovators, and potential partners in building social cohesion.

For Egypt and other contexts, the objective should not be to create more opportunities for young people to speak without changing institutional structures. It should be to build institutions in which youth participation has a defined pathway to influence. That would make participation more credible, strengthen institutional trust, and move YPS from a principle of inclusion toward a practical system of shared responsibility for peace and security.

Hi everyone! My name is Jasmine, I’m 17 and I’m from Kazakhstan. I’m a student and a youth volunteer involved in UNICEF’s Youth Council and I coordinate Y-PEER in my city, a youth network supported by UNFPA in Kazakhstan.

Through these roles, I work with young people and organize youth initiatives. So I’ll be answering these questions based mostly on what I’ve personally experienced in Kazakhstan.

1. What mechanisms support young people’s participation in peace, security and development?

Yes. In Kazakhstan, there are different youth councils, youth organizations and government-supported platforms that give young people opportunities to participate in community and development processes.

From my experience, Youth Councils are one of the most practical examples. Through UNICEF’s Youth Council, for example, young people can suggest ideas for activities, discuss issues affecting youth and actually help shape the programme.

I think these mechanisms work best when young people are not just invited to attend something, but are actually given a chance to suggest, organize and implement. The main limitation is that sometimes youth participation can become more symbolic than meaningful. Young people are heard, but not always involved in the final decision.

2. What platforms allow young people to participate?

In Kazakhstan, I’ve personally been involved in UNICEF’s Youth Council, UNFPA-supported Y-PEER, and youth-led organizations and initiatives. For me, the most meaningful spaces are the ones where young people actually have responsibility.

For example, in the UNICEF Youth Council, I’ve been involved in developing ideas for volunteer activities, training and challenges. I’ve also helped organize youth events and communicate with volunteers.

I think the reason these platforms work is simple: young people are trusted with real tasks. When you’re 17 and someone actually says, “Okay, this is your idea; go make it happen,” you become much more engaged.

3. What are the main barriers?

I think one of the biggest barriers is that young people often don’t know that they can participate in the first place.

There are opportunities, but information about them doesn’t always reach teenagers, especially outside major cities.

Another issue is the gap between being invited and actually having influence. Sometimes young people can attend a forum or meeting, but there is no clear way for their ideas to reach decision-makers afterwards.

We need more accessible information, regional opportunities, mentorship and follow-up. If a young person gives an idea, they should be able to see what happened to it.

4. What is the one change you would like to see?

I would love governments, the UN and other organizations to trust young people with more responsibility, not just invite them to events.

Give us a seat at the table, but also give us something to actually work on. Young people don't need to know everything, we’re still learning. But we know what is happening in our schools and online spaces because we are living it.

If our ideas are taken seriously and we get the right mentorship and resources, I think young people can become not just participants, but real partners in building safer and more peaceful communities.

Thanks so much for the opportunity to share our experience! My LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/jasmine-vadodaria-09ba6a356

My name is Jennifer Owusuwaa Prempeh from, and I work at the intersection of youth empowerment, diplomacy, and sustainable development in Ghana. I currently serve as Protocol Head for the International Youth Empowerment Summit (IYES), a platform that has grown from about 250 to over 1000 young participants since 2020, and as Ghana's Country Representative for Best Diplomats. I began this path during my National Service at the SDGs Advisory Unit in Ghana's Office of the President, where I supported the National SDG Action Summit and the National Blue Economy Summit under the auspices of H.E. Nana Addo Danquah Akuffo Addo, both of which brought youth voices into national policy conversations for the first time in a structured way. I am also a UNICEF Digital Advocate, a Climate Reality Leader, and a UN Online Volunteer. This mix of protocol, advocacy, and grassroots organizing work is what draws me to this consultation: I have seen, from the inside, both how far young Ghanaians have pushed the doors of peace and governance spaces open, and how often those doors still only open partway. I am responding to all four questions below.

Question 1.

Ghana does have a growing architecture on this front, though much of it is still under construction rather than fully built. The National Peace Council, set up under Act 818 of 2011, is the country's main statutory body for conflict prevention and peacebuilding, and Ghana has a National Action Plan on UNSCR 1325 for women, peace and security (GHANAP II) that has opened some space for young women specifically. More directly relevant to me is that Ghana is one of a small group of countries, alongside Nigeria and the DRC, currently developing a dedicated National Action Plan on Youth, Peace and Security under UNSCR 2250, led by the National Youth Authority together with the Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Centre. I have followed the stakeholder consultations and roadmap workshops that fed into this process. There is also the National Youth Policy (2022–2032) and its implementation plan, which names youth participation in decision-making as a core objective.

In practice, I would describe these mechanisms as promising but not yet transformative. The consultative stage has genuinely brought young people, including people like me, into rooms we were not in before, and the language of these frameworks now takes youth participation seriously rather than treating it as decorative. But a plan is not the same as a budget line, and a workshop is not the same as a seat at a decision-making table. What has limited impact so far is the gap between national-level frameworks and implementation at the regional and district level, inconsistent funding once the initial consultation energy fades, and the fact that security and peace institutions in Ghana still tend to be hierarchical spaces where youth input is welcomed as testimony rather than treated as a vote. Where these mechanisms have worked best, it has been because a specific institution, like the SDGs Advisory Unit during the summits I supported in 2022/23 under the office of the president as a National Service personnel , made a deliberate choice to build youth involvement into the design of the process from the start, rather than adding it on afterward.

Question 2.

On the formal side, Ghana has a National Youth Parliament concept that the National Youth Authority is trying to establish across district, regional, and national levels, giving young people a structured channel to raise concerns and hold local government accountable. On the civil society side, there are networks like Best Diplomats and youth-led summits such as International Youth Empowerment Summit (IYES) hosted by Pastor Brian Amoateng every March , where I work directly. On the UN-linked side, I engage through the UN Volunteers platform and as a UNICEF Digital Advocate, both of which create structured but flexible ways for young people to plug into ongoing programmes rather than one-off events.

From where I sit, the mechanisms that provide genuine influence share three features. First, young people are involved in designing the agenda, not just attending it; at IYES, the programme content and speaker line-up are shaped by a youth-led team, which is part of why participation has grown nearly threefold since 2015.

Second, there is continuity between events, so that ideas raised in one session actually feed into the next one, rather than each forum starting from zero.

Third, there is a named, accountable convener, whether that is a government agency, a UN entity, or an established civil society platform, who can be tracked and pushed to follow through. Purely symbolic structures, like youth councils that exist on paper in some districts but rarely meet or lack any budget, tend to fall away precisely because they lack these features. The community dialogue formats I have seen work best are smaller and less formal than national forums, but they are the ones where a young person's specific proposal is most likely to be acted on within weeks rather than years.

Question 3

The most persistent barrier is that youth participation is still largely consultative rather than decisional. Young people are regularly invited to speak, but far less often given a vote, a budget line, or a formal role in the bodies that actually decide policy or allocate resources. A second barrier is resourcing: many youth-led peace and governance initiatives run on volunteer energy and short-term grants, which makes it hard to sustain momentum once the novelty of a new forum wears off. A third is geography and access. Opportunities to engage with national-level peace and security processes are concentrated in Accra, so young people outside the capital, who are often the ones closest to the community-level tensions these frameworks are meant to address, face real costs of transport, connectivity, and time just to be in the room. A fourth barrier is generational trust: peace and security institutions in Ghana have historically been shaped by hierarchy and rank, which can make genuinely open dialogue with young people, especially young women, feel unfamiliar or even risky to some institutional actors.

What needs to change is fairly concrete. Youth participation needs dedicated, protected budget lines rather than being funded out of whatever is left over after other priorities are covered. Youth representatives need formal seats with voting or decision rights on the bodies implementing the National Action Plan on YPS, not just observer status at consultations. Implementation needs to be pushed down to the regional and district level, where the National Peace Council and local youth structures already exist but are often under-resourced. And there needs to be a simple, public way to track what happened to the recommendations young people make at these forums, so that participation stops feeling like it disappears into a report no one reads.

Question 4

If I had to choose one change, it would be this: move young people from being consulted to being resourced and empowered as co-decision-makers, with clear authority and a budget attached to that role. Right now, most YPS engagement stops at the point of gathering our input. What would change the picture is if governments and UN partners guaranteed young people formal seats, with real voting power, on the specific committees and boards that decide funding and policy for peace and security, and backed those seats with multi-year funding so youth-led organizations are not rebuilding themselves from scratch after every project cycle ends. That single shift, from listening to youth to sharing power with youth, is what would let the ideas coming out of forums like this one actually reach the people who need them.

Hello everyone 

My name is Julia and I’m currently a second year medical student in Lebanon, willing to answer Question 3.

From what I have seen in the past few years, we, the people of Lebanon, have experienced multiple wars and displacement (especially residents of South of Lebanon), which are main barriers preventing young people from participating in peace processes because they don’t even have peace in their own country. Other than that, I think accessibility is a main issue: people residing far from the capital city don’t have access to ongoing events to promote peace building and security implementing, which reflects the lack of education of these topics in those areas. What mainly needs to change is the education. We need to educate young people at schools about the importance of peace and security so that they grow up having value to these topics and they work on implementing them in their community.

this way, each person who’s educated on that topic could educate 10 people around him, and so on.. we would have a whole generation of young people willing to invest in peacebuilding. Here, I would like to end my comment by a life motto that I have always believed in “alone we can do so little; together we can do so much” .

Thank you for your time

Question 3

My name is Yassin, and I am a first-year engineering student from Egypt. Alongside my studies, I have been involved in volunteering, youth initiatives, scientific research, innovation and community activities.

Through these experiences, I have realized that one of the biggest barriers facing young people is not a lack of ideas or willingness to contribute, but limited and unequal access to opportunities.

One of my earliest experiences with youth leadership was through my school’s Rotary Interact Club, where I served as President. Through this role, I worked with other students to organize activities and community service initiatives within the school. This experience showed me that young people can take responsibility, lead others and contribute to their communities even while they are still students. At the same time, it made me realize that not every young person has the same access to spaces where they can develop these skills or take on leadership responsibilities.

I have seen this further through my work in youth-led initiatives. Many students are interested in volunteering, leadership, research and community activities, but opportunities are not always easy to find or accessible to everyone. Sometimes young people simply do not know where to look, while others may not have the networks, financial resources or guidance needed to participate.

This is also one of the reasons I started using digital platforms to make opportunities and knowledge more accessible to young people. I manage a WhatsApp Channel where I share opportunities, competitions, programs and important deadlines, particularly to help young people who may not already have access to strong networks that regularly share these opportunities.

I also create content across social media, including a TikTok profile, with a particular focus on making scientific research and research-related knowledge more accessible to Arabic-speaking young people. I believe that language itself can sometimes become a barrier, especially when much of the available scientific and educational content is presented in English or in highly technical language.

Another experience that shaped my perspective was co-founding Scholars’ Research Club. We wanted to create a space where students could access research knowledge and mentorship and turn their ideas into actual projects. In our first nationwide program, we received more than 400 applications and selected 160 students from 25 Egyptian governorates, with more than 70 students going on to complete research projects.

For me, this experience was an important example of what can happen when young people are given an accessible opportunity and the right support. The potential was already there; what was often missing was the bridge between young people's interest and the resources, information and guidance needed to act.

The wider numbers in Egypt also show why this matters. Young people aged 15–29 represent around 25% of the population. At the same time, youth unemployment among those aged 15–24 was estimated at 18.3% in 2025, while 23.8% of young people were not in education, employment or training in 2024.

I believe these barriers are also directly relevant to Youth, Peace and Security. Meaningful participation in peace and security cannot happen if young people who are already facing barriers to education, employment, information and leadership opportunities are also excluded from the spaces where decisions about their communities are made. Young people need to be able to access these spaces, understand the issues being discussed, contribute their perspectives and have a real opportunity to help shape and implement solutions.

This is particularly important because young people often understand challenges in their communities from a different perspective. When participation is limited to a small group of young people who already have strong networks or institutional access, decision-makers may miss the experiences and ideas of many others.

For me, meaningful youth participation should therefore go beyond inviting young people to attend consultations or events. Young people need accessible pathways to participate, learn, lead, implement ideas and receive feedback on the impact of their contributions.

Governments, the UN and other organizations can help by making opportunities easier to discover, reducing unnecessary barriers to participation, supporting youth-led initiatives with mentorship and small grants, and creating spaces where young people from different backgrounds can participate not only those who already have strong networks or impressive CVs.

I believe young people should not have to wait until they graduate or become established professionals before their ideas are taken seriously. We can contribute now when we are given the opportunity, trust and responsibility to do so.

Hi there. I am Khaled Nasir from Bangladesh and involved in development, NGO, think tanks and OSINT with a keen internet in Civic Tech and AI. I am expressing my thoughts on the 2nd question.

Youth today are engaging with a wide range of issues, from access to safe drinking water and climate change to corruption, social inequality and political participation. In many developing countries, however, young people still face barriers when trying to engage through traditional political and institutional channels. As a result, digital platforms, community networks, student bodies and youth forums are becoming important spaces where young people can raise concerns, learn, organize and take part in civic life.

