3 Foreword

orseveralyearstheCouncilofEur opehasbeenr eviewingyouthpolicy indifferentEuropeancountries. In2003-2004itwillexamineNorwegian Fyouthpolicy. Thisr eporthasbeenpr eparedtopr ovideabasisf orthe CouncilofEurope’sreview. ProfessorHalvorFauskeofLillehammerUniversity CollegehasassistedtheMinistr yofChildrenandFamilyAffairsintheprepara- tionofthisreport.

ThisreportonyouthpolicyislargelybasedonareporttotheNorwegianpar- liament, Reporttotheontheconditionsinwhichchildrenandyoung peopleg rowupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001- 2002)). Itisthefirstcomprehensivereportonchildandyouthpolicythathas beenpublishedinNorw ayandwillpr ovidethebasisf orpolicyinthey ears ahead.TheReporttotheStor tingwassubmittedb ytheMinistr yofChildr en andFamilyAffairsinspr ing2002andw asendorsedbytheStor tinginspr ing 2003.

MinistryofChildrenandFamilyAffairs, October2003

5 Contents

Foreword................................................................ 3

1 Norwegianyouthpolicy ........................................... 9 1.1 Thegoalsofyouthpolicy ............................................ 9 1.2 Abriefhistoricaloutlineofyouthpolicy ................................ 10

2 Theorganizationofyouthpolicy ................................... 15 2.1 Centralgovernmentlevel............................................. 15 2.2 Countylevel ....................................................... 17 2.3 Municipallevel..................................................... 18

3 Livingconditionsandtheenvironmentin whichyoungpeoplegrowup–maintrends 15 3.1 Changesintheconditionsinwhichyoungpeoplegrowup ................. 21 3.2 Thedemographicsituation ........................................... 21 3.3 Theconditionsinwhichchildrenandyoungpeoplegrowupinchange ....... 22 3.3.1 Newperspectivesonchildrenandyoungpeople.......................... 22 3.3.2 Changesinfamilystructures .......................................... 23 3.3.3 Partnershipsandsexuality ............................................ 24 3.3.4 Materialandsocialconditions ......................................... 25 3.3.5 Healthandlifestyle ................................................. 26 3.3.6 Childrenandyoungpeoplewithdisabilities.............................. 26 3.3.7 Identity........................................................... 27 3.3.8 Politicsandsocialissues ............................................. 27 3.3.9 Culturalchanges.................................................... 28 3.3.10 Theknowledgesociety .............................................. 29 3.3.11 Towardsgreatergenderequality ....................................... 29 3.3.12 Consumptionandcommercialization ................................... 30 3.3.13 Mediaandcommunications........................................... 32 3.3.14 Globalization ...................................................... 32

4 Areasofyouthpolicy .............................................. 33 4.1 Theinterestsandparticipationofyoungpeopleinpublicplanning ........... 33 4.1.1 Arrangementstosafeguardtheinterestsofchildrenandyoungpeopleinthe planningprocess ................................................... 34 4.1.2 Theparticipationofchildrenandyoungpeopleinlocalplanningprocesses .... 34 6 4.2 Schoolsandeducation .............................................. 35 4.2.1 Thepurposeofeducation ........................................... 35 4.2.2 Thecurrentstructureofprimary, lowersecondaryanduppersecondaryeducation 35 4.2.3 Adaptededucationandspecialeducation ............................... 36 4.2.4 TheFollow-upService .............................................. 36 4.2.5 Userparticipationinschools–parentalparticipationandpupildemocracy .... 37 4.3 Healthandsocialconditions ......................................... 38 4.3.1 Health-promotingandpreventiveactivities .............................. 38 4.3.2 Undesiredpregnancyandabortion .................................... 39 4.3.3 HIVandsexuallytransmissibleinfections ............................... 40 4.3.4 Injuriesresultingfromaccidentsandviolence ........................... 40 4.3.5 Suicideamongchildrenandyoungpeople .............................. 41 4.3.6 Smoking ......................................................... 42 4.3.7 Mentalhealth ..................................................... 42 4.3.8 Eatingdisorders ................................................... 43 4.4 Thechildandyouthwelfareservice ................................... 43 4.5 Workandunemployment............................................ 45 4.5.1 Youngpeople’scontactwiththelabourmarket .......................... 45 4.5.2 Theworkingenvironmentforyoungemployees.......................... 46 4.5.3 Unemploymentamongyoungpeople .................................. 46 4.5.4 Younglong-termunemployedrecipientsofwelfarebenefits ................ 48 4.5.5 Thesituationforyoungpeoplefromethnicminoritybackgrounds ........... 49 4.5.6 Youngpeoplewithdisabilitiesandotherspecialneeds .................... 50 4.5.7 Focusonyouthunemployment ....................................... 50 4.6 Youngpeopleandhousing ........................................... 51 4.6.1 Wheredoyoungpeoplelive?......................................... 51 4.6.2 Thesituationofyoungpeopleonthehousingmarket ..................... 51 4.7 Cultureandthemedia .............................................. 52 4.7.1 Voluntarychildandyouthorganizations ................................ 52 4.7.2 Sportsandphysicalactivity .......................................... 54 4.7.3 Outdoorrecreation................................................. 55 4.7.4 Artisticandculturalactivities ......................................... 56 4.7.5 Schoolsofmusicandthearts......................................... 56 4.7.6 Libraries ......................................................... 56 4.7.7 Museums......................................................... 57 4.7.8 Pictorialart ....................................................... 57 4.7.9 Theatre .......................................................... 57 4.7.10 Music............................................................ 58 4.7.11 Themediaandcommunication ....................................... 58

5 Safe,inclusivelocalcommunities .................................. 61 5.1 Introduction ...................................................... 61 5.2 Meetingplacesandyouthpremises .................................... 61 5.2.1 Youthpremises .................................................... 61 5.2.2 Sportsandlocalfacilities ............................................ 64 5.3 Youngpeople, drugsandalcohol ...................................... 65 5.3.1 Youngpeople’suseofdrugsandalcohol................................ 65 5.3.2 Challengesandfuturemeasurestocombatdrugandalcoholabuse........... 67 5.4 Youthcrime ...................................................... 68 5.4.1 Childandyouthcrimeinfigures ...................................... 69 5.4.2 Measuresandchallengesineffortstocombatchildandyouthcrime.......... 69 5.5 Racismanddiscrimination ........................................... 72 5.5.1 Nationalistyouthgroups ............................................ 74 7 6 Localchallenges .................................................. 77 6.1 Focusonyoungpeopleinruralandurbancommunities .................... 77 6.2 Migrationandsettlementpatterns...................................... 78 6.3 Youthmigrationandsettlement ....................................... 78 6.4 Focusontargetingyoungpeopleinruralareas ........................... 80 6.4.1 Centralgovernmentefforts ........................................... 80 6.4.2 Countyandmunicipaleffortsforyoungpeople ........................... 81 6.4.3 Providingfavourableconditionsforyouthsettlementinruralareas ........... 82 6.5 Effortstargetingyoungpeopleinmajorurbancommunities ................. 83 6.5.1 Livingconditionsandchildhoodenvironments ........................... 84 6.5.2 Focusonyoungpeopleinmajorurbancommunities....................... 87 6.5.3 Sportsinurbancommunities.......................................... 88

7 Youngpeople’sparticipationandinfluence .......................... 91 7.1 Participationandinfluenceatdifferentlevels............................. 91 7.2 Frameworksandopportunitiesforparticipationandinfluence ............... 92 7.3 Participationandinfluenceatcentralgovernmentlevel .................... 93 7.4 Participationandinfluenceatmunicipalandcountylevel................... 94 7.5 Theparticipationandinfluenceofchildrenandyoungpeoplein municipaldecision-makingprocesses................................... 95 7.6 Voterparticipationandpoliticalengagement ............................. 97 7.7 Areasoffocusandfutureefforts ....................................... 99

8 Internationalcontactandcooperationintheyouthsector ............. 101 8.1 Increasedtransnationalengagement .................................... 101 8.2 Internationalcooperation-undervoluntaryandofficialauspices ............. 102 8.3 CooperationinNordicandinternationalforums .......................... 103

9 Futurechallenges ................................................. 107 9.1 Youth ............................................................ 107 9.2 Youthpolicychallenges.............................................. 109

Appendix: Useofleisuretime, problembehaviour, andaspirationsforthefuture amongNorwegianyouth, byElisabetE. StorvollandGeirMoshuus, NOVA, NorwegianSocialResearch 8 9

1Norwegianyouthpolicy

1.1Thegoalsofyouthpolicy heo verarchingg oalofy outhpolicyinNorw ayistopr ovidesecur e livingconditionsandasaf een vironmentf orc hildrenandy oung T peopleasthe ygrowup. Thisgoalhasbeenstatedinimpor tantpoliti- caldocumentsinrecentyears.

In2002theGo vernmentsubmittedtwowhitepapersonyoungpeople. They wereReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandy oung peoplegrowupandlivein(ReportNo.39totheStorting(2001-2002)) andReportNo.40totheStorting(2001-2002)onchildandyouthwelfare.Both thesereportsweredebatedintheStor tinginspr ing2003. Thereportsarea follow-uptotheresolutionspassedbytheStortingwhenReportNo. 17tothe Storting(1999-2000)Planofactiontocombatc hildandy outhcr imeand ReportNo.50totheStorting(1998-1999)relatingtothedistributionofincome andlivingconditionsinNorw ayw eredebatedin2000. Atthattime, the StortingpassedaresolutiontorequesttheGovernmenttosubmitaRepor tto theStortingonacoherentpolicyforchildrenandyoungpeopleandonthedis- tributionoflivingstandardsamongchildrenandyoungpeople.

Inthea bovedocuments, theGovernmentformulatesthemainpr inciplesof youthpolicy. Itemphasizesthaty outhpolicym ustbebasedonthesame principlesasshouldapplytoNorwegiansocietyingeneral.Thereisparticular emphasisonprinciplessuchas:

•respectforhumandignity •equality •solidaritywithvulnerablemembersofsociety •appreciationofpersonalresponsibilityandco-responsibility forthecommunity •thefreedomoftheindividual •thefamilyasacommunitythatprovidessecurity, values andlearning •tolerance, respectfordiversityanddifference •freedomofchoice •freedomofexpression 10 Theseprinciples, whichmustbefundamentalf orpolicying eneral, mustalso providethebasisforyouthpolicy.

InRepor ttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hc hildrenandy oung peopleg rowupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001- 2002)), theGo vernmentemphasizesthattheg oalofy outhpolicyisto promote:

•agood, safeenvironmentforchildrenandyoungpeoplegrowingup, with roomfordiversity •anactivefamilypolicy •possibilitiesforindependenceandpersonaldevelopment •co-responsibilityforandinfluenceontheindividual’sownlife andinsociety •solidarity, responsibilityandrespectforothers

Asmaybeseenfr omthea bove, youngpeoplem ustbeg ivenasecur eenvi- ronmentandbeencouragedtobeindependentandpar ticipate.Youngpeople mustbeg iventheoppor tunitytotak eresponsibilityfortheiro wnlivesand showsolidaritywithother s.Thereportpavesthewayforbroad-basedefforts toimpr ovetheen vironmentinwhic hc hildrenandy oungpeopleg rowup throughinter actionbetw eenpub licauthor itiesandc hildren, youngpeople, parentsandvoluntaryorganizations.

Inspring2003, theGovernmentsubmittedaRepor ttotheStor tingonfamily policyinwhichconsiderationforthechildwasoneofthemainper spectives.

1.2Abriefhistoricaloutlineofyouthpolicy Whenyouthbecameasepar atephaseoflif eandyoungpeopleweredefined asasepar atecateg oryinsociety , thisledtothede velopmentofasepar ate youthpolicy. NorwaydidnothaveayouthpolicyuntilafterWorldWarII.This is, ofcourse, associatedwiththefactthat, asaresultofchangesinsocialinsti- tutions, suchaseducationandthela bourmarket, youngpeoplewereseenas beingseparatefromadultsociety. Oneofthemaintr endsisthatfeweryoung peoplear eemplo yedandanincr easingn umberofy oungpeoplepur suea highereducationafterprimary, lowersecondaryanduppersecondaryschool. Youngpeoplehavethusacquiredtheirownarenasandalifesituationdistinct fromchildhoodandadulthood.

Althoughtheprincipleofcomprehensiveeducationwaslaiddownatanearly stageinthe Actsr elatingtothepr imarysc hool(f olkeskole)(g rades1-5)of 1889, manyy earspassedbef oreacompr ehensiveeducationalsystemw as establishedfortheperiodaftersevenyearsofcompulsor yschooling.Trialsof 9-yeareducationbeganinthe1950s, andin1969theStor tingadoptedareso- lutiontoincreasetheperiodofcompulsoryeducationfrom7to9years.Atthe sametime, theterm"folkeskole"wasreplacedby"grunnskole"(“basiceduca - tion”, i.e. primaryandlo wersecondar ysc hool). Underthis Act, municipal authoritiesw erer equiredtointr oduce9y earsofcompulsor yeducationb y 1975. In1997, theperiodofcompulsoryprimaryandlowersecondaryeduca- tionwasincreasedto10y earsandchildrenstartedschooloneyearearlier, at theageofsix. 11 Inparallelwithther eformofpr imaryandlo wersecondar yeducation, work wasalsoinprogresstoreformuppersecondaryeducation.Vocationalschools andacademicuppersecondaryschools(gymnas)wereamalgamatedunderthe Actrelatingtouppersecondar yeducation, whichwasadoptedin1974and enteredintoforcetwoyearslater. In1994, acomprehensivereformofupper secondaryeducationtookplacewher ebyally oungpeoplew ereg iventhe righttouppersecondaryeducation.Italsobecamepossibletoqualifyforhigh- ereducationatcollegesanduniversitiesaftercompletingvocationaleducation atuppersecondaryschool.

Thehighestlevelsoftheeducationalsystemw erealsosignificantlyexpanded inthepost-warperiod.Newuniversitiesandregionalcollegeswereestablished andsomestud ypr ogrammesw ereupg radedtocolleg epr ogrammes. These changesprovidedpossibilitiesforasharpr iseinthen umberofstudents, and in200128percentof20-24year-oldswerestudyingatuniversitiesorcolleges.

Intheper iodafter WorldWarIIitw aseasyf oryoungpeopletof indwork. Duringtheyearsimmediatelyafterthewar, theemploymentraterosesharply. Therewasashortageofmanpower, particularlyyoungmanpower.Thelabour shortagewasexacerbatedbywomenmarryingatanearlierageandanincrease inthen umberofpeopleg ettingmarried.Thelabourmarketsituationcontin - uedtobef avourablef ory oungpeopleinthe1960s. Thelar gen umbersof youngpeoplewhog raduallyenter edthela bourmar ketr eplacedthelar ge numbersofolderpeoplewhor etired. Moreover, theeconomygrewstrongly andtherewasgreatdemandf orla bour. Thestrongeconomicg rowthofthe post-warerasloweddownin1973andsincethenthegrowthratehasbeensig- nificantlylowerthaninthe1950sand1960s. Parallelwiththiseconomicslow- down, unemploymentamongy oungpeopleenter edthepoliticala gendaasa specialproblem.Inthemid-1980sandearly1990s,theunemploymentratewas high. Inadditiontotheeconomicsituation,thedemographicsituationalsohad acertainimpactonthela bourmarket.Thebaby-boomersbornattheendof the1960swerefacedwithasituationwheretheyweretoreplacesmallernum- bersofpensioner s.Thelabourmarkethadchangedaswell.Thejobsthathad previouslyprovidedastartingpointforyoungpeoplehaddisappeared, which ledtog rowingunemplo ymentinthey oungera geg roup. Fromthe1980s onwards, educationandtr ainingprogrammesbecameimpor tantmeasuresto combatunemploymentamongyoungpeople.Asaresultofthelargenumbers ofyoungpeopleembarkingonuppersecondar yandhighereducation, youth unemploymenthasbeenrelativelylow.

Inthepost-warperiod, leisuretimealsobecameamatterofpoliticalinter est. Inthew akeofindustr ialization, thela bourmo vementhadf oughtf orand achievedanormalworkingdayandfixedleisuretime.Leisuretimewasintend- edtoprovideopportunitiesforrecreationandde velopment, andtheauthor i- tiesputholidaysandleisuretimeintoasocialconte xtatanearlystage. Itwas notonlyamatterofthewell-beingofindividuals, butalsoofpublichealthand productivity. Atthesametime, theauthor itiesfearedthatmor eleisur etime wouldleadtoidlenessandproblems, forindividualsandforsociety. Manypeo- plewereparticularlyconcernedabouttheleisuretimeofyoungpeople.When allthepoliticalpar tiespresentedajointprogrammein1945, leisuretimewas describedas“theleisureproblem”.Theprogrammegavenoticethattheleisure problemwouldbethesubjectofathor oughpoliticalprocessaimedatgiving youngpeoplepossibilitiesforhealthyrecreation. 12 In1946theStor tingesta blishedtheNationalOf ficeforSpor t. In1950, this officew asg ivenr esponsibilityf ory outhpolicyandr enamedtheNational OfficeforYouthandSport, apartoftheMinistr yofChurchandEducation. An importantpartofitsworkwasinthebeg inningrelatedtophysicaleducation andpr eventivehealthmeasur es. Therew asstr ongf ocusonthepr eventive aspectofleisurepolicyatthebeginningofthe1960s. From1951onwards, the NationalOfficeforYouthandSpor tinvitednon-governmentalchildren’sand youthor ganizationstotw oy outhconf erenceseac hy eartodiscussy outh policyissuesandcooper ationbetw eenthepub licandpr ivatesector s. The ministerialdepartmentsthathavesincebeenresponsibleforyouthpolicyhave continuedtoar rangenationaly outhconferences. UntiltheNorw egianYouth Councilwasestablishedin1980,thenationalyouthconferenceswerethemost importantplatformforcooperationbetweennon-governmentalorganizations andthedesignersofnationalyouthpolicy.

