1 / 16

Youth, youth leisure, and youth policy

Youth, youth leisure, and youth policy. Andries van den Broek, Koen Breedveld, Jos de Haan, Frank Huysmans, & Elke Zeijl Social and Cultural Planning Office. Youth, youth leisure, and youth policy. * policy theory * facts and figures * tenability of policy claims. Sources.

priscilla-andrews
Download Presentation

Youth, youth leisure, and youth policy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Youth, youth leisure, and youth policy Andries van den Broek,Koen Breedveld,Jos de Haan,Frank Huysmans,& Elke ZeijlSocial and Cultural Planning Office

  2. Youth, youth leisure,and youth policy • * policy theory • * facts and figures • * tenability of policy claims

  3. Sources • * policy documents • Youths deserve the future (1993) • Youth policy in equilibrium (1999) • * Research among pupils

  4. Policy theory • * inter-sector youth policy presupposes a relation between leisure participation and development: without certain types of participation, chances for development are supposed to be missed • * yet cultural policy aims at culture as such, not at culture as an instrument • * not at stake here: prevention policy

  5. Policy practice • * youth policy is a rather weak player, influencing its network is its main armory • * youth policy is highly de-centralized, both to sectors and to local government • * policy targets suffer lack specification (due to weak theoretical and practical basis?)

  6. Towards measurement 1 • * social participation: • sport • culture • media • political participation and volunteering • * implicit assumption that participation in ‘own’ youth culture is devoid of positive effects

  7. Towards measurement 2 • * state of development: • cognitive (school) • emotional (emotional problems) • social (parents & peers) • physical (subjective well-being)

  8. Effects of sport * cognitive: school n.s. * emotional: problems -.07 * social: parents .05 * social: peers .05 * physical .12

  9. Effects of (canonized) culture * cognitive: school .04 * emotional: problems .06 * social: parents .06 * social: peers n.s. * physical n.s.

  10. Effects of media (reading) * cognitive: school .04 * emotional: problems n.s. * social: parents .08 * social: peers -.04 * physical n.s.

  11. Effects of volunteering * cognitive: school - * emotional: problems .03 * social: parents .04 * social: peers -.08 * physical .12

  12. Counter-test:Effects of youth culture (hanging out) * cognitive: school -.06 * emotional: problems .04 * social: parents -.09 * social: peers n.s. * physical n.s.

  13. Activities fostered * sport * amateur cultural activities * canonized cultural visits * reading * membership associations * volunteering

  14. Activities not fostered * movies, rock concerts * bars, discotheques * watching telly * computer, internet * telephoning

  15. Overall effects of fostered and non-fostered activities f. n.f. * cognitive: school .05 n.s. * emotional problems n.s. -.04 * social: parents .10 n.s. * social: peers .03 .15 * physical .08 n.s.

  16. And so: ??? • * no support for youth policy !!! • * is policy theory inadequate ??? • * are our measurements inadequate ???

More Related