The growing role of these platforms also needs to be viewed from the perspective of safety and civic space. In situations where young people may face social pressure, harassment or other risks for expressing their views, privacy-preserving mechanisms can provide a safer way to participate. At the same time, these platforms need to address challenges such as misinformation, online harassment, manipulation and false reporting. In my view, sustainable youth engagement therefore requires more than simply providing access to technology. It also requires trust, digital literacy, inclusion and a safe environment for participation.
One of the most interesting aspects of digital civic engagement is that it can allow young people to move beyond simply expressing their opinions and become contributors to identifying problems and developing solutions. Self-paced learning, open data, digital content creation and civic technology can give young people the tools to investigate issues, document what they observe and develop responses within their communities. However, participation becomes much more meaningful when there is a clear connection between youth voice, evidence, institutional response and feedback.

There are already examples of this approach emerging in South Asia. In Bangladesh, Ghush.site, created by young Bangladeshis, attempted to document citizens' experiences with bribery and corruption. The platform received a significant number of submissions soon after its launch. What I find particularly interesting about this initiative is the way technology was used to turn individual experiences into a larger body of information while allowing contributors to maintain their anonymity. Such approaches demonstrate how youth-led civic technology can potentially contribute to public awareness, research and accountability.

Nepal's Youth Innovation Lab provides another useful example. Its work has included initiatives related to climate change, combating disinformation, digital learning and youth civic engagement. This demonstrates that youth participation does not necessarily have to be limited to elections or conventional political activities. Young people can also contribute through climate action, information integrity, community problem-solving, innovation and public accountability.
At the same time, we should recognize that digital participation can also reproduce existing inequalities. Young people in rural or low-income communities, young women, persons with disabilities and those with limited connectivity or digital literacy may not have the same opportunities to participate. For this reason, digital approaches should complement rather than replace offline forms of engagement, while deliberately creating opportunities for groups that are often underrepresented.

Sustaining these initiatives will also require collaboration. Youth organizations, civil society, governments, universities, technology companies and development partners can create an ecosystem where young people are not simply consulted but are involved as designers, researchers, innovators and partners. Sustainability should therefore include not only funding, but also technical capacity, institutional partnerships, leadership succession and community ownership.

Finally, I believe we should measure youth civic engagement by more than the number of users, submissions or social-media interactions. We should also ask whether participants gained new skills, whether their actions generated collective responses, whether institutions responded, and whether young people could actually see the impact of their participation.

Technology by itself cannot replace responsive institutions. But when it connects voice, knowledge, collective action and accountability, it can become a powerful tool for meaningful and sustained youth participation. Building such ecosystems across developing countries could help move youth engagement beyond short-term mobilization towards long-term participation in solving the social, political and development challenges that affect their communities.

Good day,

As youth, (Question #3) I think the barriers of YPS is the Access. Not everyone has the chance to give a voice in our country because of Corruption. Justice is not served equally as what we expect here. I suggest that to create an open source survey that gives youth a voice around the world. I also suggest to create a regional advisory that is not affiliated to the government but the result will be passed to the UNDP and UNDP will past it to the government. It aims to give access and opportunities to everyone especially the youth it self. It also aims to removed the barriers of YPS in rural region. Thank you so much for reading this. 

My name is Hetal Patil, and I am a postgraduate student in Public Health with a strong interest in public policy, governance and youth participation. I am particularly interested in how young people can move beyond being beneficiaries of policies and actually become part of the process of shaping them.

Q.1 In India, I see the Youth, Peace and Security (YPS) agenda reflected more through existing youth and democratic participation mechanisms than through one dedicated national YPS policy. The National Youth Policy 2014 specifically recognizes the importance of engaging young people and facilitating their participation in governance. Another important example is the National Youth Parliament Scheme, which gives young people an opportunity to understand parliamentary processes, debate public issues and develop democratic skills. In recent years, this has expanded through NYPS 2.0, which is now open not only to educational institutions but also to groups and individual citizens across India. By March 2026, more than 98,000 citizens and students had participated through its different categories since its launch.

I think these mechanisms are effective in creating exposure and confidence, especially for students who may otherwise have very little contact with formal governance. The recent Viksit Bharat Youth Parliament is another example, where young people discussed national issues and were given opportunities to interact with policymakers and experience parliamentary proceedings.

However, I would not say that participation automatically means influence. This is where I think India still has room to improve. Young people are often invited to debates, consultations or youth programmes, but there is less clarity about what happens to their recommendations afterwards. A young person can speak in a Youth Parliament or consultation, but meaningful participation should also mean knowing whether that idea was considered, adopted, modified or rejected.

For me, the biggest difference between symbolic participation and meaningful participation is the feedback loop. Youth should not only be given a microphone; they should have a clear pathway through which their ideas reach decision-makers and a way to see the outcome of their contribution.

This is also consistent with the broader YPS framework under UN Security Council Resolution 2250, which recognizes young people as important actors in conflict prevention, peacebuilding and decision-making rather than simply people affected by conflict. India itself has acknowledged the importance of implementing the five YPS pillars prevention, protection, participation, partnership, and disengagement in its statement to the UN.

From my perspective as a young person in India, the next step should therefore be to connect the many existing youth platforms more directly with actual policymaking. Young people should not only be consulted about decisions affecting their future; they should have a visible role in shaping those decisions.

Localizing YPS through Tech-Accessible Mental Health: "Sakoon" Initiative from Pakistan

In high-pressure environments like Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, youth face severe psychological distress, academic stigma, and social isolation—leading to hopelessness and vulnerability. Peace and community resilience cannot exist without youth mental well-being.

To bridge this gap, we launched "Sakoon", a 24/7 toll-free, anonymous IVR helpline designed to provide mental health screening, empathetic listening, professional counselor connections, and emergency referrals. By utilizing IVR technology, we ensure that non-smartphone users and rural youth can access support safely without facing social stigma or cost barriers.

Key recommendations for UNDP’s Policy Brief on YPS:

1. Prioritize Mental Health in YPS Action Plans: Recognize mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) as a core baseline for peacebuilding and youth empowerment under UN Resolution 2250.

2. Fund Tech-Accessible Solutions: Support low-tech, high-impact innovations (like IVR helplines) that reach grassroots and digitally excluded youth.

3. Shift from Luxury to Necessity: Encourage regional policies that integrate anonymous MHPSS into youth peace programs, breaking the stigma surrounding psychological distress.

Assalamualaikum.  
Today I want to talk to you about _"Sakoon"_.

Our youth are facing a silent crisis. Just look at *BISE Peshawar 2026* results - _60% failed in Class 9, and 30% failed in Class 10_.  
At age 14, 6 out of 10 children face *taunts, shame, social stigma, and pressure at home*.  
The biggest problem? _In our society, mental health is still considered a luxury._ So children suffer silently.

_According to WHO, 1 in every 7 young people worldwide has a mental health issue._  
*And in Pakistan, this isn’t just a statistic. This is our brother, our sister, our neighbor. This is happening in our homes.*  
*Even with good grades and a job, social stigma breaks our youth. They still suffer in silence.*  
But today, we have *no easy and anonymous solution to screen it and solve it*.

To fill this gap, we bring you _"Sakoon"_.  
A _Toll-Free, Anonymous, 24-hour IVR Helpline_.  
When a child calls, we will first *screen* their risk.  
Then we will *listen* to them.  
Then we will *connect* them with a professional counselor.  
And if needed, we will immediately *refer* them to a hospital or the UNFPA Helpline.  

In short, we’ve put a mental health professional inside every mobile phone.  
No fee. No identity.  

Because _No Health Without Mental Health_.  
_Mental health is not a luxury. It is a necessity for our young generation._  
Thank you. ❤️

My name is Francesco Bakhos, and I work at the intersection of youth empowerment, entrepreneurship, civic participation and community development in Lebanon. I currently serve as Impact Officer of the Global Shapers Beirut Hub and participate in several youth-led and institutional spaces that engage young people in governance, public policy and community action. My perspective comes from being on both sides of youth participation: as a young person invited into institutional spaces, and as someone designing programmes and platforms that try to give other young people meaningful opportunities to participate.

1. In Lebanon, I have experienced youth participation mainly through advisory bodies, youth networks, civil society initiatives and platforms linked to public institutions and international organizations.

I currently participate in spaces such as the Youth Advisory Committee of the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Lebanon and the Youth Task Force at Lebanon’s Office of the Minister of State for Administrative Reform. I also serve as Impact Officer of the Global Shapers Beirut Hub.

These mechanisms can create valuable access, but I have learned that access and influence are not the same thing.

A young person can be invited to a consultation, photographed, thanked and still have no idea whether anything they said influenced a decision.

The mechanisms I find most meaningful are those where young people are engaged before priorities are finalized, given clear responsibilities, connected directly with decision-makers, and involved in implementation and follow-up.

The biggest limitation is often continuity. We conduct consultations, workshops and dialogues, but young people are rarely told: What happened next? Which recommendation was adopted? Why was another rejected?

For me, meaningful participation should therefore be measured not by the number of young people consulted, but by the decisions, policies or actions they actually helped shape.

2. I have been fortunate to participate in several different models of youth engagement in Lebanon, and I think the strongest ones share one characteristic: young people are given ownership rather than simply an audience.

The Global Shapers Beirut Hub is one example. As Impact Officer, I work with other young leaders to develop community projects, assess their intended impact and make sure initiatives respond to real needs. Young people are not only consulted; they identify problems, design solutions, build partnerships and implement projects themselves.

Youth advisory mechanisms can also be effective when there is genuine access to institutions. Through the Netherlands Embassy’s Youth Advisory Committee, for example, young people have a structured space to bring their perspectives into conversations with an international institution. My participation in the OMSAR Youth Task Force has similarly shown me the potential of creating channels between young people and public-sector reform processes.

I have also seen the importance of creating our own spaces. Through initiatives I have worked on in entrepreneurship, diplomacy and civic engagement, young people often become much more confident participants when they are first given the knowledge, networks and practical experience necessary to engage institutions on more equal terms.

For me, a genuine participation mechanism has four elements: access, ownership, resources and accountability.

If young people can speak but cannot influence, implement or follow up, the participation remains incomplete.

3. One of the biggest barriers I see in Lebanon is tokenism without necessarily intending to be tokenistic.

Institutions increasingly understand that young people should be included, so youth representatives are invited to panels, consultations and advisory groups. That is progress. But participation can still happen after the important decisions have already been made.

Another major barrier is economic.

We cannot discuss meaningful youth participation without discussing livelihoods. Many young people in Lebanon are trying to study, work multiple jobs, support their families or find a way to remain in the country. Yet youth participation is frequently built around unpaid meetings, voluntary committees and opportunities that require significant time and resources.

This means that the young people who can afford to participate are often the ones who continue to be represented.

There is also an access gap. Opportunities, networks and institutional spaces can remain concentrated among young people who already know where to find them, particularly in Beirut. Talented young people outside these circles may never even know that the opportunity exists.

Finally, youth initiatives themselves can be fragmented. We have extraordinary young people doing important work, but often in parallel rather than together.

We need to move from inviting youth into existing processes to sharing ownership of those processes. That means earlier involvement, funding for youth-led solutions, greater geographic and socioeconomic inclusion, and clear mechanisms showing young people what changed because they participated.

4. If I could change one thing, I would ask institutions to stop measuring youth participation by attendance and start measuring youth influence.

Do not only tell us how many young people attended a consultation. Tell us how many recommendations were incorporated. Tell us which decisions young people helped make. Tell us what resources they were trusted to manage. Tell us what changed because they were there.

I believe every major youth participation mechanism should create a simple accountability loop: young people contribute, institutions respond, decisions are explained, and youth remain involved in implementation and evaluation.

There is a phrase I often come back to: do not give young people a seat at the table if the table has already decided.

Young people should be there when the agenda is being written, not only when it is being presented.

Lebanon has extraordinary youth talent, creativity and willingness to contribute. What is often missing is access: access to institutions, resources, decision-makers and genuine responsibility.

My hope for the YPS agenda is that we move beyond seeing young people as beneficiaries of peacebuilding and begin treating them as co-designers, implementers and decision-makers in building peace itself.

میرے علاقے میں نوجوانوں، امن اور سلامتی سے متعلق وعدے اُس وقت مؤثر ثابت ہو سکتے ہیں جب نوجوانوں کو صرف مشاورت تک محدود نہ رکھا جائے بلکہ انہیں فیصلہ سازی اور امن کے قیام کے عمل میں حقیقی اور بامعنی کردار دیا جائے۔

بالخصوص بالائی سوات جیسے علاقوں میں نوجوان امن، برداشت، انسانی حقوق، تنازعات کے پُرامن حل اور سماجی ہم آہنگی کے لیے اہم کردار ادا کر سکتے ہیں۔ اس کے لیے مقامی حکومت، عمائدین، سول سوسائٹی اور نوجوانوں کے درمیان باقاعدہ مکالمے اور مشاورتی پلیٹ فارمز قائم کیے جانے چاہئیں۔

نوجوانوں کے لیے امن سازی، انسانی حقوق اور قیادت کے حوالے سے تربیت، وسائل اور مواقع فراہم کیے جائیں، جبکہ دور دراز اور پسماندہ علاقوں کے نوجوانوں کو بھی برابر نمائندگی دی جائے۔

میری نظر میں نوجوان صرف امن کے مستفید نہیں بلکہ امن کے حقیقی شراکت دار اور تبدیلی کے اہم محرک ہیں۔

My name is Jafar Shah Khan, a youth and human rights advocate from Upper Swat, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. I belong to the Torwali community, and Torwali is my mother tongue. I work with young people at the community level and advocate for human rights, youth participation, peace, social justice, and inclusive development.