TheGovernmentestablishedtheStateYouthCouncilin1953toactasanadvi- sorybodyony outhpolicyissues. Non-governmentalorganizationselecteda majorityofitsmembersattheStateYouthConference.TheStateYouthCouncil wasdisbandedin1986.

AcommitteeappointedbytheGovernmenttostudyofficialsupportforyouth organizationssubmitteditsrecommendationin1960andconcludedthatnon- governmentalorganizationsmustbethecornerstoneofyouthpolicy.However, theCommitteepr oposedthatpub licleisureser vicesshouldbepr ovidedfor “unorganizedyouth”.Theseservicesshouldbeprovidedasanexceptiontothe mainpolicyline. Thepurposeofthesem unicipalyouthprogrammeswould alsobetoper suadey oungpeopletojoinv oluntaryor ganizations. The Committee’sreportwasfollowedupb ypoliticalr esolutionsthatlar gelycon- formedtother ecommendations. Consequently, youthpolicyw asformulated alongtw olines: publicleisur eactivitiesw ouldbepr ovidedf orthosewho neededthem,whilevoluntaryorganizationswouldreceivefundingsothatthey couldprovideservicesforthemajorityofyoungpeople.

Inthe1970s, officialin volvementiny outhpolicybecamemor edir ect. Politiciansagreedthatleisur eactivitiesm usttargettheentir eyoungpopula- tion. Measureswouldbebasedontheneedsofy oungpeople.TheCommittee alsopointedoutthatpreventionwascomplicatedandshouldnotbetheobjec- tiveofleisureactivities,eveniftheymighthavecertainpreventiveeffects. One topicthatbecameimpor tantiny outhpolicyconcer nedthepossib leconse- quencesofcommercialleisureactivitiesforyoungpeople.Anofficialreporton youthpolicypub lishedattheendofthe1970semphasizedthedang ersof commercialforcesbeingpermittedtofillan“opinionandidentityvacuum” in thelivesofyoungpeople.Thisviewwassubsequentlypromotedbytheparlia- mentaryStandingCommitteeonEducationandChurchAffairs, whichstressed howimportantitwastosupportalternativestospeculativeformsofcommer- cialism. Onemeasurewithac learlypreventiveperspectivewasyouthclubs. Thefirstyouthclubwasestablishedininthe1950s, andfromtheendof the1960sanincr easingnumberofm unicipalitiesestablishedclubsforboth youngerandolderchildren.

Inthe1980s, therewasonceagainstrongerfocusonthepreventivepotential ofnon-g overnmentalor ganizations. Therew aspar ticularemphasisonthe environment-formingqualitiesoforganizationsinareaswheretiestothelocal 13 communitywereweak.Therewasstressontheabilityoforganizationstopar- tiallyr eplacethelac kofneighbour s, friendsandotherlocalties. Whenthe Conservativegovernmenttooko verin1981, itindicatedacer tainamountof oppositiontostrongofficialinvolvementinleisurepolicy. Itemphasizedthatit isprimarilytheresponsibilityoftheindividualtodecideho wtospendhisor herleisuretime. InanappendixtotheRepor ttotheStor tingonYouthPolicy thattheSocial-Democr aticgovernmenthadsubmittedbef oreitr esigned, the newGo vernmentstatedthatcentr alg overnmentshouldr espectindividual freedomofchoice.Totheextentpublicauthoritieswouldprovidesupport, it mustbeaimedatfacilitatingdevelopmentandactivity. Eventhoughtherewas acer tainamountofpoliticaldisa greementony outhpolicy, publicser vices havebeensubstantiallyexpandedinthepast20-30y ears.Thecentralgovern- menthaspr ovidedfinancialsupportforav arietyofmeasur es, suchasm usic schools.Since1998,allmunicipalitieshavebeenrequiredtoprovideschoolsof musicandthearts.

Oneimpor tantg oalofy outhpolicyistostr engthenthein volvementand participationofy oungpeople. Thesocio-politicaljustif icationforsuchmeas- ureshaschangedsomewhatsincethe1970s. Today, preventionisintendedto bearesultofmeasures, sinceintegrationandqualificationmakeyoungpeople competentmembersofsociety.Themaingoalsofyouthpolicyare, therefore, tohelpensurethattheresourcesrepresentedbyyoungpeoplearefocusedon andutilizedinimpor tantareasofsociety, andthatthepar ticipationandinf lu- enceofy oungpeoplear epromoted. Themostimpor tantgroundsforyouth policyarepresentedasqualifyingthemtopar ticipateinsociety, inthewidest sense. Participationisakeywordinthisrespect.Theculturalandleisureactiv- itiesofy oungpeoplear eregardedasbeingbothapar tofsuc hqualification andanopportunityforexperienceandrecreation. Intheleisurearea, theterm qualificationmeansatleastasm uchtheacquisitionofqualitiessuc hasinitia- tive, self-managementandself-contr olastheacquisitionofkno wledgeand skills. InReportNo. 48totheStorting(2002-2003)Culturalpolicyupto2014, whichw assubmittedb ytheGo vernmentinautumn2003, theter mdig ital competenceisusedtodescr ibethea bilityofc hildrenandy oungpeopleto makeuseofne wmedia. Thereportpointsoutthatitisimpor tanttodevelop suchcompetencesothaty oungpeoplear ea bletoutilizene weducational services, andinordertopreventtheemergenceofnewsocialdividinglines. 14 15

2Theorganizationofyouthpolicy

heNorw egiansystemofg overnmenthasthr eeadministr ativele vels: central, countyandm unicipal. Ther elationshipbetw eencentr aland T localgovernmenthasdevelopedinthedirectionofgreaterdecentral- izationofr esponsibility, atransitiontonon-ear markedfinancingandar educ- tionindetailedrequirementsregardingtheorganizationofactivities.Today, the municipalsectorhasag reatdealoffr eedomtoor ganizem unicipaladmini - strationandpr ioritizeitsuseofr esourcesonthebasisoflocalneedsand conditions.

2.1Centralgovernmentlevel Atcentralgovernmentlevel, responsibilitiesinthec hildandyouthsectorare primarilyr elatedtothef ormulationofpolicy , legislation, financialtr ansfers, allocationsforresearch, humanresourcedevelopmentandde velopment, and informationandadvisoryservices.

AseparateMinistryofChildr enandFamilyAffairswasestablishedin1991to coordinatetheGovernment’seffortsonbehalfofc hildrenandyoungpeople. Responsibilityforchildandyouthpolicywastherebyconcentratedinasingle ministryforthefirsttime.AlthoughtheMinistryofChildrenandFamilyAffairs hasthemainr esponsibilityf orcoor dinatingcentr alg overnmentc hildand youthactivities, alltheministrieshaveimportantresponsibilitieswhichaffect childrenandyoungpeople, directlyorindirectly.

Inter-ministerialcooper ationinthisar eahasincr easedinr ecenty earsasa resultofcooper ationonplansofaction, researchandde velopment, infor- mationandconf erences. Inautumn1997, aspecialCommitteeofState SecretariesonChildand YouthIssuesw asesta blished. TheCommitteeis chairedbytheStateSecretaryfromtheMinistryofChildrenandFamilyAffairs anditsmember scompr iser epresentativesfr omr elevantministr iesandthe officeofthePr imeMinister.Themattersitdealswithar ewide-rangingsince, inpr inciple, theCommitteecandealwithan yissuesthatconcer ntheen vi- ronmentinwhichchildrenandyoungpeoplegrowup.

Ineffortstoimplementacoher entpolicyforchildrenandyoungpeople, the centralgovernmentauthoritieshavecontactswithr egionalandlocalauthor i- 16 tiesw orkingonc hildandy outhissuesthr oughconf erencesandmeetings, cooperationonhumanresourcedevelopment, researchanddevelopment, and theexchangeofinformationanddialogue.InReporttotheStortingonthecon- ditionsinwhic hc hildrenandy oungpeopleg rowupandliv einNorw ay (ReportNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)), itispointedoutthatsuc hcoop- erationmustbefurtherdeveloped.Amongotherthings,from2003onwardsthe MinistryofChildr enandF amily Affairswillelecta “Children’sand Young People’sMunicipalityoftheYear”.Thiswillbeamunicipalitythathasdonepar- ticularlygoodworktoimprovethelocalen vironmentforchildrenandyoung people. Oneofthecr iteriaisthatthem unicipalityhasfocusedongoodlocal interaction, betweendifferentagenciesandser vicesandbetw eenthepub lic andprivatesectors. Therewillbeemphasisonm unicipalities’ effortstog ive childrenandyoungpeopleinfluenceatthelocallevel. Inconnectionwiththe announcementoftheChildren’sandYoungPeople’sMunicipalityoftheYear, a regularannualconferenceonchildandyouthpolicyforthemunicipalsector willbear ranged, targetingpoliticians, municipalemplo yeesandr epresenta- tivesofc hildren’sandy outhgroups. Oneimportantgoalwillbetohighlight localcooperationandinteractiontoimprovetheenvironmentforchildrenand youngpeople. Inadditiontother egularannualconference, dialoguewiththe municipalsectorwillbeensur edthr oughotherconf erences, seminarsand meetingsonchildandyouthpolicy,targetingprofessionals,politicians,parents, non-governmentalorganizationsandchildren’sandyouthgroups.

Contactsbetw eencentr alandlocalauthor itiesalsoinc ludecentr alg overn- mentfundingforlocalr esearchandde velopmentprojects. Knowledgeabout localactivitiesistherebyacquiredthatcanbeusedinthefurtherdevelopment ofcentr alg overnmentc hildandy outhpolicy. Inthisw ay, centralandlocal authoritiescooperateonthedesignofyouthpolicy.

Ombudsmen ThreeOmbudsmenareresponsibleformattersrelevanttochildrenandyoung people. TheOmbudsmanf orChildr en, theConsumerOmbudsmanandthe GenderEqualityOmbudar eautonomousbodiesthatar eeachresponsiblefor theirownprofessionalareas.Norwaywasthefirstcountryintheworldtohave aspecialOmbudsmanf orChildr enandtheof ficew asesta blishedin1981. Pursuanttothe ActrelatingtotheOmbudsmanf orChildrenof5December 1981andassociatedinstr uctions, theOmbudsmanf orChildr enw asg iven broadresponsibilityforpromotingtheinter estsandr ightsofc hildreninall areasofsociety.TheOmbudsmanfocusesonareasthatareparticularlyimpor- tantforchildrengrowingup.TheActalsorequirestheOmbudsmantoensur e thatNorw egianla wandadministr ativepr acticesar einaccor dancewith Norway’sob ligationspur suanttotheUNCon ventionontheRightsofthe Child.

Asaspok espersonf orc hildrenandy oungpeople, theOmbudsmanf or Childrenm usthelptoensur ethattheire xperiencesandkno wledgear e reflectedinpracticalpolicies.Thistakesplacethroughconsultationreportsto theStor tingandtheGo vernment, proposalsf orleg islation, instructionsand practices, andinitiativ esf ordebateamongpr ofessionalsandtheg eneral public.ItisalsowithinthemandateoftheOmbudsmanforChildrentoprotect individualsfromunjustandunfairtreatment. 17 2.2Countylevel Atcountylevel, boththecentralgovernment’sregionaladministrationandthe countyauthoritiesareimportantplayersinchildandyouthpolicy.Thisdivision ofresponsibilitiesandtasksr equiresag reatdealofcooper ationandcoor di- nation,bothinternallyandbetweenthecentralgovernmentandcountyauthor- ities.

Centralgovernmentadministrationatcountylevel TheCountyGo vernoristhecentr algovernment’srepresentativeatr egional (i.e.county)level.TheCountyGovernorisrequiredtoensurethatnationalpoli- ciesareimplementedinimportantsectors, ensurethenecessarycoordination andensureduepr ocessofla watr egionallevel. Onthebasisoftheirkno w- ledgeoflocalconditions, theCountyGo vernorsr eportbac ktothecentr al governmentauthoritiesonthesituationinNorw ay’scountiesandm unicipali- ties.

TheCountyGovernormustensurethegreatestpossiblecoordinationofpoli- cyinf ormationandcontr olandsuper visoryfunctionsbetw eenthev arious partsofthecentralgovernment’sregionaladministrationandthelocalauthor- ities. Trans-sectoralcooperation, coordinationacrossa gencyandpr ofessional bordersandholisticthinkinginrelationtotheenvironmentinwhichchildren andy oungpeopleg rowupar eimpor tantpr erequisitesforac hievingg ood, long-termsolutionsforchildrenandyoungpeopleatthelocalle vel. Onepri- oritytaskis, therefore, toencouragem unicipalitiestofur therde veloptrans- sectoralcooper ation. TheCountyGo vernorm ustalsohelptoensur ethat municipalandcountyauthor itiespursuepolicieswhic hensurethatc hildren andyoungpeoplehavepossibilitiesforparticipationandinfluenceatthelocal level.

Othercentralgovernmentagenciesatcountyle velalsoengageindirectexer- ciseofauthor ityandpr ovideser vicesthatar eimpor tantf orc hildrenand youngpeople, suchasroadconstruction, trafficsafety, employmentofficesand nationalinsurancebenefits. Countyauthorities Withrespecttoy oungpeople, thecountyauthor itieshaveresponsibilitiesin thefieldsofplanning, uppersecondar yeducation, culturalandleisur eactivi- ties, transportandcommunications, andsocialandchildwelfareservices. From 1January2004, thechildwelfareservicesforwhichthecountyisresponsible willbetransferredtocentralgovernment.

Thecountyauthor itiesareresponsibleforensuringthattheinter estsofc hil- drenandyoungpeoplearetakenintoaccountinbothcountyandm unicipal planning. Inthef ieldofeducation, thecountyauthor itiesareresponsiblefor theoper ationandde velopmentofuppersecondar ysc hools. Thecounty authoritiesarealsoresponsibleforcountyfollow-upservicesforthosewhodo notutilizetheirrighttouppersecondaryeducation.Allyoungpeopleareenti- tledtouppersecondaryeducationandthosewhodonotutilizethisr ightand donothaveajobm ustbeofferedanotherprogrammethroughthefollow-up service(f orfur therdetails, seeCh. 4.2.4). Thecountyauthor itiesm ustalso ensurethateducationalandpsyc hologicalcounsellingser vicesareprovided forpupilsinuppersecondar yschools. 18 Thecountyauthoritiesareresponsibleforthedevelopmentofcountycultural policy. Themainf ocusisonr unningthecounty’ so wncultur alinstitutions, suchascountylibr aries, arrangingcountycultur alactivitiesandpr oviding informationformunicipalities.

Manycountyauthoritieshaveestablishedcountyboardsfordisabledpersons. Theycompriserepresentativesofor ganizationsforthedisa bled, centralgov- ernmentandcountya genciesandcountypoliticians. Theboardsdiscussthe planningandimplementationofmeasuresfordisabledpersons.

2.3Municipallevel Responsibilityforthepracticalimplementationofchildandyouthpolicyrests primarilywiththemunicipalities. Municipalauthoritieshavethemainrespon- sibilityforprovidingservicesandtranslatingnationalobjectivesintopractical policies.

Inthepastdecade, thegrowthofof ficialservicesforfamilieswithc hildren, childrenandy oungpeoplehaspr imarilyoccur redatm unicipallevel. Atthe sametime,throughtheLocalGovernmentAct,municipalauthoritieshavebeen giveng reaterfr eedomtoor ganizelocalser vicesf orc hildrenandy oung people. Oneconsequenceofthisisthatlocalor ganizationandlocalser vices varyfromonemunicipalitytothenext.

Manyofthenationalobjectiv esforthechildandyouthsectorha venotbeen laiddowninlegislationorregulations.Thisgivesmunicipalauthoritiesgreater freedomofaction, butalsoleadstodif ferencesinthetypesandscopeof servicesprovidedforchildrenandyoungpeople. Reportsfromthemunicipal authoritiessho wthatv ariationsinm unicipalf inancesandpr ioritiesha vea significantimpactonwhichservicesexistatthelocallevel.Theorganizationof them unicipalauthor ityandthew ayinwhic hthevie wsandinter estsof childrenandyoungpeoplearetakenintoaccountinm unicipalplanningand policyformulationalsoaf fecttheor ientationofc hildandy outhpolicy. One goalistoensur ethatm unicipalyouthpolicyisbasedonlocalconditions. At thesametime, effortsmustbebasedono verarchinggoalsandguidelinesto ensurethatservicesforchildrenandyoungpeopleareasequalaspossibleall overthecountry. Nationalguidelinesofthisnatureareimposedonthemunic- ipalauthor itiesthr oughinter actionwithcountyandcentr alg overnment authorities.

Educationisapriorityareainmostmunicipalities.Agreaterdegreeofinter-dis- ciplinary, inter-agencyandtr ans-sectoralcooper ationalsoappear stobean importantfactorinef fortstofur therdevelopacoher entyouthpolicy. Many municipalitieshavealsoestablishedarrangementstoensuregreateruserinflu- enceinthechildandyouthpolicysector.Theimportanceofinvolvingnon-gov- ernmentalorganizationsmorestronglyinworkonyouthpolicyhasalsobeen emphasizedb ythecentr alpoliticalauthor ities. Mostm unicipalauthor ities regardcontin uedandintensif iedf ocusonef fortsf orc hildrenandy oung peopleasaprioritytask.

Municipaly outhpolicyaf fectsmostar easofpolicyandthusr equiresg ood 19 cooperationandcoordinationbetweenthemanypeoplewhoworkwithchil- drenandyoungpeopleatthelocallevel. Inrecentyears, severalmunicipalities haveestablishedaspecialpostforaChildren’sRepresentativeasaresultofthe needtoimprovethecoordinationofservices, strengthenplanningforchildren andyoungpeopleandstrengthentheinfluenceofchildrenandyoungpeople inlocalplanninganddecision-makingpr ocesses.Theresponsibilitiesascribed tothesepostsvary, asdoeslocalorganization.

ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeople growupandliveinNorway(ReportNo. 39totheStorting(2001-2002))stress- estheimpor tanceofw orkwithc hildrenandy oungpeopleatthem unicipal levelbeingwellcoordinatedandofsomeonehavingthemainresponsibilityfor suchcoor dination. Italsopointsoutthatm unicipalauthor itiesar efr eeto organizethisasthe yseef it, forexamplebydelegatingther esponsibilitytoa specificpersonoragency. Italsoemphasizestheimpor tanceofthemunicipal authoritiesfacilitatinggoodinteractionbetweenchildrenandy oungpeople, parentsandthenon-governmentalsectortoensurethattheworkdoneforchil- drenandyoungpeopleatthelocalle velissatisfactory. 20 21

3Livingconditionsandthe environmentinwhichyoungpeople growup–maintr ends

3.1Changesintheconditionsinwhich youngpeoplegrowup ivingconditionsforyoungpeopleareaffectedbychanges, bothinsociety asawholeandintheirimmediater elationships, suchasthef amilyand L thelocalcomm unity. Developmentinman yareasofsocietythataf fect theconditionsinwhic hyoungpeopleg rowuphasmo vedmorerapidlyin recentdecadesthaninanypreviousperiod.

Socialchangesinthelastcenturyhavehadsignificant,andlargelypositive,con- sequencesf ortheconditionsinwhic hc hildrenandy oungpeopleliv eand growup. Housingstandar ds, incomesandeducationaloppor tunitiesha ve improvedsubstantially. Mostyoungpeopleliveinasituationoff inancialsecu- rity, andtraditionalpovertyhasmoreorlessbeeneradicated. However, wealth isnotequallydistributedandtherearestillsomeyoungpeoplelivinginf ami- lieswithsuchlimitedfinancialresourcesthattheycanbedescribedaspoor.

Socialchangeshavebeendescribedindifferentways.Termssuchasthemulti- culturalsociety, theinformationsocietyandthekno wledgesocietyindicate whichchangesarethoughttobethemostsignificant.Themulti-culturalsocie- tynatur allyhastodowithincr easedimmig ration, butitalsodescr ibesthe changesthathavetakenplaceasaresultofasinglecultureorasinglesystem ofvaluesbecominglessdominantthanbefore.Theinformationsocietyandthe knowledgesocietyarealsotermsthatfocusoncertaincharacteristicsofsoci- etywhic hha vebecomemor epr ominentthanbef ore. Thesesocialc hanges havealsor esultedinindividuality, self-realizationandpar ticipationbecoming moreimpor tantvaluesforchildrenandy oungpeopleasw ellasadults. The “youth” periodhasc hangedinc haracterandbecomemor ec learlydistin - guishedasaseparatephaseoflife.InNorway,the1980sand1990swereaperi- odofmajorc hangesinthemedia. Anincreaseinthen umberofradioandTV channels,TVadvertising, videoplayers, homecomputers, computergamesand theInternethavetotallychangedtheconditionsinwhichyoungpeoplegrow up.Thenewmediaha vealsomadethehomeanattr activeplaceforchildren andyoungpeopletospendtheirleisuretime. 22 Mostyoungstersgrowupinasecur eenvironmentwhichprovidesgoodpos- sibilitiesforde velopment. However, therearestillsomec hildrenandy oung peoplewhodonotha vesuchgoodopportunitiesasthemajor ity. Forsome, everydaylif eisc haracterizedb yinsecur ityandloneliness. Crime, bullying, violence, drugandalcoholpr oblems, learningdif ficultiesanddif ficultyin enteringthelabourmarketareallveryrealproblemsforsomeyoungpeople.

3.2Thedemographicsituation Theunder-18agegroupaccountsforalmostonequar terofNorway’spopula- tion. InJanuary2003, therewere1,075,711childrenandyoungpeopleunder thea geof18inNorw ay. Therew ereslightl ymor ebo ysthang irlsandthe largestnumberofchildrenwereinthe11-12agegroup.Therewere1,457,321 youngpeopleinthe15-24a gegroup.

Then umberofc hildrenandy oungpeopleinthe0-24a geg rouphasbeen relativelystableforthepast30-40yearsandforecastsindicatethatthisnumber willremainrelativelystableupto2020.Thisagegroupincreasedfromapprox- imately1.4milliontojusto ver1.5millionintheper iodfrom1960to1980, droppedslightlyinthe1970sand1980s,andhassincebeenstable. Until2020, thef igureise xpectedtor emainr elativelysta blef ortheg roupasawhole. Duringthisperiod, however, therewillbesignif icantvariationsinthev arious agecategories.Thenumberofchildrenundertheageof15willdecline, while then umberinthe15-24a geg roupwillincr easesome what. The15-24a ge grouppeak edin1990anddec linedto wards2000. Then umberinthisa ge groupwillincreaseagainupto2020.

Althoughthenumberofchildrenandyoungpeopleinthe0-24a gegrouphas beenrelativelystableinrecentdecades,asaproportionofthetotalpopulation ithasdec lined. Whilethe0-24a geg roupaccountedf or40percentofthe populationin1970, itaccountedf oronl y32percentin2000. Forecasts indicatethatthisper centagewillr emainr oughlythesameupto2020. The declineinthenumberofyoungpeopleasapercentageofthetotalpopulation isduetothefactthatthenumberofolderpeopleisincreasing, partlybecause thepost-warbabyboomershavenowbecometheoldergeneration.

Inthepast20-30y ears, the“youth” periodhase xpanded. Youngpeoplear e marryingandesta blishingf amilieslater , partnershipsandfr iendshipsar e replacingmarriagetoagreaterextent, someyoungpeoplearespendingmore yearsoneducationandmor eareinhighereducation. Asaresultoftheexten- sionofthe “youth” period, theparentsofsmallc hildrenaremovingintothe olderagegroups.

3.3 Theconditionsinwhichchildr enand youngpeoplegrowupinchange 3.3.1Newperspectivesonchildr enandyoungpeople Therehasbeenstr ongerf ocusonc hildren’sr ightsinr ecenty ears, bothin everydaylif eandinleg islation, statisticsandr esearch. Thishashadconse - quencesfortheyoungestgroupsinthe“youth” category.The1981Actrelating 23 tochildrenandparentsgiveschildrenandyoungpeoplemanyrightsrelating toco-deter minationandself-deter mination. Thevie wofc hildrenandy oung peopleasindependentindividualsisr eflectedintheUNCon ventiononthe RightsoftheChild, wherethechild’srighttoco-determinationandparticipa- tionisoneofthemainpr inciples.

Theco-deter minationandpar ticipationofc hildrenandy oungpeoplehas becomear ecognizedprincipleinmoder nsociety. Whilechildrenandy oung peopleha vear ighttobeindependentanddecidef orthemselv esinman y areas, theyalsohavearighttobelong, tobedependentandreceivecarefrom theirparentsandotheradults. TheUNConventionontheRightsoftheChild confirmstherighttoprotectionandcare.Whileparentalresponsibilityremains firm, itisac hallengetopr omotear ightsconceptthatencompassesinde - pendence, careandrespectfortheopinionsofchildren.

Thereappeartobetw opar alleltr endsinvie wsa boutc hildrenandy oung people: greaterautonomyandg reaterregulation. Ontheonehand, thestress onindividualizationandrightshasincreasedthefocusonchildrenandyoung peopleasindependent, activeplayers. Ontheotherhand, theenvironmentin whichchildrenandy oungpeopleg rowuphasbecomemor eorganizedand regulatedthanbef ore. Thisappliestotheor ganizationofeducation, leisure timeandworkinglife.

3.3.2Changesinfamilystr uctures Thef amilyise xtremelyimpor tantf orc hildrenandy oungpeople. Although theyformallyreachtheageofmajorityat18, afairlylargeproportionofyoung peoplecontinuetoliveathomeforsometimeafterthat.Moreover,movingout oftheparentalhomeisoftennotafinalbreak.Someyoungpeoplemovetoand fromtheparentalhomeseveraltimesbeforetheyfinallyestablishthemselves asindependententities.

The1998Sur veyofLivingConditionssho wsthat87percentofbo ysand89 percentofg irlsinthe16-17a gegroupwerelivingathome. Fromtheageof 18-19, thedifferencesbetweenboysandgirlsbecomeclear. Inthisagegroup, 52percentofgirlswerelivingwiththeirparents, comparedwith67percent ofboys. Bythea geof25, mostyoungpeoplehavemovedout. In1998, 8per centofw omenaged24-25w erelivingwiththeirpar ents, comparedwith18 percentofmeninthesamea gegroup.

Familystructureshavechangedinrecentdecades.Thepercentageofchildren livingwithunmar riedcouplesandsinglepar entshasincr eased, whilefewer liveinfamilieswheretheparentsaremarried. In2003, 75percentofchildren undertheageof18livedwithbothparents; 61percentwithmarriedparents and14percentwithunmarriedparents. 25percentlivedwithoneparent. In 1989, 82percentliv edwithbothpar ents; 77percentwithmar riedparents and5percentwithunmarriedparents.Atthattime,17percentlivedwithone parent. Familysplitsaremorefrequentthanbefore, particularlyamongunmar- riedparents, whosplituptw otothr eetimesmor efrequentlythanmar ried couples.

Changesinf amilystructuresmayalsoleadtoc hildrenacquiringnewsibling relationshipsandmorefamilymemberstorelatetothanbefore. Havingsever- 24 alsetsoffamiliescanleadtocontactswithmor eadultsthaninthetr aditional nuclearfamily.Thiscancreateagreatersenseofbelongingandsecurity, butit canalsoc hallengethesev alues.TheSurveyofLivingConditionssho wsthat, despitesignificantchangesinchildren’sfamilies, childrenstillappeartohavea greatdealofcontactwithadults, includingacrossgenerations.

Theparticipationofwomeninworkinglifehaschangedinrecentdecades. In the1950sand1960s, thefamilywiththemotherandhouse wifeathomew as thedominantpicture.Today, mostwomenandmothersareinfull-timeorpart- timeemployment.Thishasledtosignif icantchangesinthedail ylivesofchil- drenandy oungpeople. Somepeoplemaintainthat “empty” homesandlocal communitiesr epresentalossf orc hildren. Othersmaintainthator ganized activitiesstr engthenc hildren’spossibilitiesf orde velopmentandthatthisis goodadaptationtoc hangedconditions. Moreover, toag reaterdeg reethan before, thehomehasalsobecomeaplacewher ey oungpeoplemeetand engageinvarioustypesofactivities.

Intoday’ssociety, parentsareexpectedtoplayanactive, participatoryrolein relationtosc hoolsandleisur eactivities. Thedemandforparentstobeactiv e may, however, leadtog reaterdif ferencesbetweenthey oungpeoplewhose parentsmanagetofollowuptheirchildrenwellandthosewhosepar ents, for variousreasons, cannotdoso. Notallparentsgivetheirchildrenhighenough priorityorhavethenecessaryresourcestoensuregoodfollow-up, forexample inr elationtosc hoolandleisur eactivities. Socialdif ferencesma yar iseasa resultofdifferencesinparents’ abilityandwillingnesstostim ulateandfollow uptheirchildren.

Nevertheless, surveysshowthatyoungpeopleinthe14-16agegroupgeneral- lyhaveacloserelationshipwiththeirparents. Mostofthemfeelthattheirpar- entssupportthemandg ivethemgoodfeedback.Approximatelyhalfofthem statethatthe yha veenga gedinaspecif icactivity, hobby, trainingorsimilar activitywithmotherandf atherinthepastw eek. Morethan90percentof youngpeoplebelievethattheirparentsknowmostoftheirfriends.65percent hadvisitedr elativesorf amilyinthepastw eekand41percenthadvisiteda neighbouroneormoretimes.

3.3.3Partnershipsandsexuality Attitudestounmar riedpar tnershipsha vec hangedr adicallyinthepast20 years.Theidealofalasting, committedrelationshipappearstobedif ficultto realizeformanypeople. Asaresultofef fectivecontraceptives, sexualityisno longersoc learlyr eservedf ormar riageandassociatedwithr eproduction. Youngpeopleusuallyfallinlove,haveboyfriendsandgirlfriendsandmanytest outtheirsexualityinthisperiodoftheirlives.Youngpeopletodayaremetwith greateropennessthanbeforeasregardssexuality. However, thisdoesnotmean thatsexualitydoesnotha veitsproblems.Asaresultofopen, liberalattitudes tosexuality, manyyoungpeoplemayexperiencepressuretoengageinsexual activitylongbeforetheyarereadyforit.Thesexualizationofdailylifeforchil- drenandyoungpeople, notleastthroughadvertisingandthemedia, increases bodyf ixationandse xualpr essureonana geg roupthatisnoty etmatur e enoughtodealwiththechoicesandconsequencessexualrelationshipsentail. Thisalsoincludestheriskofundesiredpregnancyandabortion. 25 Asaresultofgreateropennessaboutsexualityingeneral, thereisalsogreater opennessandacceptanceofthef actthatsomepeoplear elesbianorhomo - sexual. However, researchresultsshowthatmanyyoungpeoplewhodiscover thattheyareattractedtotheirownsexexperienceconfusionabouttheiriden- tity, innerunrestanduncer tainideasa bouttheirownsexuality.Thisindicates thatopennessdoesnotnecessar ilymeanthatitiseasiertobeacceptedand acceptoneselfaslesbianorhomosexual.

3.3.4Materialandsocialconditions Thefamilysituationhasadecisiveimpactonthematerialconditionsinwhich childrenandyoungpeoplegrowup.Throughtransfersoffundsandtheprovi- sionofser vices, thepublicauthoritieshelptog ivefamiliesgoodframework conditions.Atthesametime, policymusthelptoreducedifferencessothatall childrenandy oungpeopleg rowuping oodconditions. Allf amilieswith childrenarethereforeincludedinanactiv edistributionpolicyaimedatcom - pensatingfamilieswithchildrenforsomeoftheadditionale xpenseofhaving children,orprovidingservicesortransferstosupportfamilies’careofchildren.

Householdswithc hildrenar eamongthehouseholdsthate xperiencedthe strongestr iseinincomeinthe1990s. Theincomesofbothcoupleswith childrenandsinglepar entsrosemorestronglythana verageincomesdur ing thisper iod. However, somef amiliesar einadif ficultf inancialsituation. An analysiscarriedoutbyStatisticsNorwayofhowmanychildrenandyoungpeo- pleinNorw ayg rowupinf amilieswithlo worper sistentlylo wincomes showedthatther ear ebetw een27,000and32,000c hildrenlivinginlo w- incomehouseholdsinNorw ay(J onEpland(2001): Childreninlo w-income households. Numbers, developmentandcauses. Report2001/9Statistics Norway). Someofthesechildrenareonlyinthelow-incomegroupforashort periodoftime.Overa3-yearperiod,between1.7percentand2.4percentlive inlow-incomehouseholds, equivalenttobetween14,000and19,000children. Ofthec hildrenlivinginconstantl ylo w-incomehouseholds, manyg rowup withonlyonepar ent. Manyliveinhouseholdswher etheadultsha veonlya weaklinktothela bourmar ket. Moreover, childrenfr omimmig rantbac k- groundsareover-represented.

Havingalowincomeoveralongper iodoftimemayleadtothef amiliescon- cernedbeinguna bletoaf fordluxur iesthatar eamatterofcour seformost people.Childrenandyoungpeoplefromthesefamiliesareoftenunabletotake partinthesameactivitiesasother s. Goingawayonholidayisnotamatterof course, andtheycannotaf fordtheequipmentthatmostothery oungpeople possess. Sincesomegroupshaveexperiencedasignificantincreaseinwealth, otherparents’ inabilitytopr ovidethesameluxur iesise venmoreapparent. Childrenandy oungpeoplear eparticularlyawareofdif ferencesinthedistr i- butionofluxuries.

Inrecentyears, the18-24agegrouphasexperiencedadeclineinincome, and thisa gegroupisc learlyover-representedinthelo werle velsoftheincome tables.Thisispar tlybecausemor eyoungpeoplear eattendinginstitutionsof highereducation, bute venifstudentsar ee xcepted, thepr oportionofthe 18-24agegroupwhosehouseholdincomeperconsumptionunitislessthan halfofthemedianincomehasdoubled.Thisisafrequentlyusedmeasurement 26 ofpovertyinrelationtoothergroups(relativepoverty).The20-24agegroupis alsoover-representedamongrecipientsoffinancialwelfarebenefits.Whilethe incomesofmanyyoungpeopleincreaseafterthea geof25, someyoungpeo- pleareneverthelessmoreatriskofpersistentlylowincomethanother s.This particularlyappliestoyoungpeoplewithlittleeducation.