Coming from a remote and culturally diverse region, I believe that the voices of local, indigenous, and marginalized youth must be meaningfully included in peacebuilding and decision-making processes.

In my community, Youth, Peace and Security commitments can become meaningful when young people are not only consulted but are given real opportunities to participate in decision-making and peacebuilding.

In Upper Swat, young people can play an important role in promoting peace, human rights, social cohesion, tolerance, cultural understanding, and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. There should be regular platforms where youth can engage with local government, community elders, civil society, and other relevant stakeholders.

Young people also need training, resources, mentorship, and leadership opportunities. Youth from remote, indigenous, and underserved communities should receive equal representation and meaningful opportunities.

Innovative approaches such as youth peace forums, community dialogues, peer-to-peer awareness, cultural initiatives, and youth-led local projects can make youth participation more effective.

Young people should not be seen only as beneficiaries of peace; they should be recognized as equal partners, leaders, and catalysts for positive change.

Much of the contemporary peacebuilding architecture applied across the Global Majority has been shaped by institutions, epistemologies, funding structures, and policy priorities concentrated in the North. Concepts of "peace," "security," "stability," "resilience," "capacity," and even "success" often travel from North to South as if they were universal and politically neutral.

They are not.

Peace is political. Knowledge is political. Measurement is political.

When a framework developed elsewhere arrives in African communities and determines what counts as violence, what counts as peace, what counts as expertise, what should be measured, and what constitutes a successful intervention, participation can become little more than participation inside someone else's imagination of what our future should look like.

This is the colonial contradiction I see in much of international peacebuilding, we are asked to participate in systems that have historically been designed about us more often than with us, and applied to us more often than transformed by us.

And then the burden of "ownership" is placed on local communities. But how can we speak meaningfully about local ownership when the funding comes with predetermined priorities, the indicators are established elsewhere, the expertise is credentialed elsewhere, and the legitimacy of local knowledge is often conditional on its translation into the language of international institutions?

This is particularly dangerous when we talk about African youth.

We are repeatedly described as beneficiaries, vulnerable populations, agents of change, future leaders, or sources of resilience. Rarely are we positioned as the people with the authority to define the political terms of peace itself.

An intersectional feminist approach forces us to go even deeper. Whose peace are we measuring? A peace that stabilizes the state but leaves young womxn exposed to patriarchal violence? A peace that attracts investment while communities experience dispossession? A peace that celebrates institutional stability while shrinking civic space? A peace that counts how many young people attended a consultation while none of them could alter the decision?

That may be stability. It may be institutional success. But it is not necessarily justice, and it is not necessarily peace.

We need to challenge the assumption that the Global North produces the knowledge, frameworks, indicators, and solutions while the Global South supplies the "local context."

We are not context. We are knowledge producers. We are political actors.

Decolonizing YPS therefore cannot mean simply adding more African youth to panels, consultations, or advisory boards. It requires a redistribution of epistemic and political power: allowing communities to define what peace means, what insecurity looks like, what should be measured, which knowledge counts, where resources go, and what accountability looks like.

And this must include the people most frequently excluded even within the Global majority, young womxn, feminist organizers, rural youth, racialized and marginalized communities, displaced people, disabled youth, LGBTQ+ communities, and those whose knowledge does not come with institutional credentials.

Ultimately, I think we need to stop asking only: "How can we make young people participate in existing peacebuilding frameworks?" and rather start asking:"What would peacebuilding look like if African young people had the power to define the framework itself?"

That is the shift I want from YPS:, from applying peace to communities, to building peace with communities; from extracting knowledge, to recognizing knowledge; from consultation, to power; from Global North expertise being exported to the Global South, to genuinely reciprocal political and epistemic solidarity.

Because peace cannot be decolonial if the people living its consequences do not have the power to define what peace means and is. And finally, without liberation there is no peace whether inn Congo, Sudan or Palestine.

At the end of the day, our existence remains our resistance and as long as we do, we'll continue to disrupt these systems that continue to harm us and silence us

I am an Agricultural Economics graduate, former Students' Union President, and UNFPA Sokoto Youth Ambassador based in Sokoto, Nigeria. 

Through my work with student bodies, youth organizations, and community development initiatives in Northern Nigeria, I engage with young people on issues of governance, peacebuilding, livelihoods, and civic participation. My focus areas include youth participation in policy, agricultural development, peace and security, and community mobilization.

I believe young people should not be treated only as beneficiaries of peace and development programmes, but as co-designers and co-implementers. In a region affected by insecurity and limited opportunities, it is critical to create spaces where youth can contribute ideas, lead dialogue, and influence decisions that affect their communities.

I am joining this consultation as a youth leader and practitioner from Northern Nigeria who works directly with young people and is committed to strengthening meaningful youth participation in peace, security, and development, especially through education, research, and community-based action.

Barriers to Youth Participation in Peace and Security: Key Challenges and Recommendations

From my experience in Nigeria, the biggest barrier is not that young people lack ideas, it is that they are rarely trusted with responsibility. Many young people are invited to town hall meetings, security dialogues, or community consultations, but their opinions are often not reflected in the final decisions. This creates frustration and discourages future participation.

Another challenge is economic hardship. A young person who is struggling to pay school fees, find a job, or support their family is less likely to volunteer for peacebuilding activities. This is one reason why some young people become vulnerable to political violence, cultism, or recruitment by criminal and extremist groups. During elections in Nigeria, for example, unemployed youths are sometimes used as political thugs instead of being engaged as peace ambassadors.

I have also observed that many communities only involve young people after conflict has already occurred. Yet, young people are the ones who understand local tensions, social media trends, and the concerns of their peers. If they were engaged earlier through schools, youth associations, faith based organizations, and community groups, many conflicts could be prevented before they escalate.

To change this, i'll personally recomend that the governments and community leaders must stop seeing young people as "leaders of tomorrow" and start treating them as partners today. Youth should have real representation in local peace committees, receive training in dialogue and conflict resolution, and have access to funding for community led peace initiatives. When young people are trusted, equipped, and given a genuine voice, they become some of the strongest defenders of peace and security rather than being viewed as part of the problem.

Comrade Ibrahim Adamu Iko, 
Member, United Nations Youth Association Nigeria (UNYA-NG)

Thank you for sharing this important information.

I am writing to confirm that I have successfully participated in the online consultation on SparkBlue for the Youth, Peace and Security (YPS) policies.

Additionally, I have forwarded this invitation to the young people and volunteers within my network at THE UMEED in Bihar, encouraging them to share their valuable insights and contribute before the August 31 deadline.

Best regards,

Amarjeet Kumar

1. From my experience, there are many mechanisms today that aim to create space for young people in governance, development, peacebuilding, and multilateral processes. I have personally participated in some of these spaces through civil society and UN-related youth engagement, including consultations, conferences, working groups, youth programs, and policy research.

These mechanisms are important, but one of the main lessons I took from co-authoring the 2025 policy report “Rebuilding Youth Trust in Inclusive Governance and Multilateralism” is that access and meaningful participation are not necessarily the same thing. A young person can be invited to a conference or consultation and still have very little influence over what happens afterward.

For me, effectiveness depends on what happens after young people speak. Were their recommendations reflected in the final outcome? Were they involved in implementation? Did institutions explain what happened to their input?

The most meaningful mechanisms are those that treat young people as partners rather than participants for a day. Transparency, accountability, genuine representation, and shared leadership are essential. When young people can see a connection between their participation and actual outcomes, participation builds trust.

2. Through my own work, I have participated in youth-led and civil society spaces connected to human rights, sustainable development, governance, dialogue, and international affairs. These have included youth programs, civil society working groups, policy research, conferences, consultations, workshops, and UN-related spaces.

I have learned that the most effective spaces are not necessarily the largest or most prestigious. They are spaces where young people are given continuity, responsibility, and ownership. There is a major difference between inviting a young person to speak for a few minutes and involving them in researching an issue, developing recommendations, organizing discussions, and helping shape the outcome.

I also believe strongly in smaller, community-based spaces. For more than eight years, I have mentored younger students academically, personally, and spiritually and helped create reading, writing, and discussion spaces for young people and fellows. These experiences taught me that meaningful participation does not begin when someone enters a government building or a UN conference room. It begins when young people learn that their questions and ideas matter and that they have both the confidence and responsibility to contribute.

The strongest mechanisms, in my view, connect grassroots youth development with institutional participation.

3. One of the biggest barriers is the gap between being represented and having influence.

Young people are increasingly visible in conferences, consultations, advisory groups, and international forums. That visibility matters. But representation becomes frustrating when young people are repeatedly asked for ideas without knowing where those ideas go or whether they influence anything.

While researching youth trust in inclusive governance and multilateralism in 2025, this became especially important to me. Trust cannot be demanded simply because institutions create youth programs. It has to be built through transparency, accountability, consistency, and evidence that participation actually matters.

Accessibility is another barrier. Opportunities often reach young people who already have strong networks, institutional knowledge, language skills, or financial and educational resources. This can mean that the same relatively small group continues to move between youth spaces. We therefore need to ask: Which young people are represented, and who is still missing?

I also believe in intergenerational co-leadership. Young people bring lived experience, creativity, and urgency, while older generations bring institutional knowledge, experience, and networks. Instead of replacing one generation with another, we need structures where these strengths complement each other and decision-making power is genuinely shared.

4. If I could ask governments, the United Nations, and other partners to make one change, it would be to move from youth consultation to youth co-ownership.

Young people should not only be asked what they think after priorities have already been decided. They should be involved from the beginning, in setting agendas, designing policies, making decisions, implementing solutions, and evaluating their impact.

For me, meaningful participation is about creating a real pathway from voice to influence. If young people contribute their time, experiences, and ideas, institutions also have a responsibility to show what happened to that contribution.

We do not simply need more seats at existing tables. We need young people to have a meaningful role in shaping what happens at those tables, and when necessary, the opportunity to help build new ones.

Young people can be powerful catalysts for peace when they are given meaningful opportunities to participate in decision-making and community action. In many communities, youth are already working on climate change, environmental protection, education, and social inclusion—areas that are closely connected to peace and social stability.

I believe youth-led initiatives, intergenerational dialogue, and inclusive platforms can help build trust, reduce social tensions, and create more resilient communities. Young people should not only be seen as beneficiaries of peacebuilding efforts, but also as active partners and leaders in shaping peaceful and sustainable societies.

I would especially like to see stronger support for local youth initiatives, capacity-building, and opportunities for young people from diverse backgrounds to contribute to peacebuilding at the community level.

Hello Everyone, 

This is Mukhtiar Ahmed, a sociology undergraduate student at Government College University, Faisalabad, Pakistan.

As a frontline social worker and life-skills facilitator, I see daily that peacebuilding starts with psychosocial stability and youth agency. Excited to contribute our field insights to this consultation before the Aug 31 deadline! 🕊️✨ #UNDP4Yout

This is my first opportunity to participate in a discussion with an international online community, and I’m very happy to be here.

My name is Akaki Saghinadze (Saginadze), and I am from the Republic of Georgia. I am the founder of a civil society organization, established in 2018, and a civic activist. I am 29 years old and have been actively involved in civil society and NGO work since 2015.

1. Frameworks: 

Youth participation and meaningful representation

Georgia is currently experiencing authoritarian rule. In this context, many strategies and action plans related to youth, peace, and security are merely performative. They create the appearance that young people are being heard, while in reality their participation is often neither meaningful nor independent. There is also a more concerning dimension: through such youth meetings and platforms, the authorities attempt to promote young people who are willing to serve as public faces of the authoritarian system.

Nevertheless, I can share examples from the period before authoritarianism became so pronounced in Georgia. At that time, I was still a school student myself, and several initiatives had a particularly positive impact on me. One of the most important was the existence of student councils and clubs in both public and private schools. These structures brought elements of non-formal education into the formal education system, made an otherwise uniform school environment more diverse, and encouraged students who had previously been less motivated to become actively involved in school life.

Student councils are regulated at the national legislative level, with democratic procedures such as elections. Equally important is the close cooperation between civil society organizations and student councils and clubs. I personally received a small grant while I was still a student, which allowed us to purchase equipment for our school. This helped us attract other students and made the learning process more engaging, including around issues such as peace and civic education.

2. Engagements:

Volunteering as a foundation for civic participation

Young people are particularly motivated to engage voluntarily in social activities. When their energy is transformed into organized civic action, it can influence public policy while simultaneously strengthening their personal skills and sense of agency.