Thelivingconditionsandqualityoflif eofchildrenandyoungpeoplearealso linkedtosocialconditionsotherthanfinancialandmaterialstandards. Parents’ abilitytobr ingtheirchildrenupwellispar ticularlyimportant. Childrenwho growupinfamilieswheretheparentshavedrugoralcoholproblemsareavul- nerablegroup.Thesechildrenareoftenexposedtosuchgreatstrainsinchild- hoodthattheirfuturedevelopmentmaybeaffected.Thesamepartlyappliesto childrenwhog rowupinf amilieswherethepar entshavementalpr oblems. Childreninsuchfamiliesneedagreatdealofhelpandcar e, whichotherrela- tivesorthew elfareser vicesdonotal waysmana getopr ovide. Therewasa steadyriseinthenumberofchildrenreceivingservicesfromthechildwelfare authoritiesinthe1990s. Attheendof2001, justunder26,000c hildrenwere recipientsofchildwelfaremeasuresandoftheseapproximately5,000werein care.

3.3.5Healthandlifestyle ThestateofhealthofchildrenandyoungpeopleinNorwayisgenerallygood. However, somehavechronichealthpr oblemsordisa bilitiesthataf fecttheir everydaylivesandr educetheirpossibilitiesf orplayandsocialpar ticipation. AccordingtoStatisticsNorw ay’s1995HealthSur vey, 9percentofc hildren aged0-6yearshadanillness,injuryorhealthproblemthataffectedtheirevery- daylivestoalargedegreeortosomedegree, andmoreofthemweregirlsthan boys. Inthe7-15a gegroup, thefigurewas14percent, butinthiscasether e weremoreboysthangirls.

Psycho-socialdisordersprobablyconstitutethehealthproblemthatisincreas- ingmostamongc hildrenandy oungpeople. Theyinc ludeeatingdisor ders, problemsr elatedtolonelinessandisolation, neglectanda buse, behavioural problems, drugandalcoholabuse, bullyingandunhappiness. Manyreportpsy- chosomaticsymptoms, suchasheadac hes, depressionandbac kandstomac h pains.StatisticsNorway’s1998HealthSurveyshowedthat11percentofyoung peopleaged16-24hadsymptomsofmentaldisorders. Morewomenthanmen reportthattheyhavesuchsymptoms.

Studiessho wthatman yyoungpeoplede velopalif estylethatishar mfulto theirhealthduringchildhoodandadolescence, whichincludesunhealthyeat- inghabits, inactivity, riskbehaviour, smokinganddrugoralcoholabuse.Allthe availablestudiesindicatethatalar gern umberofy oungpeoplethanbef ore statethattheyhaveusedvarioustypesofnarcoticsubstances, andthisapplies tothewholecountry.Atthesametime, studiesshowthattherehasbeenasig- nificantr iseintheuseofalcoholamongy oungpeopleinr ecentyears. The thresholdforusingdrugs, alcoholandtobaccoislowerandthereislessdiffer- encebetweenurbanandruralareas.

3.3.6Childrenandyoungpeoplewithdisabilities Between2000and2500ofthec hildrenborninNorw ayeachyeararediag- nosedashavingsomeformofdisability.Inadditiontothis,somechildrendeve- 27 lopdisa bilitiesandc hronicdiseasesafterbir th. Noo verallstatisticsar ecol - lectedconcerningthen umberofdisa bledpersonsinNorway. Ifwebaseour calculationsonthenumberofbasicorsupplementarybenefits, theproportion isaround2.5percentofthec hildpopulationbetweentheagesof7and15.

Childrenandyoungpeoplewithdisa bilitiesencountermoreandlargerbarri- ersinmanyareasoflifethanthosewithoutdisabilities.Theremaybeproblems inmeetingtheneedf orcoher ent, coordinatedser vices. Thetr ansitionfr om childtoadultmayalsobemoreproblematicfordisabledpersonsthanforthose whoarenotdisabled.Youngpeoplewithdisabilitieswhoareonthethreshold ofadultlif ehave, toag reaterextent, beenintegratedintoor dinaryschools. Theyusuallyhavethesamee xpectationsregardingeducationandw ork, but theyf acef armor ebar riersthanothery oungpeopleinter msofph ysical access, transport, adaptationofteachingmaterials, etc. Beingwithotheryoung- stersduringtheirleisuretimeisanimpor tantpartofdailylifeforyoungpeo- ple. Thelevelofactivityofy oungpeoplewithdisa bilitiesisg enerallylower thanthatofyoungpeoplewithoutdisabilities.

3.3.7Identity Youngpeopletoda ydonotappeartor elyontr aditionsandtr uthsthatha ve beenpasseddo wnfr omearlierg enerationstothesamee xtentasthe ydid before. However, thishasalsobeensaidofpr eviousg enerations. Although youngpeopleha vemor eoptionsthanbef ore, theirsocialbac kgroundstill affectstheirc hoiceofv alues, pathinlif e, partner, educationandcar eer. Society’sdemandf orqualif icationsandcompetence, thev aluesthatar e focusedon, alsoaf fectindividuals. Thepeerg roupisimpor tantf ory oung people’schoices. Ithasbeenpointedoutthaty oungpeople’ssearchforiden- tityactuallytakesplacewithintheframeworkoftheirpeergroup’sownnorms foracceptableappearance, behaviourandinterests.Amongotherthings,young people’sconsumptionpatter nssaysomethinga boutwhothe yareandwhat theyareinterestedin.Nevertheless, thefamilystillhasagreatdealofinfluence onchildren’sandy oungpeople’schoiceofv alues, particularlyifw elookat theirlivesbeyondthe“youth” period.

3.3.8Politicsandsocialissues Thelackofpar ticipationbyyoungpeopleintr aditionalpoliticalactivityhas ledtoconcernaboutafuture“democraticdeficit”.Voterparticipationstatistics showthaty oungpeopleutilizetheirr ighttov otelessthanolderpeople, at bothlocalandnationalelections. Amongf irst-timev oters, participationin nationalelectionsdroppedfrom72percentto56percentintheperiod1981- 2001, while33percentv otedatthe1999localelections. Theschoolelection surveysinthe1990sdocumentedwidespr eadmistr ustofpoliticians. Atthe sametime, youngpeoplef indthatitise xtremelydifficulttoinf luencepoliti- cians. Onlyasmallpercentagebelievethatmostpoliticiansarecredible, orthat itispossibletoinfluencepolicies.

Thelackofsupportforpoliticalelectionsandthemistr ustofpoliticsar epar- alleledbythedeclineinrecruitmenttopoliticalyouthorganizations.Themem- bershipfiguresforpoliticaly outhorganizationshavedroppedfromapproxi- mately44,000in1977to23,000in1995.Moreover, therehasbeenadeclinein themember shipf iguresf orcer tainnon-g overnmentalc hildren’sandy outh 28 organizations. Thissta gnationappear stobepar tofatr endthatpar ticularly affectspolitical, humanitarianandr eligiousorganizations, inotherw ords, the traditionalNorwegianpopularmovements.

However, wemustnotequatesocialin volvementwithpar ticipationinelec - tionsormember shipofor ganizations. Youngpeopleuseman yalter native formsofexpression,suchasfestivals,demonstrations,campaigns,Internetmes- sages, e-mailandtextmessagestopartiesandpoliticalleadersatvariouslevels.

(SeeCh.7formoreinformationabouttheparticipationandinfluenceofyoung people.)

3.3.9Culturalchanges Norwayhasal waysbeenam ulti-culturalsociety . BesidestheSamiand Norwegianpeoples, inthepastf ewcentur iesNorwayhasalsohadnational minoritiessuc hasKv ens, ForestF inns, Romani(tr avellers), JewsandRoma (gypsies).Thecompositionofthepopulationhasalsoc hangedinrecentyears duetother iseinimmigration. Growingmigrationispar toftheglobalization thatiscur rentlytakingplaceandinter nationalmigrationprocessesalsoha ve consequencesforNorwegiansocietyandf ortheen vironmentinwhic hchil- drenandyoungpeoplegrowup.

Livinginam ulti-culturalsocietyisanatur alpar tofe verydaylif ef orman y childrenandyoungpeopleinNorway.Thismeansnotonlyculturalvariationin termsofc lothes, languageandf oodtr aditions, butalsodif ferentfr amesof reference, valuesandideas. Childrenandyoungpeoplegrowinguptodayare moreusedtorelatingtothistypeofdiversitythantheadultgeneration.

Norwegiansocietyisinaperiodwheretheethniccompositionofthepopula- tionisundergoingchangesthatwillbeper manent.TheimmigrationfromAsia andAfricathathastak enplaceinthepastthir tyyearshasalr eadygivenusa moreculturallydiversifiedpopulationthanbefore.Asocietythatencompasses peoplefrommanydifferentculturesmustexpectdifferentchallengesthana societywithfewcultures.Onesuchchallengewillbetocreateafoundationfor mutualrecognitionandacceptance.

StatisticsNorway’sdefinitionoftheimmigrantpopulationcomprisesfirst-gen- erationimmigrantswithtw oforeignparentsandper sonsborninNorw ayof twoforeign-bornparents. PersonsborninNorwayoftwoforeign-bornparents wereformerlycalledsecond-generationimmigrants. Childrenandy oungpeo- pleinNorwaymayhavevaryingtieswithothercountries.Asof1January2001, 84percentofchildrenandyoungpeople(aged0-18)hadnoimmigrantback- ground. Approximately7percentofc hildrenhadaf oreign-bornmotheror fatherbutwereborninNorway. PersonsborninNorwayoftwoforeign-born parents(4.1%), first-generationimmig rantswithnoNorw egianbac kground (2.8%), personsadopteda broadandper sonsbornabroadofNorw egianpar- entsarealsor egardedasbeingpar toftheimmig rantpopulationinthiscon - nection(StatisticsNorway2003).

MostchildrenandyoungpeoplewithimmigrantbackgroundsliveinOslo.This appliestoboththetotalnumberofchildrenwithimmigrantbackgroundsand 29 thepercentageofsuc hchildreninr elationtothen umberofc hildreninthe county.Childrenwithimmigrantbackgroundsaccountforjustover40percent ofallchildreninOslo.ThefigureforOsloisthereforefarhigherthanforother counties. (Furtherinformationaboutthechallengesofthemulti-culturalsocie- tymaybefoundinCh. 6).

3.3.10Theknowledgesociety Intheper iodfr omtheendofthe19thcentur yuntilthef irstdecadeafter WorldWarII, Norwaydevelopedfromanagriculturalsocietyintoanindustrial society. Thisledtomajortec hnological, economic, socialandcultur al upheavals. However, theperiodfromthe1970stothepresentdayhasinmany waysbeenaperiodofequallyfar-reachingchange.Thisperiodischaracterized primarilybyglobalization, communicationtechnology, knowledgeandeduca - tionasthebasisforcompetence.

Intheindustrialsociety, educationwasdesirablebutnotnecessary. Itwasfully possibleforyoungpeopletobeginworkatthea geof16, andworkwastheir entryintotheadultw orld. Intheknowledgesociety, educationandexpertise arepr erequisitesf orsuccessinw orkinglif eandothersocialconte xts. Educationnotonlygivesanideaofwhatapersoncandobutalsoofwhatand whoheorsheis. Becausetheeducationalsystemis, inprinciple, opentoall, successfullycompletinganeducationisasm uchameasur ementofper sonal qualitiesasitisofknowledge.Successintheeducationalsystemcanberegard- edasasignofself-discipline, planningabilityandworkcapacity. Becauseedu- cationissoimpor tant, alackofsuccessatsc hoolandintheeducationalsys - temmayleadtonewsocialdifferences.

Socialbackgroundisstillimportantforyoungpeople’schoiceofeducationand subsequentcareer. Regardlessoftheirdeg reeofac hievement, thechildrenof parentswithahighle velofeducationc hooseanacademiceducationmor e frequentlythanthechildrenofparentswithalowlevelofeducation.However, socialbackgrounddoesnotappeartoinf luencethee xtenttowhic hyoung peoplecompletetheeducationtheyhavestartedon.

Theknowledgeandcompetencesocietyhasbroughtwithitgreateremphasis onindividuality, freedomandper sonalstyle. Self-realizationandf indingout whatIwant, whatmeansmosttome, becomeimportant.Thisstrongerempha- sisonindividualityhasoccur redinpar allelwiththef actthatthekno wledge societyhasbecomeincreasinglydominatedbycompetitionandmarketmecha- nisms.

3.3.11Towardsgreatergenderequality Childrenandyoungpeopletodayexperienceagreaterdegreeofliberalization fromestablishedgenderrolesthanpr eviousgenerations. Boysandg irlshave equalr ightsandoppor tunitiesinmostar eas, andg enderdif ferencesar e becomingfarlessmarkedinareassuchaseducation, participationinnon-gov- ernmentalyouthor ganizations, sportanddr ugandalcohola buse. However, boysandg irlscontinuetoc hooseaneducationthathasbeentr aditionalfor theirgender.Girlssticktotheserviceandcaresectorswhileboyshavebecome moredominantintechnicalsubjectsinrecentyears.Thisappliestobothvoca- tionaleducationanduniversityandcollegeeducation. 30 Inthe1980s,girlssurpassedboysatuppersecondaryschools, inthesensethat theyachievedbettergradesthanboys. Inthe1990s, girlscameintothemajor- ityatuniversitiesandcolleges, andin1993, forthef irsttime, moregirlsthan boystookdeg rees. Subjectssuchaslaw, medicineandsociolog y, whichwere previouslydominatedb ymen, wereincr easinglydominatedb ythey oung generationofw omen. Intheologytoo, theFacultyofTheologyinOsloisno longermale-dominated. Forwomen, theknowledgesocietyhasledtoc hange andthegradualdisappearanceoftheclassichousewiferole. Instead, theyhave identifiedmorestronglywitheducationandacar eer. However, therearestill fewwomeninseniorpositionsinbusinessandindustr y. Furthermore, more than40percentofworkingwomenworkparttime.

Despitethe“genderrevolution” ineducationandcar eers, boysandg irlssys- tematicallydevelopdifferentpatternsofaction. Forexample, thereisadif fer- enceinho wboys’ andgirls’ consumptionisr egardedbythosear oundthem. Becauseman ybo ysha vemor eor ganized, activity-orientedconsumption requirements, theyaregivenmoremoneyforconsumptionmor eeasilythan girls.Researchshowsthatboysreceivemoremoneyfromtheirparentsforper- sonalconsumptionthangirlsdo–theyhave“higherpay”onthehomefrontas well.

Bothverbalandph ysicalharassmentoccurinsomey outhgroups. Bothgirls andboysareexposedtose xualbullyingandse xualharassment. Thiscanbe regardedasar eversalofwhathasbeenac hievedovermanyyearsofstruggle forg enderequalityandnon-discr imination. Oneimpor tantg oalwillbeto acquiremoreknowledgeaboutthistypeofharassmentandmonitorthetrend amongyoungpeople.

Youngpeopleareconcernedaboutrightsandequalopportunities,buttheyare notconcer nedtothesamee xtenta boutgenderequality. Genderequalityis oftenregardedasbeingold-fashionedandnotquiteinstepwiththetimes.Girls lookuponthemselv esasindividualsr atherthanag ender. Theydow ellat school, theyar eactiv e, andthe ydar etostandout. Theysympathizewith genderequalitybutr egardthepr ogressthathasbeenmadeasamatterof course. Ineffortstodiscovertheiridentity, bodyandstyleappeartobemor e importantforgirlsthanforboys. Itishar dlysurprisingthatthesey ounggirls donotfeatureinthepartofthewomen’smovementthatreflectsthepolitical viewsofthepreviousgeneration.

Thereisstillsomewaytogobeforeweachievefullgenderequality, andtradi- tionalgenderrolesstillinf luenceimportantdecisionsmadebyyoungpeople. Thispar ticularlyappliestoeducationalandcar eerc hoices. Bothhomeand schoolareimportantasarenasforidentity-buildingamongchildrenandyoung people.Theymustbemadea wareofg enderroles, andattitudesm ustbef os- teredthatcounteractdiscriminationandcontraventionoftheidealofequality.

3.3.12Consumptionandcommercialization Children’sandy oungpeople’ se verydayliv esha vebecomeincr easingly commercializedinrecentdecades.Thisisreflectedintheroleofchildrenand youngpeopleasconsumer s, andalsointheirself-a warenessandidentity . As new, wealthyconsumer s, childrenandy oungpeopleha vebecomeatar get 31 groupformanufacturersandadv ertisers, andduetotheiruseofandidentif i- cationwithv ariouspr oducts, theyr epresentpotentialandimpor tantfutur e purchasingpowerforthebrandedgoodsindustry.

Itisaser iouschallengetof indmeasurestor educecommercialpressureson childrenandy oungpeople. Ontheonehand, childrenandy oungpeople shouldbeprotectedfromcommercialinfluence. Ontheotherhand, children andyoungpeoplemustbemadeawareoftheconsumersocietyingeneraland theimpactofadv ertisinginpar ticular. Suchawareness-raisingisinc ludedin consumereducationinsc hools. Inspring2003, theMinistr yofChildr enand FamilyAffairspresentedaPlanof Actiontocombatcommer cialpressureson childrenandyoungpeople.

3.3.13Mediaandcommunications Themassmediapla yacentralroleintheliv esofchildrenandyoungpeople. Thisappliestobothtr aditionalmedia, suchasTV, radio, filmsandm usic, and newmedia, suchastheInter net, mobilephonesandcomputer s. Themedia societyisglobalandcreatescommonpointsofreferenceacrossgeographical, linguisticandcultur alborders. Newtechnologiesprovidenewopportunities forcommunicationandthede velopmentofcultur alandsocialcompetence. However, theabilityofchildrenandyoungpeopletouseandutilizethepossi - bilitiesprovidedbymoderncommunicationtoolsvaries.

Until1992, Norwegianc hildrenandy oungpeopleg rewupwiththe NorwegianBr oadcastingCorporation, whichw asinamonopol ypositionas regardsradioandTVbroadcasting.Thenumberoflocalradiostationsandcom- mercialTVchannelsincreasedsharplyinthe1990sandthe ysoonr eacheda majorityofthepopulation. Surveysshowthattherehasbeenadec lineinthe percentageofthepopulationthatlistenstor adio, while TVvie winghas remainedconstantinthepastteny ears.TheproportionofTVviewersishigh- estamongchildrenandtheoldestgroup.Youngpeoplebetweentheagesof16 and24w atchlessTVthantheirpar entsandg randparentsdid. Asregardsthe choiceofchannels, thecommercialchannelsTV2,TVNorgeandTV3areclear- lyover-representedamongchildrenandyoungpeople.

Newspaperreadinghasdeclinedamongchildrenandyoungpeopleinr ecent years.Theseagegroupsalsospendtheleasttimer eadingnewspapers. Partof thisreductionmaybeduetothef actthatchildrenreadInternetnewspapers ratherthantraditionalprintednewspapers.

TheInternethaswidecoverageandtheproportionofchildrenandyoungpeo- plewithahomecomputerandaccesstotheInter nethasincr easedsignif i- cantly. Mostchildrenandy oungpeopleha veaccesstoacomputerathome. Homecomputercoverageishighestinthe0-15a gegroup(morethan90per cent). AsregardsaccesstotheInter net, approximatelysevenoutoftenc hil- dreninthe9-15a gegrouphaveaccesstotheInter netathome. Inthecaseof bothhomecomputersandtheInternet, asmallerproportionofyoungpeople over15haveaccesstothesecommunicationmediaathomethanthe9-15age group. BoysarestillmorefrequentInternetusersthang irls.Almosthalfofall boysbetweenthea gesof9and15logontotheInter netonana verageday, anditisthispopulationgroupthatcomprisesthemostfrequentInternetusers. 32 Surveysshowthatapproximatelyhalfofallchildreninthe9-15agegroupplay computergamesonanordinaryday.Almost80percentinthe9-15a gegroup whouseahomecomputersa ythatthe yuseitf orentertainmentandgames. Approximatelytwiceasmanyboysasgirlsplaycomputergames.Thismedium isdif ferentfr ommediasuc hasf ilmsand TVbecausemostgamesar einter - active. Computergamesv aryfromplay-and-learngames, boardgames, adven- tureandrole-playtoactionandwargames.

Therehasbeenasharpriseintheuseofmobilephonesinrecentyears.Almost nineoutoftenyoungpeopleaged16-24havetheirownmobilephone. Inthe 9-12agegroupalmost30percenthadtheiro wnmobilephonein2000and thenumberofusershasrisensignificantlysincethen. Moregirlsthanboysin the9-15a gegrouphavetheiro wnmobilephone. Theuseofmobilephones andtextmessagesisanimportantmeansofcommunication, bothwithinpeer groupsandbetweenchildrenandtheirparents.

3.3.14Globalization “Theageofglobalization” isasomewhatimprecisetermthatisoftenusedto describetoday’sreality. Internationaldecision-makingforums, inbothbusiness andpolitics, areimpor tantelementsofglobalization. Migration, international trade, morer apidtr ansportandcomm unications, increasedtr avel, linguistic mergingandthede velopmentofcomm unitiesacr ossnationalbor dersar e typicalc haracteristicsofglobalization. Thisisnotr eallyne wincompar ison withpreviouseras. Internationalinteractionhasalwaysinfluencedsocialdeve- lopment.Thethingthatc haracterizesourownageandperhapsdif ferentiates itfromotherer asisthef actthattheimpactofinter nationalmassmediais greaterthanbef oreandcomm unicationtechnologyhasincr easedthepossi - bilitiesforcontactacrossgreatdistances.Asaresultofthis,internationalization, orglobalization, isaffectingeveryoneofus, intermsofbothourv aluesand ourpatternsofaction.

Alargerproportionofyoungpeoplethanbeforegaininternationalexperience andinsightfr omeducation, themedia, travelandper sonalcontacts. Communicationtakesplaceacrossnationalborders, bothasaresultofthefact thatmorepeopleliveinothercountr iesandbecausene wtechnologymakes frequentcontactsandthedevelopmentofasenseofcommunitypossible,even ifpeopledonottr avelphysically. Regardlessofwher etheylive, toag reater degreethanbefore, youngpeoplehavethepossibilitytoor ientthemselvesin relationtointer nationalandspecialinter estgroups.Theinternationalfashion andenter tainmentindustr yhasalsoledtointer nationalizationandglobali - zationoftheformsofexpressionofyouthcultureacrossnationalborders.

Inrecentyears, internationalpoliticalmo vementshavegrownupwhic hare criticaltoglobalization,particularlyintheeconomicsphere.Youngpeopleplay anactiveroleinthesemo vements.Althoughitisv aluabletocriticizesomeof theef fectsofglobalization, itisunhelpfultobenegativ etoglobalizationin general.Thecrucialquestioniswhic hvaluesinternationalizationandglobali - zationaretobebasedon. Withrespecttointer nationalization, itisimpor tant togiveyoungpeopletheoppor tunitytoacquir einter nationalandinter-cul - turalcompetence, andtode veloppoliticalarenasthatg iveyoungpeoplethe possibilitytoexertinfluence, alsooninternationalissues. 33

4Areasofyouthpolicy

4.1Theinterestsandparticipationofyoung peopleinpublicplanning afeguardingtheinterestsofyoungpeopleinpublicplanningisanimpor- tantgoalforthedesignofy outhpolicy. BoththePlanningandBuilding S ActandtheNationalP olicyGuidelinestostr engthentheinter estsof childrenandy oungpeopleintheplanningpr ocessemphasizethatspecial attentionm ustbepaidtotheneedsandinter estsofc hildrenandy oung people. Amongotherthings, theNationalP olicyGuidelinesr equirem unici- palitiestoorganizetheplanningprocessinsuchawaythatviewsconcerning childrenandyoungpeopleasinterestedpartiesareexpressed,andthatvarious groupsofchildrenandyoungpeoplearegiventheopportunitytoparticipate themselves.

Thehistoryofmunicipalplanningforchildrenandyoungpeoplebeginsatthe endofthe1970s. Oneimportantdifferenceincomparisonwithbeforeisthat planningforchildrenandy oungpeopleisf ormallylink edtothem unicipal developmentplan. Somemunicipalitiesdothisb ypreparingseparatemunici- palsub-plansf orc hildrenandy oungpeople, whileother sg ivepr iorityto childrenandyoungpeopleinthemunicipaldevelopmentplan.

Inrecentyears,manymunicipalitieshaveidentifiedchildrenandyoungpeople asoneoftheirmostimpor tantpriorities. However, therearestillconsiderable differencesbetweenmunicipalitieswithr especttothee xtenttowhic hthey considertheconsequencesofpolicyf ormulationsf orc hildrenandy oung peopleinconnectionwiththeirplanningw ork, andwhethertheinter estsof childrenandyoungpeoplearesufficientlytakenintoaccount.Thepossibilities forchildrenandyoungpeopletotakepartintheplanningprocessalsovary.

Thereisalsostr ongerfocusontheinter estsofc hildrenandy oungpeopleat countyle vel. Inmostcounties, themostr ecentcountyde velopmentplans, whichareincreasinglystrategicandf ocusedonspecif icissues, childrenand youngpeoplear eeitherasepar atetopicorha vebeenpr ioritizedinsome otherway.SeveralcountieshavealsoestablishedYouthCountyCouncils,which provideinputsf orcountyplanningandmak estatementsonmatter sthatar e dealtwithinthecountyplanningpr ocess.Atcountyleveltoo, however, there 34 isconsiderablevariationintermsofbothconsiderationfortheinterestsofchil- drenandyoungpeopleandtheextenttowhichtheyoungpeoplethemselves areensur edpossibilitiesf orpar ticipationinandinf luenceontheplanning process.

4.1.1Arrangementstosafeguardtheinterestsof childrenandyoungpeopleintheplanningpr ocess In1989, twoimportantreformswereimplementedtostrengthentheinterests ofc hildrenandy oungpeopleinplanningpr ocesses. TheNationalP olicy Guidelinestostr engthentheinter estsofc hildrenandy oungpeopleinthe planningprocesswerelaiddownbyRoyalDecreeon1September1989.Inthe sameyear, thePlanningandBuildingActwasamendedforthesamepurpose. Ther eformsw ereintr oducedbecausetheinter estsofc hildrenandy oung peoplehadnotbeensuf ficientlytakenintoaccountintheplanningsystem. Despitethefactthattherewaswidespreadawarenessofhowagoodenviron- mentforchildrencouldbeachievedthroughplanninganddevelopment, chil- drenandyoungpeopleconstantlylostoutincompetitionwithotherinterests.

TheintroductionoftheNationalP olicyGuidelinestostrengthentheinterests ofchildrenandyoungpeopleintheplanningprocessandtheamendmentsto thePlanningandBuildingActareastrongsignalfromcentralgovernmentthat theconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeopleg rowupm ustbeonthe agendaatallle velsoftheplanningpr ocess.Thesedocumentsareinstructions fromcentralgovernment, butitisuptolocalauthor itiestogivethemcontent andadaptpracticestolocalconditions.

Oneimpor tantpr ovisioninthePlanningandBuilding Actstatesthatthe MunicipalCouncilhasanobligationtoappointtheheadofoneofthem unici- palagenciesoranotherof ficialtobeespeciall yresponsibleforsafeguarding theinter estsofc hildrenandy oungpeopleintheplanningpr ocess. The Children’sRepresentativemustensurethattheinterestsofchildrenandyoung peoplearetakenintoaccountinthevariousplansandmustreactifthisisnot thecase.TheChildren’sRepresentativemustattendmeetings, hastherightto speakandther ighttopr esentproposals, whichtheStandingCommitteef or PlanningIssuesisfreetoacceptorreject.TheChildren’sRepresentativehasthe righttoaddf ootnotestothemin utesofmeetingsoftheStandingCommittee forPlanningIssues, butdoesnothavetherighttoappealdecisions.Anyobjec- tionstoaplanmustcomefromthecountyauthorities.

4.1.2Theparticipationofchildrenandyoungpeoplein localplanningprocesses ThePlanningandBuildingActandtheNationalPolicyGuidelinesalsoprovide forthepar ticipationofc hildrenandy oungpeopleintheplanningpr ocess. Manymunicipalitieshavebeenw orkingonf acilitatingthepar ticipationand influenceofchildrenandyoungpeopleinlocalplanningpr ocessesforsome time.Themethodsusedandthee xtenttowhichmunicipalitieshaveinvolved childrenandyoungpeoplevary, andwestillhavealongw aytogobeforeall municipalitiesmeettherequirementsforactiveparticipationlaiddowninthe NationalPolicyGuidelines.

Experienceshowsthattherearemanypossibilitiesforinvolvingchildrenand 35 youngpeopleinlocalplanningpr ocesses. Severalmunicipalitieshaveincor- poratedregularroutinesfortheparticipationofchildrenandyoungpeoplein municipalplanningactivities. Thispar ticularlyappliestoph ysicalplanning. Somedothisb yusingpupils’ councilsandc lasscouncilsasper manentcon- sultationbodies. Otherscollectsystematicinf ormationfr omc hildrenand youngpeopleaboutwheretheyplay, spendtheirleisuretime, etc., whichthey thenuseinconnectionwithworkonthemunicipaldevelopmentplan.

4.2Schoolsandeducation Fromthe1950suntilthepresentday, comprehensiveeducationalreformsand othersocialc hangeshaveradicallychangedtheliv esofc hildrenandy oung people.Oneoftheobjectivesofchangesintheeducationalsystemhasbeento provideeducationforallchildrenandyoungpeople,regardlessoftheirgender, placeofresidence,ability,ethnicbackgroundorparents’financialsituation.The equalr ighttoeducationhasbeenano verarchingpoliticalg oal. Compulsory educationhasincr easedfr om7to10y earsandmostc hildrenno wattend uppersecondaryschoolsfor(atleast)afur ther3years.Theproportionofthe populationattendingschoolabovelowersecondarylevelhasrisensharplyin thepastthirtyyears. In1970, 7.3percentofthepopulationovertheageof16 hadcompletedauniv ersityorcolleg eeducation, comparedwithasman yas 21.9percentin2001. Therear ealsof ewerdif ferencesbetweenurbanand ruralareasandbetweenboysandgirls.Today, moregirlsthanboysstudyatcol- legesanduniversities.

4.2.1Thepurposeofeducation Thepurposeofsc hoolsistopr ovideeducationandkno wledge.Accordingto theobjectclauseoftheEducationAct, inadditiontoknowledge, theobjectof primaryandlo wersecondar yeducationistoincr easeawarenessandunder - standingoffundamentalChr istianandhumanistv aluesandfur thertheequal statusandequalrightsofallhumanbeings,intellectualfreedomandtolerance, ecologicalunder standingandinter nationalco-r esponsibility. Thecur riculum forten-yearprimaryandlo wersecondaryeducationstr onglyemphasizesthe importanceofdevelopingotheraspectsofeducationinadditiontothepur ely academicaspects, andunderlinestheimpor tanceofeducationinde veloping socialskillsandinc lusiveattitudes. Thepurposeofeducationis, therefore, to ensurethatchildrenandyoungpeopleacquireknowledgeandsocialskillsand arepreparedforlife. Primary, lowersecondaryanduppersecondaryeducation mustalsoencourageandbepar toflifelonglearningsothatcompetencecan bemaintained, developedandstrengthenedthroughoutaperson’slife.

4.2.2Thecurrentstructureofprimary,lowersecondary anduppersecondaryeducation Theintentionofthereformsofprimary,lowersecondaryanduppersecondary educationinthe1990sw astomaintaincentr alaspectsofNorw egianeduca- tionalpolicy, withemphasisoncompr ehensiveeducation, aswellastotak e intoaccountnewchallenges.Thereformofprimaryandlowersecondaryedu- cationmustbeviewedinconjunctionwiththereformofuppersecondaryedu- cation. Oneoftheimpor tantpurposesoftheser eformswastoensurecoher- 36 enceintheeducationandde velopmentofc hildrenandy oungpeople. Nevertheless, inmanyareasthereappear stobec learpotentialf orimprove- mentintheconnectionsbetweenthevariouslevelsofeducationandbetween learningandw ork. Therear eman yindicationsthattheser eformsha venot beensufficientlycoordinated.Amongotherthings, thereappearstobeaneed andpotentialf org reaterf lexibilityasr egardstheinteg rationoftheor yand practiceandasr egardscooper ationbetw eensc hoolsandcompanies. Adjustmentsarealsorequiredinordertoimprovethewayinwhichtheneeds ofspecialg roups, suchaspupilswithspecialeducationalneedsandpupils fromminoritylanguagegroups, aremet.

4.2.3Adaptededucationandspecialeducation Alleducationm ustbeadaptedtothea bilitiesandaptitudesofindividual pupils, apprenticesandtrainees(Section1-2oftheEducationAct).Thecorner- stoneofthepr incipleofadaptededucationandequaleducationalser vicesis, therefore, thatallpupilsm ustencounterchallengescommensuratewiththeir aptitude, regardlessoftheirbackgrounds, abilitiesandpossibledisabilities.

TheprincipleofintegrationinNorwegianeducationalpolicy, combinedwith thegoalofadaptededucationandtheambitiontoinc ludeallpupilsandg ive allpupilstheexperienceofmeetingeducationalexpectations, requiresstrong focusontar geteddif ferentiationofeducation. Withr especttothepr actical implementationofdif ferentiatededucation, however, schoolshavenotmade enoughprogressincater ingforthebr oadrangeofpupilneeds. InReportto theStortingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandy oungpeopleg rowup andliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)), the Governmentpointsoutthatpub licschoolshavenotbeenf lexibleenoughto fullymeettheneeds, eitherofpupilswhofeelthatschoolistootheoreticalor ofpupilswhoneedtostretchthemselvesmore.

Substantialr esourcesar eallocatedf orspecialeducation(individualtuition, smallgroups, teachingassistants, etc.)andotherspecialeducationalmeasur es andauxiliaryservicesineducation, includingtheeducationalandpsyc hologi- calcounsellingser viceandthecentr algovernment’ssupportsystemf orspe- cialeducation.Inadditiontotheabove,substantialamountsoffundingarepro- videdforadditionalteac hingresources(dividedc lasses, two-teachersystems, etc.), whichbenef itallpupils, andf ormother-tonguetuitionf orlangua ge minorities.