In Georgia, young people played a major role in supporting people affected by Russia’s war against Ukraine. Providing young volunteers with training, adapting action plans to their needs, and involving them directly in organizing activities can significantly encourage a culture of nonviolent civic activism.

Everything begins with a culture of volunteering: with an interest in social change, but also with the belief that collective organization can make a difference. Young people are also often subject to less repression when their activities are clearly nonviolent, particularly when they are exercising their civic rights peacefully.

3. Barriers to youth participation under authoritarianism

In an authoritarian environment, two major factors can prevent young people from participating in peace and security initiatives.

The first is fear of repression. Authoritarian systems deliberately cultivate this fear. One of the most effective ways to counter it is to teach young people how to remain peaceful and disciplined even in the face of repression, including during protests. This can ultimately reduce the space for repression: when society sees that young people are acting peacefully, public solidarity tends to grow, making it more difficult for an authoritarian government to continue suppressing them without consequences.

It is equally important to strengthen young people’s capacity for courage. This can be achieved by demonstrating the importance and impact of their actions, and by encouraging reflection on historical examples and personal stories of people who have contributed to peaceful social change.

The second major barrier is propaganda. False narratives can undermine young people’s interest in engaging with peace and security issues. In Georgia, the system frequently attempts to convince society that existing problems are exaggerated or even invented, and that the situation in the country is fundamentally good. At the same time, authorities may claim that they are already addressing these problems through various artificial councils, symbolic initiatives, and simulated peacebuilding processes. Such narratives can create the illusion of participation while discouraging genuine civic engagement.

4. Education and international opportunities as a form of resilience

Under authoritarianism, activities promoting peace, freedom, and civic participation are often restricted. Funding may be withdrawn, organizations may face pressure, and certain activities may become impossible to implement domestically.

For this reason, it is equally important to ensure that young people continue to have opportunities to learn, develop, and build networks in safer environments outside the country. International educational exchanges, conferences, short-term training programmes, and similar opportunities can play an important role.

Education keeps young people actively engaged and is, in many ways, less vulnerable to repression. Even when educational programmes are not explicitly political, they create opportunities for young people to connect with one another, develop organizational and leadership skills, build trust, and strengthen democratic values.

It would therefore be particularly valuable for young people from countries experiencing democratic backsliding and authoritarian pressure to have greater access to international short-term educational programmes, exchange opportunities, conferences, and alumni networks. Such programmes do more than provide education: they help preserve civic space, maintain connections among young people, and strengthen the capacity of a new generation to contribute to peace, security, freedom, and democratic resilience.

Hi my name is Serenah Nkunkumo and I’m an education final year student at the University of Namibia,as well as a UNFPA youth advisory panel member Namibia for the Zambezi Region.

1.Namibia has several frameworks and mechanisms that create space for young people to participate in governance,development and peacebuilding. These include the National Youth Policy, the National Youth Council, the National Development Plans, the Namibia Youth Credit Scheme, youth representation structures within communities and institutions and opportunities created through civil society and United Nations youth programmes. Namibia's Constitution also provides a strong foundation for participation, equality,democracy and fundamental freedoms.

At the regional and international level, Namibia is also influenced by frameworks such as UN Security Council Resolution 2250 on Youth, Peace and Security, the African Union's Youth Charter and the Sustainable Development Goals.

From my experience, these mechanisms have created important opportunities for young people to express their views, participate in consultations, leadership programmes, advocacy initiatives and community development. However,participation does not always translate into meaningful decision-making power. Young people are frequently consulted, but their recommendations may not always be reflected in final policies, budgets or implementation plans.

The greatest strengths are the increasing recognition of young people as partners rather than merely beneficiaries,the existence of youth structures and the willingness of some institutions to engage young people. However, implementation is limited by inadequate resources,weak feedback mechanisms, limited representation of marginalised youth and the gap between policy commitments and what happens at community level.

2. For YPS to become more effective,youth participation needs to move beyond consultation towards co-creation, decision-making, implementation and accountability. Young people should have clearly defined roles in structures where decisions affecting peace, security, governance and development are made.

In my experience, one of the biggest barriers is the gap between being invited to participate and actually having influence. Young people may be invited to consultations, conferences or dialogues, but they are not always given the opportunity to participate throughout the policy cycle or to see how their recommendations are acted upon.

Other barriers include limited access to decision-makers, inadequate funding for youth-led initiatives, political and institutional barriers, lack of information about available opportunities, unemployment and economic vulnerability, and the concentration of opportunities in urban areas. Rural youth, young women, persons with disabilities and other marginalised groups can face additional barriers to participation.

There is also a generational perception that young people lack sufficient experience to contribute to serious discussions on peace, security and governance. This can result in youth voices being treated as symbolic rather than substantive. In addition many youth organisations lack sustainable resources and institutional support, making it difficult to transform ideas into long-term programmes.

To overcome these barriers, governments and partners should establish formal and measurable mechanisms for youth participation. Youth should be represented not only in consultations but also in committees, policy-development processes, monitoring structures and decision-making spaces. Funding should be made available directly to credible youth-led initiatives, particularly at community and grassroots level.

There should also be stronger feedback and accountability mechanisms: whenever young people provide recommendations, institutions should explain which recommendations were adopted, which were not, and why. This would build trust and demonstrate that youth participation has tangible outcomes.

3. The one change I would most like governments, the United Nations and other partners to make is to move from consulting young people to sharing decision-making power with young people.

Young people should not only be invited to speak after decisions have already been designed. They should be involved from the beginning identifying problems, developing solutions, allocating resources, implementing programmes and monitoring results. Youth participation should therefore be institutionalised through youth seats and meaningful representation in peace, security, governance and development structures, with clear responsibilities and the ability to influence outcomes.

I would also like to see greater investment in locally led youth initiatives. Young people understand the challenges in their communities because they experience them directly. Given the right resources, mentorship and institutional support, they can develop practical solutions to issues such as social exclusion, unemployment, inequality, violence and community conflict.

Meaningful YPS participation should ultimately be measured not by how many young people attend a consultation, but by how many young people have influenced a decision and what changed because of their participation.

As the popular saying goes young people are not only beneficiaries of peace and development. We are stakeholders, partners and leaders in building peaceful, inclusive and resilient communities.

My name is Aliyu Khalifa Jibril, from Niger State, Nigeria. I am an educationist and youth advocate with a strong interest in education, youth development, good governance, and community development. I am passionate about creating opportunities for young people to have their voices heard and contribute meaningfully to decisions that affect their future.
 

1. Yes. In Nigeria, there are policies and programmes that encourage young people to take part in governance, peacebuilding and development. However, from my experience, young people are not always fully involved in decision-making. Sometimes they are invited to meetings, but their ideas are not always reflected in the final decisions. More support, funding and proper representation would make these policies more effective.
2. There are youth organizations, civil society groups, student associations, community groups and different youth networks that give young people opportunities to speak and participate. Social media and community dialogues also help young people raise issues that affect them. I believe the most effective ones are those where young people are not just invited to attend but are actually given a chance to contribute ideas and take part in decisions.
3. One major barrier is that young people are sometimes seen as inexperienced and are not taken seriously. Other challenges include lack of funding, limited access to decision-makers, unemployment and lack of information about available opportunities. There is also sometimes tokenism, where young people are included only to meet a requirement. To improve this, young people should be given real responsibilities, funding, training and a stronger voice in decision-making.
4. The one change I would most like to see is meaningful youth representation in decision-making. Governments, the UN and other partners should involve young people from the beginning when developing policies and programmes, not only after decisions have already been made. Young people should have a seat at the table and their contributions should lead to real action.

I would like to extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and its partners for providing this important space for dialogue and participation, and for the significant efforts being made to advance the Youth, Peace and Security (YPS) agenda. I greatly value the opportunity for young people, researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to exchange perspectives, ideas, and experiences on how to translate this agenda into more effective and impactful policies and practices.

Building on my interest in Youth, Peace and Security, and the role of media and diplomacy in promoting dialogue and mutual understanding among communities, I firmly believe that young people should not be viewed merely as beneficiaries of peace policies, but rather as essential partners in peacebuilding, safeguarding the stability of societies, and shaping a safer and more sustainable future.

At a time when the world is facing increasingly complex challenges—including conflicts, humanitarian crises, social polarization, hate speech, digital misinformation, and the rapid transformations brought about by artificial intelligence—empowering young people and strengthening their meaningful participation across different sectors, particularly in dialogue, decision-making, and policy development, has become a necessity rather than an option.

In my view, investing in young people and strengthening their capacities is one of the key foundations for conflict prevention and resilient societies. When young people are given genuine spaces to express themselves, participate, and assume responsibility, they become better equipped to understand the complexities of the realities around them, appreciate the magnitude of the challenges facing their communities, and contribute responsibly to peaceful and sustainable solutions.

Youth empowerment should also go beyond simply providing opportunities. It should be accompanied by awareness-building, leadership development, dialogue and negotiation skills, critical thinking, social responsibility, and the ability to navigate the digital and media environment responsibly. An informed and responsible young person can move from being a recipient of challenges to an active contributor to addressing them, and from being affected by crises to becoming a partner in preventing conflict and building peace.

From this perspective, I believe that Youth, Peace and Security policies and National Action Plans should include clear and measurable mechanisms to ensure genuine and sustainable youth participation. This requires moving beyond simply involving young people in events and consultations toward meaningful engagement in policy design, implementation, monitoring, and impact assessment.

I also believe that media, cultural diplomacy, and intercultural dialogue can play a pivotal role in this process by building bridges of communication, countering stereotypes and hate speech, promoting a culture of diversity and mutual understanding, and creating spaces for young people to express their perspectives and contribute to shaping positive narratives around peace and coexistence.

In my view, building a generation of young people who are aware, capable, responsible, and open to dialogue represents one of the most important long-term investments in the security and stability of societies. Sustainable peace is not built solely by addressing conflicts after they occur; it begins with empowering people, strengthening their awareness, and providing them with the trust, space, and tools they need to become genuine partners in shaping their own future and the future of their communities.

I look forward to this consultation contributing to practical approaches that can strengthen the implementation of the Youth, Peace and Security agenda and help translate international commitments into tangible and sustainable outcomes that create meaningful impact for young people and their communities.

Mais Reda
ICESCO Peace Ambassador
Leadership for Security and Peace Programme

My name is Yeldana, and I am from Kazakhstan. 

Question 3: Barriers to meaningful youth participation in peace and security

I think that one of the barriers could be:

1) Young people are not engaged enough in discussions and opportunities. Especially, youth from the regions do not have enough information about opportunities connected with participating in peace and security processes.

I think that in order to overcome this barrier, we should increase young people’s interest, provide more attention to youth from the regions, and not focus only on youth from the main cities.

2) Another issue could be connected with real actions. I think many young people need a community where they can implement their projects, but also where they can have a real impact and contribute to finding solutions.

I think that in order to solve this issue, we need to pay more attention to youth, support them more, and give them opportunities to make a real impact.

My name is Saikat Panda. As a social impact leader, founder, and researcher working at the intersection of philanthropy, civic tech, and grassroots empowerment across 15+ countries, I’ve seen firsthand that sustainable peace cannot be engineered from the top down. It requires real capital, decision-making power, and institutional infrastructure in the hands of the local actors doing the work daily.

While frameworks like UNSCR 2250 have opened important doors for youth dialogue, their real-world impact is consistently undercut by two structural flaws: the absence of dedicated public budget lines and a lack of transparent feedback loops showing what happens to youth recommendations after consultations end. When paired with rigid compliance barriers that favor large INGOs, uncompensated civic labor, and persistent tokenism, young leaders are often left with a voice but no leverage or resources to act on it. Platforms that genuinely work, such as participatory grantmaking models, decentralized civic tech, and community coalitions, succeed precisely because they shift youth from passive witnesses to active decision-makers.

If governments, the UN, and partners make one fundamental change, it must be moving from consultation to co-ownership. This requires establishing dedicated, flexible multi-year funding quotas for grassroots youth groups, granting young leaders formal voting seats on peace and development boards, and publishing clear accountability matrices detailing how youth inputs translate into policy and budget allocations. When young people are resourced as co-architects rather than symbolic beneficiaries, the YPS agenda can finally deliver lasting community peace.

Hello everyone this is my point of view,

My vision of sustainable peace and security for youth is rooted in the belief that rights must be more than principles on paper. They must create real conditions for young people to live with dignity, participate meaningfully in society, and achieve economic independence. Through my studies in law and my work on youth empowerment, girls’ education, and media literacy, I seek to contribute to legal and social frameworks that address the realities young people face. For me, peace is not only the absence of conflict; it is also the presence of justice, opportunity, bodily dignity, and the economic security needed for young people to shape their own futures and their communities's

Hola a todos!! 
Mi nombre es Valeria Ramírez. Soy una chica de 15 años, en Ecuador. He visto que la mayoría de comentarios son profundos y tienen una reflexión increíble. No soy una experta en todo esto pero creo que todo tiene un inicio, por eso estoy aquí para aportar aunque sea con una simple idea e ir aprendiendo. 
Basándome en mi experiencia creo que los jóvenes somos los encargados de mantener un visión viva en el mundo, pero muchos de nosotros, incluyéndome, tenemos miedo, y nos falta valor para poder aportar a esa visión. 

Respondiendo a la pregunta 1, en mi país si hay leyes o políticas, así como en otros países, que tratan de fomentar la participación y reconocer a los jóvenes como catalizadores de paz, al crear estos acuerdos o planes pueden que sean eficaces al inicio pero con el tiempo se debilitan, y creo que en mi país estas leyes son débiles. En algunas leyes se menciona que los jóvenes obligatoriamente deben de ser parte de partidos políticos pero el problema es que muchos de ellos solo son de relleno, es decir, solo sirven para cumplir con lo que dice esa ley pero no darles la capacidad de participar. Otro inconveniente es la falta de fondos, la falta de recursos económicos que sustenten a estas políticas, porque no existe un impulsor que mantenga viva a estas leyes, no existe el dinero que ayude al desarrollo de estas y que no se queden solo en un acuerdo, en un papel.

Pregunta 2: No conozco tantas plataformas o lugares clave para fomentar la participación de los jóvenes, y ese un problema no solo mío, sino de jóvenes que también están interesados en conocer plataformas que los ayuden a poder participar más. Y ahí es donde la falta de información puede afectar a miles de nosotros. Pero por otro lado, algo que si conozco que ayuda mucho a desenvolver a los jóvenes son los modelos ONU, los MUN, que no solo son actividades de oratoria, sino que también son espacios para involucrarse más en las problemáticas globales y mejorar su liderazgo.

Pregunta 3: Considero que uno de los cambios esenciales para promover la participación de los jóvenes es dejar de confundirlos, muchos de ellos son actores de paz pero se los confunde como “vándalos”, solo por defender sus ideales, pensamos que son personas que salen a la calle a hacer daño, cuando no es así. Y de igual manera, considerar que lo que ocurre en las calles aveces  puede ser diferente a lo que dice la ley.

Y por último creo que los gobiernos y las Naciones Unidas deben trabajar por mantener una participación activa, ya sea desde foros como estos o incluso implementando una plataforma supervisada en donde los jóvenes interesados aporten con ideas o con experiencias propias, para poder analizar y buscar soluciones mas amplias. Y pienso que los jóvenes deben de actuar basándose en la verdad, y la verdad es Dios, quien nos puede brindar una guía y esa visión que debemos aportar al mundo.

Gracias por darme la oportunidad de dar mi opinión.

Hello, all. My name is Alicia, and I'm a 2nd-year university student from Canada, and I study political science. I've participated in grassroots volunteering and activism within my local community, and I've become really invested in expanding my boundaries and entering international spaces. This is my first time participating in an online international discussion forum, and I want to thank you for this opportunity. The questions answered below are #1 and #4.

1. National and local frameworks for YPS

Currently, some youth-oriented organizations in Canada allow youth to participate in peace, security and development. The Canadian Coalition for Youth, Peace, & Security is an organization dedicated to fulfilling Canada’s commitment to the YPS Agenda and supporting Canadian youth in changemaking processes. There is also Canada's Women, Peace & Security, a similar entity and a national action plan that incorporates women’s perspectives and advocacy in peace, security and development. And, supplementary programs offered to youth that are not strictly under YPS, including the UNICEF Canada Advocacy Program, provide annual training and education for youth on topics of advocacy and activism. Programs like this can strengthen young people’s skills and knowledge should they pursue YPS paths.

Unfortunately, these opportunities are not immensely effective in stimulating genuine youth participation and influence in policymaking processes. Today, we lack definitive plans and systems for implementing youth voices and perspectives. In some circumstances, it is uncertain whether youth inputs are implemented at all. Additionally, many youth-based efforts are offered only through civil society groups, organizations or sponsoring entities. This means youth participation is entirely based on associations with, and involvement in, these entities. One factor that hinders true youth participation in peace, security and development efforts is the existence of socioeconomic inequalities. Inequalities play a role in influencing which sectors of youth can participate in policymaking. Issues such as lacking easy internet access, research resources, adequate education or even leisure time can get in the way of effective participation. This is especially true if getting involved with YPS-related organizations requires stable internet access (e.g. online applications, emails). Combatting inequalities among youth can broaden the types of perspectives presented in policymaking spaces, making YPS more inclusive and improving the effectiveness of YPS action plans.

4. Changes for meaningful youth participation in peace and security

A step governments can take is institutionalizing processes of youth inclusion in decision-making systems at the federal and regional levels, and ensuring all youth across the country have fair and equal opportunities to participate. By embedding systemic mechanisms, more young people can access and contribute to engagement in governance. And, young people can rely less on whether they’re part of an NGO or civil society group to share their voice and opinions in YPS efforts. Additionally, like UNICEF’s advocacy programs, organizations could provide workshops and accessible courses that educate and train young individuals in engaging in policy discussions, both nationally and internationally. I believe accessibility and affordability is a priority goal in the path to strengthening youth engagement. Even with various youth-led organizations giving young leaders a chance to be present, many individuals selected for these opportunities come from backgrounds of extensive education, a vast professional network and plenty of applicable experience that less-privileged young people may not have access to. This is especially true for those who were born into circumstances that challenged their ability to seek further education, a safe community, and paths to build the networks necessary to enter governance. Through offering less-privileged youth a real chance to explore peace and security, doors open to being actively involved in contributions to policymaking.

Barriers to Youth Participation in Peace and Security.
My name is Hamza shehu Muhammad from Nigeria and currently based in Kaduna State, Kaduna South Local Government Area. From my experience working with young people in my community(makera) I have seen that many youths want to contribute to peace and community development, but there are still barriers that make meaningful participation difficult.
One major barrier is that young people are sometimes invited to meetings and consultations, but their ideas are not always carried into actual decisions. There is also limited access to funding, training and opportunities for youth-led initiatives. For young people from communities facing economic challenges, these barriers can make it difficult to turn good ideas into action.
In Kaduna South, I believe young people can play a stronger role in preventing conflict, promoting dialogue and building trust among people from different backgrounds. However, they need to be given the opportunity and resources to do this.
Another important issue is the role of social media. Young people are highly active online, and while social media can help promote peace and connect communities, misinformation, hate speech and rumours can also create tension. Providing young people with digital literacy and peacebuilding skills can help them become positive voices in their communities.
For me, meaningful youth participation means involving young people not only when decisions are being discussed, but also in designing solutions, implementing them and measuring their impact. Governments and organisations should create more spaces where young people can contribute their ideas and provide small grants and training to support youth-led peace initiatives.
I believe that when young people are trusted, listened to and given the right support, they can become important partners in building peaceful and resilient communities in Kaduna State and Nigeria as a whole.

Young generation is the standard Bearer of any nation .If their energy is channelized in Proper direction they can bring a great change in social, political and economic bearer of any nation .

But Unfortunately today's youth are facing some challenges in all parts of world especially in developing countries like south Asia and Africa .

As a young student from Pakistan who is well aware of challenges that are faced by students over there, I can easily raise their voice and will become a beacon of hope for them .

More than 60 percent of Pakistan are between the age of 28/30 years which is a significant amount and most of them are forced to do labour work from their child hood which prevent them from getting Higher education even middle class and those who aimed to achieve higher education they are provided with low quality of education which is not to the standard of new challenges and modern world . leadership qualities are not Inculcated in Students that prevents them from participating in social activities that result in shortage of Young minds in Politics and key decision of Country .

In order to move forward and to Present the voice of Young people to the world we have to work together.

Both Government and Private sectors should join hands for betterment of humanity and Providing Practical and skill ful education to our Youth.

Thank you for the question. I’m joining from Burundi 🇧🇮. We have frameworks such as the National Youth Policy, the National Youth, Peace and Security Strategy, and programmes supported by institutions such as UNICEF, UNFPA and PAEEJ that promote youth development, education, protection, economic empowerment and participation.
What works is that these frameworks and programmes create important opportunities and services for young people. What still needs improvement is meaningful and sustained youth participation. There remains a gap between urban and rural youth,especially girls,in access to information, education, economic opportunities and spaces where decisions are made. I also believe young people should move from being consulted or represented at events to being co-creators and active partners in policies and programmes.
As a young Burundian woman and law student, I want to be part of these spaces, contribute my ideas and experiences, and help turn policies into real opportunities for girls and youth, particularly those who are less represented. My goal is not simply to speak about change, but to participate in creating it and to make a meaningful impact as a young woman.

Hello guys I am interested by this conference in Germany but I really don't have any idea how to join it someone could help me please ? Thanks you.

Antara Islam 

Yes, there are initiatives such as the National Youth Policy, the Not Too Young To Run Act, the Nigerian Youth Parliament and youth-focused programmes supported by government and development organisations.

However, from my experience, the major challenge is the gap between having these initiatives and making them work fairly. Corruption, favouritism and political connections can affect who gets access to some of these opportunities. Sometimes, opportunities that are meant for young people generally end up reaching mainly those who already have connections or people who know someone in the system.

This can discourage other young people who are qualified but do not have the right connections. I believe youth participation should be based more on merit, openness and equal opportunity. Young people should not have to know a politician or someone in government before they can have their voices heard.

The Nigerian Youth Parliament and other youth networks are useful platforms because they create spaces for young people to engage and speak up. But for these platforms to have real influence, young people need to be involved in actual decision-making, not just invited to meetings or programmes. There should also be more transparency in how participants and beneficiaries are selected.

Hello everyone! My name is Hafiz Muhammad Hamza Baig, a Pharm.D student and youth volunteer from Lahore, Pakistan. I am joining this consultation as a young person interested in peace, community development, and youth participation because I believe young people in Pakistan have an important role to play in promoting peace, social cohesion, and positive change in their communities.

From my experience, the main barriers preventing young people from meaningfully participating in peace and security in Pakistan are:

• Limited access to decision-making platforms because young people are often consulted but are not sufficiently involved in developing or implementing policies that affect them.
• Lack of awareness and resources because many young people do not know about available opportunities, while financial and educational limitations can prevent them from participating.
• Limited coordination and representation because youth from rural, disadvantaged, and less-connected communities may have fewer opportunities to make their voices heard.

To overcome these barriers, I believe governments, the United Nations, civil society, and educational institutions should create accessible and sustained youth participation mechanisms, provide capacity-building and leadership opportunities, and ensure that young people’s recommendations are reflected in actual policies and programs.

Hi 

I ma also young Boy from Pakistan and I appreciate your point of view but I want to emphasize that just saying or writing is not enough we have to take out some Practical step if we see many young boys are doing labour work which is preventing them from getting Higher education so we have to spread awareness among people for well being of society.

My name is Francis Ephraim Arumse. I am a climate risk and sustainability professional whose work focuses on climate risk, adaptation, sustainable finance and international diplomacy. My interest is particularly in how climate risk is measured, understood and translated into decisions that affect people and communities, especially in places where environmental pressures increasingly influence livelihoods, economic stability, governance and peace.

My connection to Youth, Peace and Security has developed through my work with young people, communities and development issues rather than through a single peacebuilding role. As a Green Hope Ambassador with the Nigerian National Agricultural Land Development Authority, I have supported youth engagement around climate action, ecosystem restoration, sustainable agriculture and rural livelihoods. Through my work with the International Forum for Peace & Diplomacy, I have also researched climate resilience, peacebuilding, food security and the vulnerabilities facing smallholder farming communities.

1. National and local frameworks for youth, peace and security

Nigeria has made important progress in creating a formal framework for Youth, Peace and Security, particularly through its National Action Plan on Youth, Peace and Security. I see the existence of this framework as important because it recognises that young people should have a defined role in decisions around peace, security and development rather than being treated only as beneficiaries of government programmes.

At the African level, this is also significant. The African Union has encouraged Member States to develop and implement national action plans to domesticate the Continental Framework on Youth, Peace and Security. In November 2024, the African Union noted that Nigeria and the Democratic Republic of Congo were the only two Member States that had successfully adopted YPS National Action Plans at that point. Full link to AU communiqué 

What I find more important, however, is what happens between a national policy and the young person experiencing insecurity or economic hardship in their community.

There are encouraging signs that Nigeria is beginning to move in this direction. The United Nations reported that implementation of Nigeria’s YPS National Action Plan had reached five states in 2024, with efforts focused on youth involvement in decision-making, violence prevention and peacebuilding. Kaduna also developed a State Action Plan on YPS through consultations involving young people, with the process connected to early warning and early response efforts. UN Nigeria 2024 Annual Results Report 

UN Peacebuilding, Nigeria success story 

From my own experience, I think this movement toward state and community implementation is essential. Through my work in climate action, agriculture and rural livelihoods, I have seen that many of the pressures affecting communities are experienced locally. Young people are often among the first to experience unemployment, loss of livelihoods, environmental degradation, displacement and uncertainty about their future.