4.2.4TheFollow-upService Inconnectionwithther eformofuppersecondar yeducation, theFollow-up Servicewasestablishedasastatutoryserviceatcountylevelforyoungpeople whoareentitledtouppersecondaryeducationbutdonothaveaschoolplace orapermanentjob. TheFollow-upServicemustensurethatally oungpeople withintheSer vice’stargetgroupareofferededucation, workorsomeother activity.Theprimaryaimoftheseservicesisfortheyoungpersontoqualifyfor furtherstudiesorav ocationalcareer, orachievequalificationatalowerlevel. TheFollow-upServicemustensurethatithasfulldetailsofthetar getgroup andm ustfollowupandcontacteac hyoungper sonintheg roupandof fer counselling. 37 Youngpeopleinthetar getgroupwhodonotaccepttheF ollow-upService’s offerandarenotattendingsc hoolorworkingmustbecontactedandof fered aprogrammeeachschoolyearforaslongastheyarecoveredbythestatutory righttofur thereducation. However, somey oungpeoplear euntr aceableor refusefollow-upservices.Therearemanyreasonswhypupilswishtomak ea breakwiththeeducationalsystem, themainonebeingalackofmotivationto attendschool.

TheF ollow-upSer vicem ustensur einter-a gencycooper ationbetw eenthe municipal, countyandcentralgovernmentauthoritiesresponsibleforthistar- getgroupandpassonorcoordinateoffersfromthevariousagencies. Relevant partnersinc ludelo wersecondar ysc hools, uppersecondar ysc hoolsand schoolcounsellorsattheabove, theeducationalandpsychologicalcounselling service, thecountyeducationauthor ity, theLabourMarketAuthorityandthe socialwelfareandhealthservices.

4.2.5Userparticipationinschools– parentalparticipationandpupildemocracy ReportNo.14totheStorting(1997-98)relatingtoparentalparticipationinpri- maryandlo wersecondar yeducationemphasizedthedesir abilityofmor e parentalparticipationinschools.TheEducationActandthegeneralsectionof thecur riculumstronglyunderlinethepossibilitiesf orparentsandpupilsto participateinandinf luencetheoperationanddevelopmentofschools.

TheEducation Actr egulatescooper ationbetw eenpar ents/thehomeand schoolsandpr ovidesrulesforschoolboards, parents’ councilsandthew ork- ingcommitteesofpar ents’ councilsatallpr imaryandlo wersecondar y schools. Althoughclasscontactsinpr imaryandlo wersecondar yschoolsare nolongerastatutoryrequirement,morethan90percentofprimaryandlower secondarysc hoolsstillha vec lasscontacts. Norwegiansur veyssho wthat parentsareextremelyinterestedinwhattakesplaceatschoolwithrespectto theiro wnc hildrenandtheirc lassen vironment. TheNationalP arents’ Committeef orPr imaryandLo werSecondar yEducationisanindependent bodywhichadvisestheMinistr yonmatter srelatingtocooper ationbetween schoolandhomeandsafeguardstheinterestsofparentsinrelationtotheedu- cationalsystem. TheNationalP arents’ Committeef orPr imaryandLo wer SecondaryEducationisalsor esponsibleforimplementingmeasuresthatwill, toagreaterextentthantoday, promotetheinclusionofparentsfromlanguage minoritiesincooper ationbetweenhomesandsc hools.Thistypeofcooper a- tionisfarlesscomprehensiveinuppersecondaryschoolsthaninprimaryand lowersecondaryschools.

TheEducation Actsetsthepar ametersf orpupilpar ticipationandinc ludes rulesforclasscouncilsandpupil’ scouncilsinpr imaryandlo wersecondar y schoolsandpr ovisionsr elatingtopupils’ councils, generalmeetings, school committeesandparticipationoncountyboardsinuppersecondaryeducation. TheNorwegianPupils’ Organizationisanindependent, nationalorganization withcountybr anchesforpupilsandappr enticesinuppersecondar yeduca- tionwhosepurposeistosaf eguardtheinter estsofpupilsvis-à-vislocaland centraleducationauthorities.TheMinistryofEducationandResear chcooper- ateswiththeNorwegianPupils’ Organizationinmanyareas. 38 4.3Healthandsocialconditions Althoughy oungpeopleinNorw ayar ehealth yonthewhole, manyy oung peoplearestrugglingwithpr oblemsanddiseases. Somechildrenandy oung peoplehavechronichealthproblemsordisa bilitiesthataf fecttheireveryday livestosuchanextentthatthe ycannottakepartinplayorleisureactivities. Surveysalsoshowthatmanychildrenandyoungpeopledevelopanunhealthy lifestyleduringchildhoodandadolescence, suchasunfortunateeatinghabits, inactivity, riskbeha viour, smokinganddr ugandalcoholuse. Therear ealso manyindicationsthattheoccurrenceofmentalproblemsandillnessesamong childrenandyoungpeopleisincreasing.

InRepor ttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hc hildrenandy oung peopleg rowupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001- 2002)), theGovernmentpointsoutthatmeasurestoimprovetheconditionsin whichyoungpeoplegrowupr equirefocusonhealth-pr omoting, preventive, curativeandrehabilitativeeffortswithintheareasofresponsibilityofmanydif- ferentagenciesandsector s. IntheReport, itispointedoutthattheef fectsof sucheffortswillbestrengthenedifservicesandsectorscooperatemoreonthe designandimplementationofmeasures.Thisentailsare-orientationawayfrom thehealthandsocialw elfaresectorto wardsgeneralpoliticalandadministr a- tivesolutions, bothwithinandoutsidethehealthandsocialser vices. Health- promotingandpreventiveeffortstoprovideagoodenvironmentforchildren growingupmusttakeplacethroughbroadcooperationbetweenagenciesand sectorsandinc ludebothof ficialandnon-g overnmentalactivities. Thec hal- lengesarerelatedtocooper ationbetweenm unicipala genciesandser vices, betweenmunicipalandspecialisthealthser vicesandbetweenthepublicand voluntarysectors. Problemsrelatingtothehealthofc hildrenandyoungpeo- plearediscussedinmor edetailinaspecialRepor ttotheStor tingonhealth policy, whichtheGovernmentsubmittedinJanuary2003.

4.3.1Health-promotingandpreventiveactivities Health-promotingactivitiesaimtoimpr ovequalityoflif e, happinessandthe abilitytocopewiththec hallengesandstr ainstowhic hweareexposedin everydaylife. Preventiveactivitiesaimtor educeriskfactorsthatma yleadto illness, injuryandpr ematuredeath. Theseconceptsar ecombinedunderthe term“publichealthactivities”,whichmaybedefinedassociety’soverallefforts tomaintain, promoteandimpr ovethepub lichealth. Throughoutthe1990s, health-promotingandpr eventiveactivitiesha vebeenf ollowedupthr ough inter-ministerialactionplans, trans-sectoralmeasuresandr esearch. Feedback andevaluationsshowthatthesemeasur eshaveresultedingoodprocessesin themunicipal, countyandnon-governmentalsectors.

Theestablishmentofyouthhealthclinicswasoneofthepr iorityareasinthe PlanofActiontoPreventUndesiredPregnancyandAbortionandmanymuni- cipalitieshaveestablishedyouthhealthc linicsinr ecentyears.Thisserviceis providedforally oungpeople, usuallyuptothea geof20, regardlessoftheir placeofeducationorwork.

Youthhealthc linicsof feradviceandguidancef orbothg irlsandbo ys. Importanttopicsinc ludemattersrelatingtose xuality, sexualintercourseand 39 contraception, includingsexualpreference, HIVandsexuallytransmittedinfec- tions, sexuala buseandviolence, physicalandmentalhealthandhealth-pr o- motingbeha viour. Boysandg irlsar eequall yimpor tanttar getg roupswith respecttothepreventionofmentalillness, HIVandsexuallytransmittedinfec- tions. Itisextremelyimportanttoprovideguidanceoncontraceptionforboth girlsandboystomakethemawareoftheirresponsibilityforpreventingunde- siredpregnancyandabortionandpromoteethicalreflectionandchoices.The challengeforyouthhealthclinicsis, throughdialogue, tohelpstrengthenthe self-confidence, personalcare, responsibilityandsocialskillsofyoungpeople.

Inconnectionwiththepsyc ho-socialactivitiesr unbyschoolhealthser vices andyouthhealthc linics, happiness, sexuality, sexualintercourseandcontr a- ception, preventionofundesir edpr egnancy, abuse, preventionofsuicide, reventionandguidancer elatingtoeatingdisor dersandpr eventionoff orced marriageandfemalegenitalmutilationareimportantpriorities.Specialplansof actionha vebeenf ormulatedtocombatf orcedmar riageandf emaleg enital mutilation.

4.3.2Undesiredpregnancyandabortion 13,867abortionswerecarriedoutin2001,788fewerthaninthepreviousyear, whichisequivalenttoadec lineofjusto ver5percent. Thenumberofabort- ionshasnotbeenaslowsincethemid-1990s.Afterariseinteenageabortions in2000, then umbersareoncea gainatthesamele velasattheendofthe 1990s. Effortstopr eventundesiredpregnancyandr educethea bortionrate argetbothg enders. Anotherg oalofpr eventiveef fortsistoensur ethatall youngpeopleha vethebestpossib lebasis, inter msofkno wledgeofse xual intercourse, sexuality, contraceptionandpregnancy, forchoosingwhentostart ababy.

InconnectionwiththedebateonPr opositionNo. 1totheStor ting(2001- 2002)onthe2002budget, theStortingsupportedtheproposalthatgirlsaged 16-19shouldha veaccesstofr eecontraceptivepillsasameasur etopr event undesiredpregnancyandabortionamongteenagegirls. Nursesandmidwives withsupplementaryqualificationswhoareemployedinhealthclinicsandthe schoolhealthser vicehavebeenauthor izedtowr iteprescriptionsforcontra- ceptivepillsforyounggirlswhorequestthem.

4.3.3HIVandsexuallytransmissibleinfections ResponsibilityandConsider ation–astr ategicplanforthepr eventionofHIV andsexuallytransmissiblediseasesw aspresentedb ytheMinistr yofHealth andSocialAffairsinNovember2001. Oneoftheg oalsofthestr ategicplanis tostrengthenhealth-promotingandpr eventiveeffortsinthisar eathattar get adolescentsandyoungadults.

Theincidenceofsexuallytransmissibleinfectionsamongyoungpeopleisstill high. EffortstopreventHIVandsexuallytransmissibleinfectionsamongyoung peoplehavethereforebeenintensified,withemphasisoncooperatingwiththe youngpeoplethemselv es. Schools, non-governmentalor ganizations, youth clubs, youthhealthc linicsandthesc hoolhealthser viceplayavitalr olein theseinformationandadvisoryactivities. 40 InRepor ttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hc hildrenandy oung peopleg rowupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001- 2002)), theGovernmentemphasizesthat, inconnectionwithcounsellingf or childrenandyoungpeopleonsexualintercourse, sexualityandcontraception, theaimistomakechildrenandyoungpeopleawareoftheirownbodies,devel- opmentandse xualityandla ythef oundationsforethicalc hoices. Providing educationandpassingonvaluesrelatingtosexualityandsexualintercourseto youngpeople,willimprovetheabilityofadolescentsandyoungadultstomake crucial, ethicallifechoices. 4.3.4Injuriesresultingfromaccidentsandviolence Thenumberoffatalaccidentshasbeendecliningsince1970, forbothgenders andinalla gegroups. In2001, therewerejustunder2,300violentdeathsin Norway. 74percentofthemwereduetoaccidentsand24percentduetosui- cide. Inthey oungesta geg roup(0-14), then umberofaccidentaldeaths declinedbyalmost60percentfr om1980to2001. Accidentalinjuriesarestill themostcommoncauseofdeathamongchildrenandyoungpeople.Accidents inthehomearemostfrequentamongchildren(0-14).Accidentsandinjuriesin connectionwithspor tandtr ainingaremostfr equentamongy oungpeople aged15-24. Intheleisur esector, therearetrendsthatentailamajorr iskof accident, asmaybeseenfr omthen umberofinjur iesrelatedtosno wboards, skateboardsandrollerskates.Therearegroundsformonitoringtrendsinmod- ernoutdooractivitiesandurbanleisureactivities.

Thechallengesinconnectionwiththepr eventionofinjur iesresultingfrom accidentsorviolencear etostrengthentheknowledgebaseandtr anslatethis knowledgeintopracticalpreventivemeasures.Trafficaccidentsposeaspecial challenge, sincetheaveragedegreeofseriousnessofthiscategoryofinjuryis high. Manymeasureshavebeenimplementedinr ecentyearstoimproveroad safetyforschoolchildren. Theyincludeimprovedbarriersbetweenmotorists andpedestr iansandtheconstr uctionofspecialpedestr ianandcyc lepaths. Thereisstillag reatdealofpotentialf orpr eventingbicyc le-relatedinjur ies amongchildrenandyoungpeople.

Thepreventionofaccidentsisdependentonlocal,long-termefforts.TheWorld HealthOr ganisation’s(WHO’ s)Saf eComm unitiesconcepthasbeenwidel y incorporatedasaw orkingmethodinef fortstopr eventaccidents. Almost50 municipalitiesinNorwayareworkingonasystematic, trans-sectoralandlong- termbasistopr eventaccidentsandinjur ieswithintheSaf eComm unities framework.WorkonSafeCommunitiesiscontinuing. 4.3.5Suicideamongchildrenandyoungpeople Despitethef actthatthesuicider atef orthepopulationasawholec learly declinedinthe1990s, thetrendwasnotasfavourablefortheyoungerpopula- tion. Thesuicider atehastr aditionallybeenv erylo wf ory oungpeoplein Norwaycompar edwithothercountr ies, includingNorw ay’sneighbour s, DenmarkandSw eden. However, thisisnolong erthecase. Thesuicider ate amongthe15-24a geg roupinNorw ayisno wsignif icantlyhigherthanin DenmarkandSweden, andthesituationisthesameforbothsexes. Suicidehas becomethemostcommoncauseofdeathamongbo ysandy oungmenin Norway,andalsoaccountsforasubstantialproportionofalldeathsamonggirls andyoungwomen. Foreachsuicide, therearemanyattemptedsuicides. 41 Surveysalsosho wthatther eisahighattemptedsuicider ateamongy oung homosexualsandlesbians. ReportNo. 25totheStor ting(2000-2001)Living conditionsandqualityoflifeforlesbiansandhomosexualsinNorwayparticu- larlyaddressestheissueofsuicideamongyounglesbiansandhomosexuals.The Reportcontainspr oposalsforse veralmeasur esaimedatpr eventinglesbian andhomose xualsuicide. Amongotherthings, theMinistr yofChildr enand FamilyAffairsprovidesfundingf orinformationactivitiesaimedatpr eventing discriminationandpr omotingequaltr eatmentandr espectforhomosexuals andlesbiansinNorwegiansociety.Thereisspecialfocusonprovidingpreven- tiveinformationforyounghomosexualsandlesbianswhomaybeindangerof committingsuicide.

Aplanofactiontocombatsuicidewascompletedattheendof1999.AFollow- upProject–measurestocombatsuicide(2000-2002)wasintroducedinorder tomaintainanddeveloptheexpertisethathadbeenestablished.Themaingoal istostr engthenthee xpertiseofandser vicesprovidedbythehealthser vice forpeopleinsuicidalcr isisandtopr eventsuicideamongvulner ablegroups, includingc hildrenandy oungpeople. UndertheF ollow-upPr oject, thepr e- ventionofsuicideamonglesbiansandhomose xualsisdef inedasapr iority area. Aspartofthispr oject, regionalresourcegroupshavebeenesta blished, linkedtothehealthr egions. Furthermore, underthisproject, aninter-discipli- narytrainingprogrammeonpreventionofsuicidehasbeenestablished, acon- tributionhasbeenmadetowardsimprovingroutinesforfollowingupsuicidal personsandresearchhasbeenstrengthened.

4.3.6Smoking Smokingisoneofthemostimpor tantriskfactorsandcausesofcar dio-vascu- lardiseases, cancerandpneumonicandr espiratorydiseases. Everyy ear, approximately7,500dieofsmoking-relateddiseasesbecausethey smokethemselves, whileapproximately500peoplediefrompassivesmoking. Theannualsurveysofsmokingha bitsinNorw aycarriedoutb ytheNational CouncilonTobaccoandHealthsho wthatjustunderonethir dofthepopula - tionbetweentheagesof16and74smokeonadailybasis.Afteraverypositive trendinthepopulation’ssmokinghabitsinthe1970s, theproportionofdaily smokersisno wdecliningonlyslightly. Genderdifferencesinsmokingha bits arerelativelyslightinNorway.

Feweryoungpeoplearestartingtosmoketodaythan25yearsago.Thedecline isprobablyaresultofnewrestrictionsandincreasedfocusonandknowledge ofther isksofsmoking. Thesharpdeclineinthepr oportionofdailysmokers amongyoungpeopleaged16-24from1973totheendofthe1980shassta g- nated,however,andthetrendhasbeenstablesincetheendofthe1980s.Inthe under-25a geg roup, approximately30percentofw omenandmensmok e everyday. Amongpupilsinlo wersecondar yschools, 10percentw eredaily smokersin2000, comparedwith16percentin1975. Amongpupilsinupper secondaryschools, approximately25percentaredailysmokers.