This means that a national policy can only achieve its purpose if young people at the local level understand it, can participate in its implementation and can see how it affects their lives.

I would therefore describe the effectiveness of Nigeria’s YPS framework as promising but still dependent on implementation. Having a national action plan gives us a foundation, but meaningful participation requires resources, institutional commitment, local structures and accountability.

For me, one useful measure of success would be whether a young person in a community can answer three simple questions. What does the YPS policy mean for my community? How can I participate? And what happens to my contribution after I participate?

If we can consistently answer those questions, I believe the framework will move from being a policy document to something young people can actually experience.

2. Youth civic and political engagement

I have experienced youth civic engagement through several different platforms, and one thing I have learned is that the existence of a platform does not necessarily mean that young people have meaningful influence.

These platforms are valuable because they expose young people to different perspectives and create opportunities to engage with people who influence policy. However, I think the more important question is what happens after the conversation.

There is a difference between inviting young people to speak and creating a pathway through which their contributions can influence decisions.

For example, a young person can participate in a consultation and provide recommendations, but may never know whether those recommendations were considered. A young person can attend an international youth summit and return home inspired, but without funding, institutional support or a mechanism to apply what they have learned.

I therefore believe the most effective youth platforms are those that connect participation to responsibility and decision-making. Young people should be able to contribute to identifying problems, developing solutions, implementing programmes and monitoring whether commitments are being delivered.

I also think representation needs greater attention. Youth participation can easily become concentrated among young people who already have access to universities, professional networks, technology and international opportunities. Young people in rural communities, conflict-affected areas and economically disadvantaged communities may have very different experiences but remain less visible in policy spaces.

The African Union’s Youth for Peace Africa programme provides an interesting continental example because it was established specifically to engage young people and organised youth groups as partners in promoting peace and security, rather than treating youth primarily as a source of risk. African Union Youth for Peace Africa Programme 

For me, the strongest civic platforms are therefore not necessarily the largest ones. They are the ones where young people can move from expressing an opinion to taking responsibility for what happens next.

3. Barriers to youth participation in peace and security

From my experience, one of the biggest barriers to meaningful youth participation in peace and security is the gap between being included in a conversation and having actual influence over what happens afterwards.

Young people are increasingly invited to conferences, consultations, panels and policy discussions. I have personally benefited from some of these opportunities. They are important, but participation becomes limited when young people are expected to provide ideas without being involved in implementation, monitoring or decision-making.

Another major barrier is unequal access.

A young person in an area where I have access to the internet, professional networks and international opportunities can have a very different experience from a young person living in a rural or conflict-affected community. If our participation mechanisms mainly reach those who already have access, we can unintentionally create a system where the young people most affected by insecurity are the least represented in the conversations about it.

Economic insecurity is another important barrier. It is difficult to expect sustained civic or peacebuilding participation from young people who are struggling to find employment, support their families or maintain a livelihood. From my work around climate resilience, agriculture and rural livelihoods, I have seen how environmental pressures can compound these challenges.

This is particularly relevant in northern Nigeria. Climate pressures can affect agricultural productivity and natural resources at the same time that communities are dealing with insecurity, displacement and economic hardship. UNDP’s work in Northwest Nigeria offers a useful example of how these issues can be addressed together. Its Climate-Peace Hubs have combined climate-smart livelihoods, natural resource management, local dispute-resolution mechanisms and opportunities for young people as part of conflict prevention efforts in Sokoto, Katsina and Zamfara. UNDP North West Climate-Peace Hubs 

UNDP has also documented livelihood programmes for young people in conflict-affected communities in northeast Nigeria. In Potiskum, for example, young people received vocational training and business support as part of a wider effort to strengthen social stability and recovery. UNDP Nigeria, A story of recovery and resilience

These examples reinforce something I have come to believe through my own work. Peacebuilding cannot always begin with a discussion about conflict. Sometimes it begins with whether a young person can find meaningful work, whether a farmer can maintain a livelihood, whether communities can manage shared natural resources, whether young women feel safe participating in public life and whether young people believe they have a future in their own communities.

Another barrier is the limited participation of young women and other groups whose experiences are often different from the majority. My engagements around girls and vulnerable children in northern Nigeria have made me particularly conscious of this. Creating a youth platform is not enough if some young people cannot safely access or influence that platform.

There is also a knowledge gap. Young people may not know what policies exist, which institutions are responsible for them or how they can contribute beyond attending consultations. Institutions also need to improve how they communicate with young people and how they demonstrate that youth contributions have influenced decisions.

I believe the response should therefore involve stronger local participation, better access to information, dedicated resources for youth-led initiatives and clearer mechanisms for accountability.

Most importantly, young people should be involved throughout the policy cycle. We should be able to help identify the problem, develop the response, implement it and evaluate whether it worked.

For me, meaningful participation begins when young people are no longer treated simply as people to be consulted and are recognised as partners who can share responsibility for solving the problems affecting their communities.

4. Accelerating youth leadership in peace and security

The one change I would most like governments, the United Nations and development partners to make is to move young people from consultation into shared responsibility for implementation.

I do not think the main problem is that young people have nothing to contribute. Across Nigeria and Africa, young people are already organising communities, creating businesses, working on climate action, supporting vulnerable people, participating in peacebuilding and developing solutions to problems around them.

The challenge is that these contributions are not always connected to formal decision-making structures or supported with the resources required to grow them.

I would therefore like to see every Youth, Peace and Security commitment have a clear pathway for youth participation beyond consultation. Young people should have defined roles, access to resources, opportunities to work with relevant institutions and a meaningful role in monitoring implementation.

My own experience as an SDG Governor during National Youth Service Corps in Kogi State Camp, Nigeria showed me the difference that responsibility can make. I was not simply asked to speak about the Sustainable Development Goals. I was trusted to mobilise people, coordinate an intervention, manage information and help ensure that resources reached their intended beneficiaries. That experience taught me that leadership develops when people are given responsibility and held accountable for what they do with it.

I believe the same principle can strengthen YPS.

Young people can contribute to community-level early warning, dialogue, peace education, environmental restoration, sustainable livelihoods, civic education and monitoring of government commitments. They can also bring information from their communities that may not reach national institutions through conventional channels.

This is particularly important in communities facing multiple pressures. My own work has shown me how climate risk, livelihoods and community resilience can influence wider questions of stability. UNDP’s recent work on Youth, Climate, Peace and Security similarly argues for recognising young people as actors who can contribute to climate adaptation, sustainable livelihoods and peacebuilding. UNDP, Beyond Vulnerability

I would therefore like to see governments and development partners invest in local youth leadership rather than only national youth dialogues. This could include funding youth-led initiatives, establishing clear youth representation within implementation structures, supporting young people with training and data, and creating public mechanisms through which young people can monitor progress.

The goal should not simply be to create more spaces where young people can speak.

The goal should be to create systems where young people can contribute, make decisions, take responsibility and see the results of their contribution.

For me, that is the difference between youth participation and youth leadership. Participation gives young people a voice. Leadership gives them responsibility for helping shape what happens next.

Thank you.

Question 3:

From my experience in Busuma Refugee Camp, Burundi, the main barriers are:

1. Exclusion: Refugee youth are treated as a security problem, not as peace builders. We are never invited to peace and security meetings.

2. No resources: We have ideas but no funding, land, or tools. Refugee-Led Organizations are not included in National Action Plans budgets.

3. Survival first: When youth are hungry and unemployed, it is hard to focus on peace. Conflict starts from lack of opportunity.

What needs to change: Governments and UN must fund Refugee-Led Organizations directly and give youth seats in peace committees at camp level.

Question 4:

The one change I want: Reserve 10% of YPS funding and decision-making seats for Refugee-Led Organizations in every National Action Plan.

We are on the ground every day in Busuma Camp. When you give refugee youth skills, trust, and resources through Work For Living asbl, we become the first defenders of peace. 

Example: Our solar irrigation groups reduced conflict between refugees and host community by 70% because we now work and sell together.

Question 2:

In Busuma Camp, Work For Living asbl is the main platform. We bring together refugee and host community youth for solar farming and peace dialogue.

What makes it effective: It connects peace with livelihoods. Youth are not just talking about peace, they are working together to produce food.

Hi everyone, my name is Ruth Awentirim Pechim Ane. I am an emerging Peace and Security expert/practitioner in Ghana with a focus on the women, peace and security agenda. I am the founder and led researcher of Beyond1325.org. The Youth, Peace and Security Agenda is important to me because as a youth, I have often felt that my voice is not represented in most of the youth policies developed and that they do not serve me. 

Question 1:

Ghana is currently in the process of developing it first National Action Plan on the Youth Peace and Security Agenda. They have been an online stakeholder survey to collect youth perspectives on security issues and their level of engagement with security institutions. According to the Ghana Ministry of Youth and the Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Centre (KAIPTC), a working group is currently undertaking a nationwide consultation exercise. However, information and updates on the exercise seems limited to the more "elite" categories. I have not been involved in any of these exercises and have not had any information on it. If as a recent graduate of KAIPTC, who is leading this process, I do not have any forthcoming knowledge of this, what can we say about the youth living in the rural area and have probably never heard of KAIPTC? 

Question 2: 

I know of so many youth-led organisations working in youth, peace and security who often do not even label their work as such. Civil society organisation have created many youth parliament and youth council and thus act as a liaison  between the youth and governments, carrying their concerns to and fro. Unfortunately, many times youth are put in these youth parliaments and council, speak in foras but are not included in the implementation processes. People are have long passed the youth age bracket are selected to lead such process. Additional, peace and security issues in Ghana often follow funding dynamics. So, you would see a lot of focus on PVE and inclusion in the security sector, this sometimes ignores the everyday (in)security issues youth face. 

Question 3: 

I would attribute limited youth participation largely to political marginalisation. Youth engagement is often treated as mere symbolism and tokenistic. As such, most youth have developed an apathy to state-led youth engagement. Youth are often consulted, but not included and empowered during decision-making. The state make policies regarding youth, but often do not follow through. Most government regions are not youth-friendly. Youth are mobilise and incentivised during election periods to campaign and vote, but are excluded when elections are won. Additionally, not all youth have equal access to opportunities which affect their chances at being involved in peace and security issues. 

Question 4: 

For the YPS to be fully implemented, I believe we need to start looking at equal access to opportunities for all youth. Youth should not only be relevant for consultations but be allowed to shape implementation and be involved in the implementation process. The implementation of the YPS agenda should follow a human-centred design/approach.

Question 2.

​I know of two organisation in my country which are: Amnesty Nigeria and ideal community aids Africa's.

Amnesty Nigeria, advocates for human rights, injustice through social media. Host conference for young youths who talk about how they advocate for peace and how they can push it forward through collective action.

Ideal community aids Africa, raise funds for school and educates youths on how to build their futures especially through voting. I had also benefited from there conference  on on voting as many youths in my country practice political apathy so after the conference I got my voters card which was provided by ICAA.

​​​

Greetings everyone my name is Relebohile from South Africa I am currently studying at the University of Free State. I am also part of the UN volunteer  

Question 1

In my country, South Africa there are several policies and mechanisms that helps youth participation in development, governance, peace and security. The well-known policy called National Youth Policy of 2020-2030, which aims to empower youth and facilitate their participation in building South Africa better. It also identifies the priorities like education and skills, employment and entrepreneurship, social cohesion and effective youth development institutions. There is another framework called the South African National Action Plan on Women Peace and Security of 2020-2025, which encourages participation, prevention, protection, and relief and recovery in peace and security processes. 

In my observation, these frameworks have created some meaningful opportunities for young people, especially through youth organizations like (UNASA) in universities, consultations, leadership programmes more like Gordon Institution of Business and Science leadership programme that supports High scholars to earn leadership skill and community initiatives.

However, their effectiveness can be restricted for instance youth participation is only consultative and when there is shortage of resources to turn their recommendations into actual policies or programmes, but the main factors contribute to their success incorporate government support, youth organizations, partnerships with civil society, access to education and leadership opportunities, and youth willingness to participate. Furthermore, their effectiveness can be restricted also by unemployment, lack of resources, unequal access to opportunities, political barriers and insufficient follow-through after youth consultations.

,

.

Hi everyone! My name is Muslima Abdurashidova. I'm a student at Webster University in Tashkent Uzbekistan. At 17б I have already spent years exploring how young people can create change and contribute to a more just society. I am a FLEX Program Alternate Finalist, alumnus of the UN Youth for Peace MUN 2026, UNFPA/EU Debate Tournament on Gender Equality, and been volunteering and coordinating at many local organizations focusing on charity, debates, international olympiads and others. Despite these, my heart lies in direct community action, from volunteering with children with disabilities to working as an IELTS Speaking tutor, and general English for kids.

Today, I want to present a project I am currently developing, which focuses on two things I believe should go together: giving young people opportunities to lead and making quality education more accessible to children from vulnerable backgrounds.

The idea for this project came from something I noticed in my own family. Last summer, I was leaving home early almost every morning to take part in different social initiatives. My younger siblings would often ask me to take them with me because they were genuinely excited to volunteer, help others, and be part of what I was doing. It made me realize that even though they already had access to sports and extracurricular activities, they were still looking for more opportunities to learn, create, and be involved in something meaningful. That made me think about children whose families cannot afford these kinds of opportunities at all. I started asking myself: If my siblings are so eager to participate, how many other children would want the same opportunity if they simply had access to it? That question became the starting point for this project.

1. Existing Mechanisms and Their Effectiveness In Uzbekistan, there are already several mechanisms that support young people and families who need additional support. National initiatives such as the “Youth of New Uzbekistan – 2030” strategy, as well as local structures like the Mahalla and social support systems such as the “Iron Notebook”, help identify families facing economic difficulties and connect them with available assistance. However, from my perspective, there is still an important gap. These mechanisms are effective in identifying needs and providing formal support, but they do not always create safe, community-based spaces where children can learn, connect with others, and develop new skills. This is where I believe young people can play a much greater role — not only as beneficiaries of these systems, but also as people who actively create solutions within their communities.

2. Proposed Youth-Led Solution (Our Initiative). I am developing a Youth-Led Inclusive Learning Hub - a completely free, interactive educational space for children aged 7–14 from low-income families. The initiative is designed to give children access to opportunities that are often limited by their financial circumstances, including informal learning, communication, critical thinking, creativity, and exposure to global issues. At the same time, the Hub will create opportunities for young volunteers and mentors to take an active role in their communities by designing and leading educational activities for younger children.

• Peer-to-Peer Mentorship: Driven by university students, practitioners, and passionate interns, the hub will feature interactive language clubs, digital literacy workshops, creative arts, reading encouragement sessions, and soft-skills training,  (conflict resolution, emotional intelligence, teamwork).

• Grassroots Partnership: By working directly with local Mahallas, we can build trust within the community and reach families who need support while keeping the process respectful and private.

3. Main Barriers & Needed Changes In my experience, the main barriers preventing young peacebuilders and students from realizing such initiatives are:

• Access to Direct Seed Funding: Young people have the motivation, skills, and volunteer power, but lack micro-grants to fund or support with physical spaces, equipment, and learning materials.

• Bureaucratic Distances: Youth-led initiatives can also face practical challenges, especially when it comes to finding funding, building partnerships, and connecting with international organizations such as UN agencies and embassies.

4. One Key Change Request for Governments and the UN 

If I could ask governments and international partners, including UN agencies and donors, to make one change, it would be to create simpler and more accessible funding and mentorship opportunities for youth-led community projects. Young people often have ideas that could make a real difference in their communities, but they may not have the funding, experience, or connections needed to turn those ideas into reality. Giving them small grants, guidance, and trusted spaces to develop their projects would allow young people to become active contributors to their communities rather than simply beneficiaries of existing programmes. I believe this is how peacebuilding can become something practical and visible in everyday community life.

Overall, through my experiences in gender equality debates and volunteering with children with special needs, I have come to understand that peace is not only something discussed at the international level. It also begins in our own communities - in the way we support each other, include those who are often left out, and create opportunities for young people to contribute. We do not have to wait until we graduate or become professionals to make a difference. My team already has the motivation, volunteers, and young people willing to contribute to this project. What we need now is the support to turn this idea into a real space where children from low-income families can learn, feel included, and discover their potential. I believe that giving children these opportunities is not only an investment in their future, but also a step toward stronger and more connected communities.

Hi ‘I’m Sarra

The first second in our life, the first minute, oxygen filled our tiny lungs

We cried . Some say it is the cry of life some say that we are screaming at the life we were born into, screaming, at where the fate place us where such poverty can exist, and some controversial issues can still occur. Nevertheless, we stopped crying at one point only to get into the maze of society, our families schools, and communities. They’re all forms of society where we challenge the challenges themselves ,accept that ambition is optional but can we really? Can we ignore the sense of why we existed at first place? Can we really hide the fact that youth is losing its young spark gradually? 

1-Youth is the enemy of youth 

It was never in my perspective to deny the absolute fact that we are often underestimated no matter our causes nor our voices by 

Youngsters ,those for which we fight these wars, the war of creating a better future 

This issue has only bettered our awareness

“You may give me the microphone you may give me the attention and the respect, everybody can give a reaction, but can you give an action?”

The youngsters themselves are sometimes opposing to such ideas

But can we really blame them when , e-bullying as well occurs no matter how successful you can be  .In this context ,I find the exemple of Malala Yousafzai who even though is a Noble Prize winner has gotten e-bullied . Hence, some youth may avoid volunteering .

2- difficult conditions 

Meaningfully participating in peace and security programs requires specific conditions that some might lack . There’s absolutely no doubt that a lot of regions in my country aren’t provided with electricity.

Apart from the necessities in which this energy contributes in , a lot of participants won’t be able to attend some online meetings ,nor have enough money to meet in the in-person ones which require often either traveling or getting transported to the capital as an illustration, which wouldn’t be quite helpful for the southerners 

There is nothing more honorable than participation in charitable platforms .Yet this honor unfortunately doesn’t cover the expense that comes with it

1- not enough confidence 

We may never forget the mental challenges. Youngster face, difficulty of not believing in themselves.Therefore they might not even register for the fear of failure 

5-“ Accept ,don’t defy “

In hight school , in the 6th chapter of scholar law < Students are supposed to respect their teachers and supervisors and the whole teaching surroundings as whole including girls who are supposed to wear their uniform (which is a dark blouse-looking jacket that needs to be closed all the time )> Not only is the heat unbearable and dark colors are known for their hight heat-absorbency , but the gender inequality is unbelievable 

^You can be as unhappy and upset as you like about this topic but can you change it ? 

What are you going to do about it ? ^ Disbobey and revolting comes with the cost of detention and even way worse . The mentality of only living for less only because better comes with bravery and work is the actual mentality to which we need to put an end  .

 What is a desperate need of change is mostly the mentality

How many hours did you encounter success as a habitual action ? Always because you have gone so far in your own dreams that your ambition is no longer words on paper . It’s scripted in opportunities like participation in communities where you may light up someone’s spark by your idea and remember  the crucial introductory line of NASA “ Due to aerodynamic laws and its size the bee can’t fly but it flies anyway “

1-we were raised hearing the say < never judge a book by its cover > even if we have prevented such injust judgement we still judged a teen due to his /her will of change , a youngster because of his /her desire and ambition to get in a charity , one for his /her participation ,the other for his /her “unprofessional”

speeches 

When will we stop ? Is it when we really see the decline feel it crawling beneath our skin when we have no control over any change ? We have the change might as well use it starting with the simplest : 

let’s grow the seed in our brains first 

3-Music 

This art is a science itself . Proven that no major situation in life, even if everything is perfect, but you’re still listening to sad songs with my uncle Lee hidden within its lines. Sadness will haunt you though if it was the opposite and everything is corrupting while you are listening to positive songs, happiness will be your companion, and that might also be manifested into reality

This art holds power within its melodies , the power of inspiring generations and the youth , the power of awareness

4-managers in the same country

Diversity is a crucial pillar and such platforms as someone from country X might not share the same experience or at least have some similarities to the others from countryY . That’s why having a manager from the same country can improve the experience with higher understanding levels of it because you will be not only sharing the same schedule and international timing. But also. Cooperating to solve similar issues might be the strength we need.

5-books 

Books are way more than just scrambled in on papers or typed letters on screens as books of Taherah Mafi or Holly Black who enrich us with what’s happening politically behind stories so having a story with the heroes charitable work as their way of discovering the world is how to explain better the experience with the ability of turning the story into reality

Question 4 

my name is Mastewal Hailu. I am a law graduate from Ethiopia, and I am currently working as a governance intern with UNDP Ethiopia. but when I think about youth leadership in peace and security, I think about it first as a young Ethiopia who has grown up watching how conflict affects people my age.

we trust young people enough to fight wars, but not enough to make peace. whenever there's conflict young people are often the first to carry the consequences. they lose education, jobs, family members, stability and sometimes the most important years of their lives. yet when the fighting stops and decisions about peace, reconciliation and reconstruction begin, young people are often invited to listen, participate or be consulted but rarely to hold real responsibility. 

for me the deeper question is not only how to include youth in peace building, but why so many young people become vulnerable to conflict in the first place. when someone is unemployed, economically dependent, feels unheard and sees very little possibility of shaping their own future, conflict can offer what society has failed to provide. purpose, recognition and sometimes even income. that is why peace cannot be discussed separately from poverty, unemployment and hopelessness.

there is also a question of trust. in many of our communities, age is still strongly connected with authority. we have valuable traditional systems of mediation, but young people and women are often expected to respect the process rather than lead it no matter how competent they are or how deep they are affected by the decisions themselves.

what I would most like to see change is give young people real responsibility, not just representation let them mediate real disputes, sit where decisions are actually made, manage resources and help shape reconstruction in their own communities. young people should not only inherit or receive peace they should be trusted to build it.

Hi everyone, I’m Liksha from India. I’m currently one of the 50 youth-led creators selected across the Asia-Pacific for the UNFPA Asia-Pacific Young Creators Lab. I have also previously worked with The Palladium Group, an international development consultancy, as a part of its communications team.

I’ve had limited direct experience with formal youth consultation mechanisms in India. Interestingly though, having participated in the UNFPA Young Creators Lab, I’ve become more and more aware of this gap in India, that compared with some of the youth-engagement spaces I’m encountering across the Asia-Pacific, formal pathways for young Indians to understand where they can contribute to policymaking, who has the authority to act on their input, and what happens afterwards can be difficult to see or access. As far as I’m aware, India does not currently have a National Action Plan on YPS, and according to my research, RTI reporting has indicated that the National Youth Advisory Council, which is a mechanism intended to involve young people in decision-making, has actually not met in the preceding five years. And I think this suggests that the challenge may not only be making existing participation mechanisms more visible, but ensuring that the formal architecture itself remains active and consequential.

The recent Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) mobilisation in my country around NEET made me think about this in a different way // what I find particularly interesting about CJP is not only the political pressure generated, but the form of participation itself. It emerged through humour, satire, memes and informal digital organising, rather than through a youth council, formal consultation, or other government-invited mechanism. In contrast, my experience with the UNFPA Young Creators Lab has been an example of an institution deliberately creating a structured space for young people to contribute. These represent two very different forms of participation: “invited spaces”, which are created by institutions, and “invented spaces”, which are created by young people themselves. I wonder whether YPS frameworks focus too heavily on the former while underrecognising the latter. Young people do not necessarily wait to be invited into political participation; they can create their own spaces, particularly online, and these can sometimes mobilise more effectively than formal mechanisms.

For me, one of the main barriers is therefore not simply a lack of opportunities to speak, but the lack of a clear pathway between youth participation and institutional influence. If young people see that organic mobilisation produces a faster or more visible response than formal consultation, formal participation risks becoming less credible. Looking ahead, I would most like to see YPS National Action Plans explicitly recognise both invited and invented spaces of youth participation. This could include credible, rapid channels through which institutions can engage with organic youth movements when they emerge, alongside a public and trackable record of what was heard, what action followed, what was not implemented, and why. A concrete outcome of youth engagement should be measurable not simply by how many young people were consulted, but by whether their participation produced a meaningful institutional response.

Young people are always creating new spaces. The question for institutions is whether they are prepared to recognise and respond to those spaces, rather than waiting for young people to become impossible to ignore.

Dear Hannah, 

Thank you for the question. 

From Busuma Refugee Camp in Burundi, I see 3 key ways the National Youth Strategy can include rural youth and girls:

1. Take the strategy to the camps: Hold consultations and skills training inside refugee camps, not only in Bujumbura. Many rural and refugee girls cannot afford transport.

2. Use local languages and WhatsApp: Share information about the National Youth Strategy in Kirundi and via WhatsApp groups. This is how most rural youth and girls get information.

3. Fund youth-led groups directly: Allow organizations like Work For Living to access small grants from the National Youth Strategy to implement peacebuilding and agriculture projects in camps.

We have the will and the projects. We need access and funding to implement the Strategy with us.

Thank you.

Hello everyone, my name is Abubakar Danladi from Nigeria’s northeastern part, Borno State. I am highly pleased to join this platform, and excited to be able to share my contribution, even though I unfortunately am joining late.

I am also excited to see efforts made by the likes of UNDP in sampling the opinion of young people in order to develop a policy brief while considering the youths themselves as catalysts for peace.

I also commend Hannah and Antara for moderating the panel. I hope even after the closure, we could still get access to the collective responses of other members for learning and professional implementation in our areas of work.

 As a youth myself and someone who has dedicated close to a decade of career around humanitarian access and safety, conflict-reporting as a Journalist, and youth advocacy & inclusion, I think I have some points to share; 

1. In my country, especially Borno State where I am from and where the impact of the conflict was most felt, there are rigorous efforts put in place by both governments, humanitarian interventions and supports from bilateral/multilateral organisations to advocate, support, and give opportunities for young people to be involved in peace, governance and development processes. These efforts are however not evenly distributed in terms of youth participation in security.  This is largely because there are lesser awareness and sensitization efforts on the YPS Agenda compared, and no much local-led or youth-led efforts centered on the core YPS Agenda itself. This is also not unrelated to the ongoing humanitarian reset and localisation efforts that are happening globally.