Reducingsmokingamongy oungpeopleisapr ioritytask. Schoolsar ean importantar enainthisr espect. Onee xampleofthemeasur estak enisthe educationalanti-smokingpr ogrammeVÆRrøykFRI(VrF), whichtargetschil- dreninlo wersecondar yschools. Approximatelyhalfofthelo wersecondar y schoolclassesinthecountryaretakingpartintheprogramme.VrFisthemost 42 comprehensiveanti-smokingcampaignthathase verbeenintr oducedin Norway. Itsmainpurposeistopr eventchildrenfr omstar tingtosmok e. An evaluationofthepr ogrammeshowedgoodresults. VrFisbeingcontin uedin lowersecondar ysc hoolsandin volvesteac hers, pupilsandpar ents. Røyksignaler(Smok eSignals)isajointpr ojectbetw eentheDir ectorateof HealthandSocialAffairsandtheNorwegianCancerSociety, thegoalofwhich istoreducethenumberofsmokersinthe16-19a gegroup.Theprojectaims tocombineindividual-basedstr ategieswithmeasuresatgroupandcommuni- tylevel. SmokeSignalsisbeingcontinuedinuppersecondar yschoolsaccord- ingtothesameprinciplesasVrF.

Norwayhase xtremelystr ictanti-smokingleg islationthatpr ohibitssmoking indoorsinpublicbuildings, onpublictransportandinw orkplaces.Allrestau- rantsarerequiredtoha vesmoke-freezones. Smokinginrestaurants, barsand caféswillbeprohibitedfromJune2004.

4.3.7Mentalhealth MentalillnessinNorwayvariesintermsofitsduration, seriousnessandinten- sity. Itiscalculatedthat15-20percentofthepopulationsuf ferfromamildor moreseriousformofmentalillness. Thismeansthatther eareapproximately 800,000peopleinNorwaysufferingfrommentalillness.Varioussurveysshow thatapproximately20percentofchildrenandyoungpeoplesufferfrommen- talillness. Researchersandclinicsagreethataround5percentofchildrenand youngpeople(a ged0-18)havementalproblemsthataresoser iousthatthe y needhelpfromthespecialisthealthser vice.

Manystudiesshowthatcertainriskfactorsincreasetheprobabilityofmental illnessamongchildrenandyoungpeople. Factorsthathaveprovedtoincrease theriskofmentalhealthproblemsincludelong-termfamilystress, educational qualityanden vironmentalfactorssuchaspoorlivingstandar dsandalac kof socialsupport. Parents’ problemsinconnectionwithdr ugandalcohola buse, mentalillnessandhelplessnessinconf lictsituationsalsoleadtoanincr eased probabilityofproblemsamongchildren. Researchalsoindicatesthatinman y casessocialstressincreasesthedangerofmentalandphysicalillness.

Formanyyears,ithasbeendocumentedthatservicesforpeoplesufferingfrom mentalillnessar eseriouslydeficientandthatthedef icienciesaregreatestin servicesforchildrenandyoungpeople.TheExpansionPlanforMentalHealth 1999-2006isintendedtosignif icantlystrengthenmentalhealthser vicesover aneight-y earper iod. Measurestar getingc hildrenandy oungpeoplear ea centralfocusoftheExpansionPlan. Servicesforchildrenandy oungpeople willbee xpandedb ypr ovidingmor er esidentialandda yplacesandmor e professionalstaf fforoutpatientdepar tments. Inall, theGovernmentaimsto increaseservicestocover5percentofthe0-18agegroup, comparedwiththe current2percent.

4.3.8Eatingdisorders Thereisg rowingfocusoneatingdisor dersasahealthpr oblem. Itislar gely childrenandyoungpeoplewhodevelopeatingdisorders.Thereisadifference betweenwhatareregardedaseatingproblemsandmoreseriouseatingdisor- 43 dersdiagnosedaccordingtomedicalcriteria. Itisbelievedthattherehasbeen anincreaseinthenumberoflessser iouseatingproblems, butitisdif ficultto quantify. However, theassumptionthatther ehasbeenadr amaticriseinthe incidenceofeatingdisordersisnotsupportedbyrecentresearch.

InternationalandNorw egiansur veysestimatethatser iouseatingdisor ders affectapproximately2percentofthefemalepopulation. Eatingdisorderspri- marilyaffectwomen.Accordingtoanumberofstudies,thegenderdistribution isapproximately90percentgirlsandwomenand10percentboysandmen. Duetobothphysicalcomplicationsandsuicideattemptsresultingfromeating disorders, themortalityrateis6-9timeshigherthanf orthecomparablepopu- lation.

AStrategicPlantocombateatingdisorderswaspresentedin2000.Theplanis basedintheMinistr yofHealth, butthev ariousmeasuresarefollowedupb y theministriesresponsiblefordifferentpartsoftheplan. Theplanf ocuseson increasingthepr eventionofeatingdisor dersb yimpr ovingcompetenceat healthclinicsandinthesc hoolhealthser viceandb yprovidinginformation materialsforschools.Treatmentwillalsobestrengthened.Amongotherthings, specialisttreatmentserviceswillbeesta blishedineachhealthregion, andall outpatientsdepar tmentsinthementalhealthcar esystemm ustha vethe necessaryexpertisetotreateatingdisorders.

Aspartoftheef forttopreventeatingdisorders, theMinistryofChildrenand FamilyAffairsandtheMinistr yofEducationandResear charef inancingthe developmentofanInter net-basededucationalpr ogrammewhichisintended toraiseawarenessamongc hildrenandy oungpeopleoftheinstr umentsand methodsusedb ythemediaandtheadv ertisingindustr y. Youngpeoplear e activelyinvolvedinthedesignofthewebsite, whichtargetspupilsinprimary, lowersecondar yanduppersecondar ysc hools. Workisalsoinpr ogressto makeparentsawareoftheproblemandindicatewhatparentsandprofession- alscandotopr eventchildrenandy oungpeoplefr omdevelopingeatingdis - orders.

4.4Thechildandyouthwelfar eservice Therehavebeencomprehensivedevelopmentsinthechildandyouthwelfare serviceinthepastdecade.AnewChildWelfareActwasintroducedin1992,and athree-yeardevelopmentprogrammeforthechildwelfareservicewasimple- mentedfrom1991-1993. ThenewActandthede velopmentprogrammelaid thefoundationsforstrengtheningpreventiveefforts, assistanceandmeasur es inthelocalcomm unity.Thedevelopmentofthec hildwelfareserviceinthe 1990swasbasedonfourmainprinciples:

•strengtheninglegalprotection •focusingonassistanceandthepreventionofproblemdevelopment •stagnationintheprovisionofpublicinstitutionalservices–growthof private, commercialinstitutionalservices •humanresourcedevelopment, researchanddevelopment

Oneoftheaimsofthe1992Child WelfareActwastostr engthenlegalsaf e- guardsbyprovidingmoreprecisecriteriaforinterventionandimprovingcase 44 processing. Themostimpor tantlegalr eformunderthe Actconcer nedthe establishmentofcountysocialwelfareboards.Theprovisionconcerningdead- linesandther eportingofan yf ailuretocompl ywithdeadlinesf orr eports, investigationsortheimplementationofmeasur eshasalsoledtomor epr e- dictablecaseprocessingandotherwisestrengthenedlegalprotection.

Inthe1990s, asaresultofincreasedpersonnelcapacityatthemunicipallevel andmoresystematic, targetedchildwelfareactivities, therewasstrongerfocus ondevelopingassistanceser vicesandpr eventiveactivities. Manymunicipali- tiesha veesta blishedinter-a gencyandinter-disciplinar yteamscompr ising schools, educationalandpsyc hologicalcounsellingser vices, day-carecentres andhealthc linics. Mostmunicipalitieshaveformulatedtrans-sectoralpreven- tiveplansf orchildrenandy oungpeople. Majororganizationalchangeshave alsotakenplaceinman ymunicipalities, whichhavealsoaf fectedtheor gani- zationofc hildwelfareservices.The1992Child WelfareActreducedthea ge- limitforafter-careservicesto20.PursuanttoanamendmenttotheActin1998, thislimitwasonceagainincreasedto23. Themostfrequentlyusedafter-care measuresar ef inancialsuppor t, fosterhomes, institutions, personalsuppor t contactsandhousing.

Thechildwelfareserviceisnotonlyanelementofthewelfaresystembutalso anelementoftheofficialcontrolsystem, anditexercisesagreatdealofpower onbehalfofsociety.TheGovernmentwishestoensur ethatthec hildwelfare serviceisawareofitsdualrole.Asfaraspossible,thechildwelfareservicemust providepreventiveassistanceforchildrenandfamilies. However, beingableto interveneandprovidemeasuresoutsidethehomeisanequallyimportantpart ofthecompetenceofamoder nchildwelfaresystem.

In2002, theGovernmentthereforesubmittedRepor tNo. 40totheStor ting (2001-2002)onc hildandy outhwelfare.TheReportconcludesthatthec hild welfareserviceisf acingsomeimpor tantchallenges. Firstly, thechildwelfare serviceoftenenter sthescenetoolatetobea bletopr ovideadequateassis - tanceforchildrenatr iskandtheirf amilies. Secondly, cooperationwithother agenciesandser vicesisnotg oodenough. Thirdly, thelegitimacyofthec hild welfareserviceintheeyesofthepopulationisrelativelylow. Fourthly, thereis toolittlepoliticalawarenessandtoolittleinvolvementintheworkdonebythe childwelfareserviceatmunicipallevel.

TheReporttotheStortingcontainsmorethan70proposalsformeasures.The maingoalofthesemeasuresisto:

•str engthenpr eventivew orkwithf amiliesandimpr oveser vicesforvul - nerablechildren, adolescentsandfamilies •increasethefocusonthepotentialofparentsandfamilies •improvethefollow-upofparentsincaseswherethechildwelfareauthor- itiesplacechildrenoutsidethehome •strengthenmethodsbasedinthelocalcomm unitytopr eventandtr eat seriousbeha viouralpr oblems, e.g. throughtheMulti-Systemic Therapy (MST)andParentManagementTraining(PMT)methods •strengthencooperationbetweenthec hildwelfareauthoritiesandother agenciesthatpr ovideservicesforvulnerablechildren, youngpeopleand families •improvethesupervisionoffosterparents 45 •str engthenw orkwithc hildrenandf amiliesfr omdif ferentethnicbac k- groundsandunaccompaniedminorswhoarerefugees •increasethefocusonchildren’srighttoreceiveinformationandexpress theiropinions •increasethefocusontransparencyinthechildwelfareserviceandcoun- tysocialwelfareboards •strengthentheexpertiseofthechildwelfareservicerelatingtopreventive workwithfamiliesandworkwithchildrenandyoungpeoplewithserious behaviouralproblems.

ThroughtheMinistr yofChildr enandF amilyAffairs, thecentralgovernment hasag eneral, overarchingresponsibilityforchildwelfare, whiletheadminis - trationofchildwelfareislargelytheresponsibilityofthemunicipalchildwel- fareserviceandthecountyauthor ities. From1January2004, thecentralgov- ernmentwilltak eoverthetasksandr esponsibilitiesofthecountyc hildwel- fareauthor ities. Themostimpor tantobjectiv esofthec hildw elfareser vice reformareto:

•ensureimprovedprofessionalandf inancialcontrolofc hildwelfareserv- ices •ensureequalc hildwelfareservicesallo verthecountr yforchildrenand youngpeoplewhoneedthem •developimprovedcooperationandimprovedservicesformunicipalities •ensuregoodqualityinallpartsofthechildwelfareservice •makeanactivecontributiontowardsensuringthefurtherdevelopmentof professionalchildwelfareservices •contributetoimprovecooperationwithassociatedservices

4.5Workandunemployment 4.5.1Youngpeople’scontactwiththelabourmarket Becausethe yspendmor eyearsoneducation, youngpeoplejointhela bour marketlaterthantheydidbefore.Theproportionofyoungpeoplewhosemain activityisworkislowincomparisonwiththeadultpopulation.Thisisbecause mostyoungpeopleundertheageof20attenduppersecondaryschoolandthe percentageofyoungpeopleattendingcolleg esanduniversitieshasincreased inrecentyears. However, sincemanyschoolpupilsanduniversityandcollege studentsworkpar t-time, ar elativelylar geper centageofy oungpeopleha ve contactwiththelabourmarket.

Thepercentageofy oungpeopleinemplo ymentincreaseswitha ge. 50per centofthe20-24agegrouphadworkastheirmainactivityin2001.Sincemany peopleinthisa geg roupalsow orkpar t-timealongsidetheirstudies, the employmentratewas68percent.Thepercentageofstudentsinthisagegroup increasedfrom27percentin1990to39percentin2001.Therearestillmajor differencesbetweenyoungwomenandyoungmenasregardsthetypeofedu- cationtheychoose. Educationalchoicesarelargelymadeinaccor dancewith traditionalgenderroles.Thechoicesyoungpeoplemak earethemainr eason whygendersegregationstillexistsontheNorwegianlabourmarket. 46 4.5.2Theworkingenvironmentforyoungemployees Duetoy oungpeople’slimitede xperienceofw orkinglif e, specialr ulesar e requiredtopr otectthemandensur ethatthe yhaveagoodworkingenviron- ment. Becauseyoungpeopleha ve“looser” tiestothela bourmarket, theyare morevulnerablethanemplo yeeswhoar emorestronglylinkedtotheenter - prise. Itisalsonaturalthatyoungpeoplewholackexperienceofworkinglife andknowledgeoftheirrightsmoreeasilyacceptunlawfulworkingconditions, suchasthelackofawrittencontract, poortraining, arbitrarydismissal, lackof overtimepayandwithholdingofholida ypaywhenthe yleavethejob. There arealsoexamplesofw agesbeingpaidinthef ormofg oods. Experiencealso showsthaty oungpeoplema yoftenbee xposedtoanunf ortunateworking environmentandtheirrightsasemployeesmaynotbeobser ved. Duetotheir “loose” connectionwithw orkinglife, however, theseconditionsar eseldom noticedinconnectionwithor dinaryw orkingen vironmentactivitiesatthe workplace. Thispr oblemise xacerbatedb ythef actthattheper centageof youngpeoplewhobelongtoatradeunionissignificantlylowerthantheaver- age. Accordingtothe2000Sur veyofLivingConditions, only27percentof youngpeopleinthe16-24agegroupbelongedtoatradeunion,comparedwith anaverageof57percent.

Datafromthe2000SurveyofLivingConditionsshowsthatyoungpeopleaged 16-24haveworseconditionsthanadultemployeesinseveralareasintermsof boththeor ganizationalandtheph ysicalw orkingen vironment. Asw ellas workingtoag reaterextentintempor arypostswithnoper manentcontract, theyalsohavelessindependenceandlessvariedwork.Asregardsthephysical workingen vironment, itispar ticularlyinconnectionwiththeer gonomic workingenvironment(lifting, thepercentagewalkingorstanding)thaty oung peopleworkunderworseconditionsthanolderemployees. However, thereis nostatisticaldifferencebetweenthenumberofhealthpr oblemsinthe16-24 agegroupandintheaverageworkingpopulation.

TheWorkingEn vironmentActandther egulationsr elatingtoc hildrenand youngpeopleatw orkcontainr ulesintendedtopr otectchildrenandy oung peoplefromworkthatma ybehar mfultotheirsaf ety, healthorph ysicalor mentaldevelopment, orconditionsthatmayhaveadetrimentaleffectontheir education. TheLabourInspectoratereportsthatf ewemployersareawareof theseprovisions.

4.5.3Unemploymentamongyoungpeople Theextentofunemploymentprovidesinformationabouttheproblemsyoung peoplefaceinthetr ansitionfromeducationtoemplo ymentandhowsociety treatsnewcomerstothela bourmarket. Boththestr ucturalsituationonthe labourmarketandeconomiccyclesaffecttheunemploymentrate.Thesizeof they oungpopulationandeducationalser vicesalsoaf fecty oungpeople’ s accesstothelabourmarket.

Unemploymentamongy oungpeopleismostwidespr eadinthe20-24a ge groupanditisthisagegroupthathasthehighestoverallunemploymentrate. FiguresfromtheLabourMarketAuthorityshowthat,onaverage, 2,600persons betweentheagesof16and19wereregisteredasunemployedin2001.Thisis equivalentto2.4percentofthela bourforce(thetotalofemplo yedandun - 47 employedpersons). Mostpeopleinthisa gegroupareonlyunemployedfora shortperiodoftime. Thelowpercentageoflong-ter munemployedmustbe viewedinconjunctionwitheducationalser vicesandthe YouthGuar antee, whichensuresanof ferofla bourmarketprogrammesforyoungpeoplewho donothaveaplaceintheeducationalsystemoranof ferofwork.

Thehigherle velofunemplo ymentamongthe20-24a gegroupthanamong youngerpeopleisassociatedwiththef actthattherearemorepeopleinthis agegrouponthelabourmarket. In2001, 9,300personsinthisagegroupwere registeredasunemployed, equivalenttoanunemploymentrateof4.6percent ofthetotalla bourforce. Approximately12percentofthemw erelong-term unemployed.Thelowproportionoflong-termunemployedispartlyduetothe factthatpeopleinthisa gegroupareeasytoplace. Youngpeoplear emore mobileandadaptabletothekindsofw orkavailablethanpeopleinoldera ge groups.