2. There are many groups, organizations, networks and forums that are youth-centered and youth-led that have mandates around advocating and engaging youths on peace, governance and other similar issues. The aspect of security is however not much explored as earlier highlighted. One of the main reasons include the sensitive nature associated with the nature of the conflict. Another important point is the absence of organisations to advocate for the YPS Agenda. Currently, the shift on humanitarian interventions in my area to respond to the Humanitarian-Development-Peacebuilding (HDP) Nexus is at the Development stage. Even though some organisations are dedicating their responses on the Peacebuilding stage, they are few and have no clear action plan towards a sustainable YPS Agenda. As a personal effort, I have started a newly found organisation that aims to support humanitarian access, peacebuilding, Disaster Risk Reduction, and Youth, Peace & Security Agenda. These mandates are unique and not many NGOs are established around it, posing both the challenges of donor support and stakeholder/government acceptance.

3. Additionally, from my experience, the major barriers that I think are  preventing young people from implementation the YPS agenda in my locality include;
   • Lack of local acceptance: there are many perceptions around how NGOs with mandates around security are perceived by both authorities and communities. Allegations have been on the increase especially since the claim by the American government on terrorism financing especially with Boko Haram. That as the government explained was among the reason for scraping of USAID. Situations like these are difficult to navigate especially when questions around humanitarian principles are also asked.
   •  Humanitarian Reset and Localisation Efforts: Several global factors like the COVID-19, the war (in Ukraine, Palestine and Iran), and the stoppage of USAID funding have redirected humanitarian responses globally due to funding cuts and demands in prioritizing responses. These factors led to what is called the Localisation Efforts – allowing local actors like NGOs, CSOs, CBOs to take lead of interventions. While this has given them more opportunity, it has however not come with monopoly of decision-making and ownership. They are mostly coordinated through sectors and operate in clusters.
   • Lack of Locally-driven solutions: With the little that remains of INGOs and the many established local NGOs, most are not yet YPS-focused. Having local organisations with clear operational mandates on the YPS Agenda will challenge some of the issues around acceptance, transparency and clarity of purpose.

I think organisations like UNPD being an intergovernmental and as a developmental organisation should advocate for local solutions and as well support the resultant commitments that follows suit.

4. And lastly, with regards to the changes I and other youths would most appreciate from governments, the UN and other stakeholders to make in strengthening young people’s participation in peace and security is to create, support and encourage an environment for such participations. One example is this type of medium that sought to hear the opinions from youths through open consultations. Localising this kind of set-ups and creating other fora and medium to engage, youths and other stakeholders to establish policy documents is commendable. It shouldn’t just stop there, encouraging youths to start initiatives around it is also important. So also is the constant engagement, conversations and building the capacities of youth around the YPS Agenda is integral to a meaningful participation.

Thank you.

Hello to all my fellow youth,

My name is Ridima Sur. I am an astrophysicist and space governance researcher working at the intersection of science and the ways it shapes humanity through law and international relations. I am currently associated with multiple roles across the Space Generation Advisory Council, Common Futures Conversations at Chatham House, Universal Inclusion, and the Space Woman Alliance, to name a few.

I come from a unique background, and my exposure to peace and security grew out of necessity, because the work I care about must benefit humanity at large. I was initially comfortable focusing on the fundamentals of the universe through physics, but it did not take long to realize that the pursuit of science and knowledge is deeply political. That realization came while researching my undergraduate thesis on space debris: we, collectively as a human society in space, have created a man-made problem that could risk lives here on Earth. In simple terms, I learned that space is political. As a 19-year-old about to turn 20, who at the time excelled in math and physics, this plunge into the humanities was abrupt and uncomfortable. Now, nearly four years later, I can say I know a little more about the realities of space in the context of peace and security.

That was my story time, and it sounds like a hopeful beginning, but the more I open my eyes to the realities of space and what it means to live as a youth in this field, the more I realize the journey has not been easy or comfortable.

Space is often considered an overly complicated area of peace and security, yet the lives of youth and future generations are most at stake. Given its dual nature, many countries don't provide infrastructure to expose youth to what space is, how space capabilities are used in daily life, how space affects them each day, and why space education is, in a way, a basic necessity, not just for technology but for a shared domain all of humanity depends on. The science may be fragmented, and as that knowledge is fragmented, so too are capabilities and discussions of peace and security, far removed from youth. I often remind young people that, regardless of their expertise, the defense industry depends heavily on space capabilities, which in turn affect the realities of war and peace across nations. This is an uncomfortable truth for youth and for those already in the space sector.

Space is a heavily security-cleared area, and often most youth around the world cannot even get close to the stage where decisions are made. This reality shows how dual-use the knowledge and skills youth could develop are and how those skills can threaten the geopolitical interests of corporations and nations. While organizations like UNOOSA and UNIDIR do fantastic work pushing for peace in space and on Earth, the broader youth community cannot always access those spaces. This highlights disparities in representation: countries that actually benefit from space and the youth who can sit at important tables to do meaningful space work and contribute to peace and security. Youth from the Global South are often excluded not only from space activities but even more from discussions about peace and security in space. These disparities stem from many factors, including socioeconomic background, gender, sexuality, nationality, disability, and more. I have been studying this deeply, both the political realities of space and the lack of true inclusivity within it. What truly gives me despair is that youth are currently the ones suffering most from these gaps. I use the word “suffering” because the broader realities of humanity are directly affecting youth, even in a sector that runs on a harsh meritocracy.

Job markets are so difficult that many people across space and beyond struggle to make a living, which compounds the challenge of participating in peace and security discussions. Global conflicts unfolding in real time have affected careers and, more importantly, the safety of young people who do meaningful research and advocacy for peace and security in space. The rise of conservative movements in some regions is reducing the rights of already marginalized communities, making it harder for them to be at these tables. Depending on where youth live, the right to advocate for peace and security in space is never guaranteed; different political systems can impose orthodox rules that punish dissenting opinions, creating real safety risks. Alongside this, funding cuts worldwide to fundamental sciences and the humanities threaten youth who rely on these fields to change the world and come together for peace and security. This last point is personal to me: cuts to public space science and humanities research in national space organizations remove one of the most powerful ways the world can come together and push for collaboration that requires extensive work in peace and security. A simple example is GPS, which became a global civilian tool thanks to science, patents, knowledge sharing, and diplomacy that made it usable for peaceful purposes. It may seem ordinary today, but it is significant, and it did not happen overnight. Similar collaborative efforts underpin weather systems, climate monitoring, earth observation, and many other civilian applications we rely on today.

The point I am making is that even though space transcends borders and inspires excitement, it directly affects our daily lives and cannot exempt itself from human issues, issues that often put youth around the globe on a chopping board.

I love space and all the exciting possibilities it offers to benefit humanity, but I truly hope organizations and the world get real about what it means to bring positive change through this field and why youth deserve safety, opportunity, and security to participate in space and beyond. While I have focused on youth, peace, and security in the context of space, these issues are not confined to this sector; they exist across many fields worldwide. That gives me hope: youth everywhere, including myself, understand that we have the capacity to recognize problems and drive change, no matter how difficult it may be. We must strive for that for ourselves and for generations to come.

Thank you for the opportunity to share my voice.

Hello colleagues,

My name is Princess Juah Kollie from Liberia, a country that knows both the high cost of conflict and the transformative power of youth in sustaining peace.

As UNDP implement sampling on opinion of young people in order to develop a policy brief while considering the youths themselves as catalysts for peace, I am excited to contribute from the perspective of a young Liberian engaged with youth-led networks including the Federation of Liberian Youth (FLY) and community peace structures across our 15 counties.

With over 60% of our population under 35, and many still grappling with post-war trauma, unemployment, and the at-risk youth crisis, we see YPS not as an abstract agenda, but as a daily survival and nation-building imperative.

I am pleased to share our experiences, gaps, and recommendations to help strengthen YPS frameworks globally, and to learn from other countries.

Question 1: Assessing Progress on Youth, Peace and Security: National Frameworks and Implementation

Liberia has strong policies on paper, but real impact depends on funding and making youth co-leaders, not just participants.

On August 29, 2025, Liberia launched its first NAP-YPS 2025-2029, a $15.4M five-year plan led by the Ministry of Youth and Sports and the Ministry of Internal Affairs. It is built on five pillars: Participation, Protection, Prevention, Partnerships, and Reintegration. This is complemented by the National Youth Policy, our commitment to UNSCR 2250, 2419, 2535 and the African Youth Charter, and local mechanisms like county peace committees, youth centers, and district development councils.

This plan has changed how youth are seen — from troublemakers to peace partners — and created space for youth in peacebuilding. But at county level, many youth still don't feel the impact. We are consulted, but rarely in the room where final decisions and budgets are made.

What has helped is strong support from UNFPA, UNDP, DPPA, and leadership from youth networks like FLY. What limits us is no predictable funding at county level, low awareness in rural areas, tokenism, high youth unemployment, and low inclusion of young women and at-risk youth.

Question 2: Youth Civic and Political Engagement: Platforms, Networks and Effective Participation

Liberia has several active youth platforms, but only those with official recognition and real decision-making power give youth genuine influence.

1. Main Platforms: Federation of Liberian Youth (FLY) as the national umbrella; Liberia National Students' Union (LINSU); Liberia National Coalition on YPS; County Youth Peace Committees & Peace Huts for local conflict resolution; Regional bodies like Mano River Youth Parliament & ECOWAS Youth Council; and digital platforms like Facebook groups, community radio, and SparkBlue.

2. Which are most effective?

FLY and the YPS Coalition, because they are not just invited to talk — they are part of the structure that implements the NAP-YPS with government.

3. What makes them effective?

They are youth-led, include youth from all 15 counties, and government must listen to them formally. Other groups are good at mobilizing youth but often lack funding and follow-up, so their ideas do not become policy.

Question 3: Barriers to Youth Participation in Peace and Security: Key Challenges and Recommendations for Reform

The biggest barrier in Liberia is that youth are seen as beneficiaries to be managed, not as partners to lead — compounded by poverty, trauma, and lack of funding.

1. Main Barriers I see:

 - Tokenism & Distrust: Youth are invited to workshops but not to security and budget decision tables. Post-war stigma still labels youth as a security threat.

 - Economic Barriers: High unemployment and the at-risk youth crisis (Kush/drug abuse) means many youth struggle to survive and cannot volunteer for peace.

 - Funding Gap: NAP-YPS is $15.4M but not yet fully funded at county level. Youth-led groups like FLY run on short-term projects.

 - Exclusion: Young women, rural youth, youth with disabilities, and ex-combatant youth are often left out.

 - Information Gap: Many youth don't know about YPS resolutions 2250/2419/2535 or how to engage formally.

2. What needs to change:

 - A 30% youth quota in all peace and security structures, from community peace committees to national security councils.

 - A direct funding window for youth-led organizations under the NAP-YPS.

 - Investment in livelihoods, rehabilitation for at-risk youth, and trauma/mental health support.

 - Decentralizing YPS to all 15 counties with youth centers and information in local languages.

Question 4: Accelerating Youth Leadership in Peace and Security

The one change I want is simple — put money and power directly in the hands of youth.

Looking ahead, I ask the Government of Liberia, the UN, and partners to make one shift: Institutionalize youth co-leadership with a dedicated budget.

Do not just invite us. Make it policy that every peace and security body — from the National Peace Council to County Security Councils — has a youth co-chair (50% young women) with voting power, and allocate at least 15% of peacebuilding funds directly to youth-led groups through FLY and the YPS Coalition. When youth control resources and decisions, participation stops being symbolic and becomes sustainable peace.

My name is Matthew, and I serve as Director of Innovation at Responsible Innovation Lab. My work currently centers on responsible innovation and questions of human agency and meaningful participation, with a growing focus on youth readiness. In my broader work, I often look at how upstream design choices shape downstream outcomes. I don't work directly in YPS practice, so I am approaching these questions from an adjacent perspective (responding specifically to Questions 3 and 4).

For Question 3, one barrier I would highlight sits upstream. Some problems with youth participation may be shaped before young people ever enter the process. When institutions decide in advance what role young people will have, what they can influence, and what authority comes with the responsibilities they're given, young people may enter the process after many of the limits on their participation have already been set. Problems such as tokenism, weak influence, or responsibility without enough authority may therefore involve more than implementation alone and can also reflect choices made when the participation process was designed.

For Question 4, the change I'd prioritize is involving young people early enough to help shape the terms of their participation, rather than involving them only after the most important terms have already been set. For YPS policies and programmes, that could mean asking whether young people have a say in defining their role and the decisions they'll actually be able to influence, while also having opportunities to shape policy content or implementation. The key questions I see are what role young people are actually being asked to play, what they can genuinely influence, whether their authority matches the responsibilities they're expected to carry, and what the institution commits to in return. Young people might not need to co-design every procedural detail, but the decisions that most shape their role and influence shouldn't all be settled before they enter the process.