Thefiguresforyoungpeoplewhoareregisteredasunemployedshowthatjust over60percentar emen. Thisappliestoboththe16-19andthe20-24a ge group. Long-termunemplo ymentisalsoslightl yhigherf ormenthanf or womenintheseagegroups.

ThecountyFollow-upServicehasaspecialr esponsibilityforyoungpeoplein the16-19a gegroup. TheFollow-upSer vicecoordinatesmeasurestoensur e thaty oungpeoplewho, forv ariousr easons, dropoutofuppersecondar y schoolareofferedaschoolplace, ajoboralabourmarketprogramme. Follow- upofthesey oungpeopletak esplacethr oughcooperationbetweenvarious agencies, includingtheLa bourMar ket Authority. Youngpeoplewhoha ve droppedoutofsc hoolandappl ytotheLa bourMarketAuthorityareusually giveninformation, counsellingandassistanceforashortperiodoftime. Ifthe prospectsoffindingworkarelimited, youngpeopleareofferedlabourmarket programmes. Evaluationoftheneedf oraprogrammetakesplaceincooper a- tionwiththey oungpeoplethemselv esandsometimesincooper ationwith representativesoftheF ollow-upSer viceortheeducationauthor ities. Tothe greatestpossibleextent, youngpeoplemustbeofferedacombinationofwork experienceanduppersecondaryeducation.

ThroughtheGovernment’sYouthGuarantee,youngpeopleundertheageof20 whohaveneitherajobnoraplaceatschoolareentitledtoanofferofalabour marketprogramme. In2001, labourmarketprogrammeswereprovidedforan averageof1,649personsundertheageof20.Anofferofworkexperiencehas beenthemostimpor tantla bourmarketprogrammeusedtofulf ilthe Youth Guarantee.Thisprogrammeprovidesexperienceandtrainingthroughfollow- upandadaptedon-the-jobtr aininginpub licorpr ivateenterpr ises. Aw ork experienceplacecanbeusedincombinationwithasc hoolplace. Thisis knownasacombinedpr ogramme. Forcombinedprogrammes, theeducation authoritiesar er esponsiblef orthef ormaleducationthatleadstoaqualif i- cation, whiletheLa bourMarketAuthorityisr esponsibleforprovidingwork experienceplaces. In1999, approximately30percentofyoungpeopleinthe 16-19agegrouphadworkexperienceplacesinacombinedprogramme.

TheLa bourMar ket Authorityhasde velopedaneducationalguidance rogramme, theaimofwhic histoteac hindividualstotak eresponsibilityfor theirdevelopmenttowardsworkinglifeandcopewiththetransitionfromedu- 48 cationtow ork.Thisisaser viceforyoungpeoplewhoneedcompr ehensive assistance.Theeducationalguidanceprogrammeisalsousedtomotivateyoung peopleundertheageof20whoareentitledtouppersecondaryeducationbut forvariousreasonshavedroppedoutofschool, tocontinuetheireducation.

Themainserviceofferedtounemployedpeopleaged20-24istohelpthemto findajob, insomecasesincombinationwithw agecontr ibutions. Offersof labourmar ketpr ogrammesar emostappr opriateforlong-ter munemplo yed personswhoneedqualif icationsandw orkexperiencetof indajob. Labour Market TrainingCour ses(AMOcour ses)ar esuita blef orthisg roup. The coursesincreasetheirchancesoftransitiontoanordinaryjobormotivatepeo- pletoacquireordinaryeducationalqualificationsthroughtraining. Short-term vocationalcoursesarethemainsta yofAMOcourses, whicharestructuredin suchawaythatstudentscantak esomemodulesasunemplo yedpersonsand othersinordinaryschools. Intotal, thiswilladduptoaf ormalqualification.

TheNorwegianeconomyiscur rentlyaffectedbyaweakeconomicsituation, economicgrowthisslowandunemploymentisrising. Forthefirsttimesince 1996, then umberofr egisteredunemplo yedper sonse xceeded100,000 (figuresfromtheLabourMarketAuthority,August2003). Itisnormalforunem- ploymenttoreachaseasonalpeakinAugust.Thisisbecauseyoungpeoplewho havecompletedtheireducationr egisterasunemplo yedinthesummer . In September, unemploymentusuall ydec linesbecauseman yjob-seek ersf ind workorstar tsc hool. Thereisne verthelesscausef orconcer n. Therear ef ar moreregisteredunemplo yedper sonsthanther ewereatthesametimelast year, andtheriseinlong-termunemploymentisstrongestamongtheyoungest people(under30).AttheendofAugust, 3,921personsundertheageof20and 16,073per sonsa ged20-24w erer egisteredastotall yunemplo yed. 17,178 personsinthe25-29agegroupwereregisteredastotallyunemployed.

4.5.4Younglong-termunemployed recipientsofwelfarebenefits Whenyoungpeoplear eunemployedforaf airlylongper iodoftime, thisis usuallybecausethe yhaveotherproblemsaswell, suchasalo wlevelofedu- cation, drugoralcohola buse, behaviouralproblemsorlackapermanentresi- dence. Someofthemwillr eceivewelfarebenefits. Itisimportanttostrength- enlabourmarketpoliciesforyoung, long-termunemployedrecipientsofwel- farebenefits.TheLabourMarketAuthoritycollaborateswithotherplayers, par- ticularlythem unicipalsocialser vicesandemplo yers, tofindjobsf orunem- ployedrecipientsofwelfarebenefits.

Sincemanyyoungrecipientsofwelfarebenefitshavecomplexneedsandprob- lems, ordinaryla bourmar ketpr ogrammeswilloftenbeinadequate. Some youngrecipientsofw elfarebenefitswithser ious, complexproblemsmaybe registeredasoccupationallydisabledonsocialg rounds.Thesepeoplemaybe offeredsomeofthespecialla bourmarketprogrammesfortheoccupationally disabled. Moreover, itma ybenecessar ytoha vehelpfr omother stosolv e healthandsocialproblems.

Inordertobea bletoof ferbetter, moreeffectiveassistancef orrecipientsof welfarebenefitswhoar eoutsidethela bourmarket, pilotmeasuresentailing 49 morecoherentmunicipalresponsibilityforactivatinglong-termrecipientsof welfarebenefitshavebeeninitiated.Thepurposeistoenabletherecipientsof welfarebenef itstobecomemor eself-r eliantandtotestv ariousmodelsf or coherentmunicipalresponsibilityforemploymentandactivationprogrammes forthisgroup.

Asasubsidiar ypr oject, thesocialw elfareser viceandtheLa bourMar ket Authoritywilljointl yproduceaguidetotheirr espectiveservices.Thetarget groupcompr isesunemplo yedper sonswhosemainsour ceofincomeis welfarebenef its. Thepurposeoftheguideistopr omotemor ecoher ent servicesforpeoplewhoar eclientsofboththeLa bourMarketAuthorityand thesocialwelfareoffice.Theguidecoversadministrativeroutines, cooperation agreementsandotherinformation.

4.5.5Thesituationforyoungpeople fromethnicminoritybackgrounds Youngpeoplefr omethnicminor itybackgroundsareahighl yheterogeneous groupwithdif ferentqualificationsandpossibilitiesf orenteringworkinglife. Thef actorsthatinf luencetheirsituationinc ludethen umberofy earsthe y haveliv edinthecountr y, theirle velofeducationandtheirNorw egian languageskills, aswellaspr ejudiceandlac kofkno wledgeaboutthisg roup amongethnicNorw egians. Mosty oungpeoplefr omethnicminor itybac k- groundswhohavegrownupinNorway,inthesamewayasethnicNorwegians, areabletofindworkwithoutexperiencinganysignificantproblems.

However, ethnicminoritiesgenerallyhavegreaterproblemsonthelabourmar- ketthanethnicNorw egians. Occupationalfrequency(theper centageinthe labourforcecomparedwiththeper centageofpeopleintheg roup)islower, theunemplo ymentr ateishigherandtheper iodofunemplo ymentlong er. Furthermore, theyar eo ver-representedinlo w-statusoccupationsandha ve greaterdifficultyinfindingworkcommensuratewiththeireducationalqualifi- cations.Amongyoungpeople, thisispar ticularlynoticeableforyoungpeople fromnon-westernbackgrounds.Theyhavemoredifficultyinfindingtheirfirst jobaftercompletingtheireducationthanotherg raduatesingeneral, aremore oftenoutsidethela bourforce, andearnlessaftercompletingtheireducation thanethnicNorwegians.

Inthesamew ayasothery oungpeople, youngpeoplefr omethnicminor ity backgroundsha veaccesstothewholer angeofLa bourMar ket Authority servicesandpr ogrammes. However, fory oungpeoplewhoha ver ecently settledinNorway, theLabourMarketAuthorityprovidesprogrammesforqual- ificationatanearliersta geandmor esystematically. Forthisg roup, offersof counsellingareextremelyimportant, withaviewtoevaluatingandapproving qualificationsfromtheircountryoforiginand,ifnecessary,buildingonorcom- pletinganeducationthe yha vealr eadystar tedon. Itisoftennecessar yto provideassistancedur ingthepr ocessofha vingv ocationalqualif ications assessedandapproved.

TheLa bourMar ket Authorityhascer tainpr ogrammesthatar especif ically designedforimmigrants, mainlylabourmarketcourses. Clarificationandcoun- sellinginterviewsandworkonactionplansandjobapplicationsar eintegrat- 50 edintothesecour ses. Thishaspr ovedtobr inggoodresultswithr espectto bothjobplacementandthetransitiontoeducation.Thechoiceofprogrammes isdeterminedbythedemandformanpoweronthelocallabourmarketandthe practicalandf ormalqualif ications, periodofunemplo ymentandindividual qualificationneedsandwishesoftheindividualconcer ned.Thereisstr onger emphasisoneducationalprogrammesforyoungpeoplethanforothergroups ofunemployedpersons.

4.5.6Youngpeoplewithdisabilities andotherspecialneeds Assistedwork,whichmaybeanappropriateinstrumentforyoungpeoplewith disabilities, focusesonthetransitionfromschooltowork. Itispossibletouse thisinstr umentincombinationwithser vicesfr oma genciesotherthanthe LabourMar ket Authority. Fore xample, itma ybepar tofaneducational programmewhich, duringcertainperiods, includesassessmentortrainingata workplace, andwher ether eisaneedf orc lose, broad-basedf ollow-up. Experiencesho wsthatthismethodispar ticularlysuita bleinr elationto technicalandergonomicadaptationofworkplaces.

Studentswithdisabilitieswhotakepartinordinaryeducationunderanoccu - pationalrehabilitationprogrammemusthaveregularcontactswiththeLabour MarketAuthorityduringtherehabilitationperiod.TheLabourMarketAuthority hasformulatedindividualactionplansthathelptoensur ethatindividualstu - dentsreceivetargeted, practicalguidanceandfollow-up. Evaluationsshowthat cooperationwiththeworkplaceusuallyfunctionswellinsuchcasesinter ms ofboththef lexibilityofthestudyprogrammeandadaptationforpeoplewith disabilities.

4.5.7Focusonyouthunemployment InReporttotheStortingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeo- plegrowupandliv einNorway(ReportNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)), theGovernmentstatedthattheLabourMarketAuthority’sactiveeffortstohelp youngpeoplef indworkandpr eventthemfr ombeingunemplo yedforlong periodsoftimewillcontin ue. TheGo vernmentwillg ivepr ioritytoy oung peoplewithaspecialneedforassistance. Measuresmust, tothegreatestpossi- blee xtent, beadaptedtotheindividual’ spr oblemsandhisorherneedto developcompetence. TheGovernmentwillalsostr engthenindividualfollow- upandadaptationpr ogrammes. Thistypeoff ollow-uprequiresconsiderable resources, butitiscrucialforsuccessinworkingwithyoungpeoplewhohave problemsfindingafootholdonthelabourmarket.

TheYouthGuaranteewillcontinue.TheGovernmentregardsitasimportantto ensurethattheyoungestpeopleinthisgrouparereachedquicklyandarenot leftinasituationwher etheyreceivenooffersofworkoreducation. Inorder toensuresatisfactoryservicesforyoungpeoplewho, forvariousreasons, need tobefolloweduponthela bourmarket, theGovernmentregardsitasimpor - tanttofur therdevelopther outinesforinter-agencycooperationthatalr eady exist. TheGo vernmentr egardsitasespeciall yimpor tanttopr ovidespecial servicesforthelong-ter munemplo yed, youngpeoplefr omimmigrantback- groundsandyoungpeoplewithdisa bilitieswhohaveproblemsinrelationto workinglife. 51 4.6Youngpeopleandhousing 4.6.1Wheredoyoungpeoplelive? Formanyyoungpeople, thepr ocessofesta blishinganindependentlif efor themselvesiscloselyrelatedtostar tingafamilyandenter ingthela bourmar- ket. Itoftentakesplaceinstages, entailingseveralmovesfromonetemporary rentalaccommodationtoanotheruntilthey oungpersonfinallypurchaseshis orherownapartment, houseorhousingcooperativeunit.

Mostyoungpeopleunderthea geof20liv ewiththeirpar ents. Accordingto theSurveyofLivingConditionscarriedoutbyStatisticsNorwayin1998,about asmany16-17year-oldboys(87percent)asgirls(89percent)livedwiththeir parents.Among18-19year-olds, thepercentagehaddroppedto52percentfor girlsand67percentf orboys. Among24-25y ear-olds, 8percentofw omen livedwiththeirpar ents, comparedwith18percentofmen. Basedonthe percentageofr espondentsinlivingconditionsur veyswhor epliedthatthe y livewiththeirparents, therehasbeennoc hangeinthe1990sintheper cent- ageofy oungwomenwhomo veoutoftheirpar ents’ home. Throughoutthe period, approximately16percentofwomenaged16-39havelivedwiththeir parents.Amongyoungermen,ontheotherhand,therehasbeenacleardecline inthepercentagelivingathome, from30percentin1991to21percentin 1998.

Manyoftheyoungpeoplewhohavemovedoutoftheirparents’ homelivein temporaryaccommodationwithoutaleaseorwithashort-termlease.Thiscan beagoodsolutionforthosewhoonlyrequirehousingtemporarily, suchasstu- dents. Otheryoungpeople, suchasunemplo yedpersonswhoar edependent onsocialw elfare, mustforfinancialreasonslargelymakedowithshor t-term solutionsonthehousingmar ket.Amongone-personhouseholds, youngsingle persons(aged16-24)havetheworsthousingconditions.Thisprimarilyapplies tothosewholiv einto wns. Personsfromethnicminor itybackgroundshave greaterdifficultythanothersingainingentrytothehousingmarket, partlydue totheirlowincomelevelandhousingmarketdiscrimination.

Studentshavealo werstandardofhousingthanothery oungpeople, butfor mostofthemitisatempor aryproblem.TheSurveyofLivingConditionscar - riedoutamongstudentsin1998sho wsthathousinge xpensesareanimpor - tantcauseofstudents’ difficultfinancialsituation, especiallyforthosewholive inlargetowns.Abouthalfofthestudentsrentabed-sittingroomorotherhous- ing.Althoughstudentshavelowincomes, theyarefairlystablepayersandare morepopulartenantsthanper sonswhoar esociallydisadvantaged. Students thereforeoftensqueezeweakergroupsoutoftherentalmarket.

4.6.2Thesituationofyoungpeople onthehousingmarket InNorwayitisrelativelycommontobuyandownone’sownhomecompared withothercountries.About23%ofthepopulationr entthehousingthe ylive in. Sincethe1990sther ehasbeenanincr easeintheper centageofper sons whor enthousing, particularlyinlar geto wns. Housingpr icesha ver isen sharplyinthelastfewyearsinsomepartsofNorway, forbothownedandrent- edaccommodation.WhiletheriseinpriceshasbeenstrongestintheOsloarea, 52 priceshavealsoincreasedsignificantlyinotherlar gecitiesinr ecentyears. In thelargesttowns, therefore, thesituationforthosewhowishtoestablishtheir ownhomehasbecomeconsiderablymoredifficult.Thisdoesnotapplyonlyto householdswithlowincomesandlittleornoequity.Evenformanyhouseholds withnormalincomes, ithasbecomemoredifficulttoacquiresuitablehousing thatisaffordable.

Thissituationhasbeendocumentedinse veralr eportspr esentedtothe Stortinginrecentyears, cf. ReportNo. 49(1997-98)totheStortingonhousing foryoungpeopleanddisadv antagedpersons, andReportNo. 50(1998-99)to theStortingonequalization. Thesereportsshowthatthereisagreatneedfor morehousingforyoungpeopleandvulnerablegroups, particularlyinpressure areas.Thereisalsoaneedformorestudentaccommodationsinordertosolve students’ housingproblems. Aftertheser eportswerepresented, thesituation becameevenmoredifficultduetohigherinterestratesandincreasedhousing prices. In2003thistr endhassta bilizedsomewhatfollowingseveralinterest ratecuts.

Husbanken(theNorw egianStateHousingBank)isthecentr algovernment’s mostimportantinstrumentfortheimplementationofhousingpolicy.Thecen- tralgovernmentprovidesloansandg rantsthroughHusbanken. Furthermore, Husbankenadministersthestatehousingbenefitscheme.Stateloansandhous- ingbenefitsarekeyinstrumentsforhelpingyoungpeoplewhoar eestablish- ingtheirfirsthomeanddisadvantagedpersonstoobtainhousing.Thestart-up loanisintendedtoassisty oungpeopleandotherdisadv antagedpersonswho havepr oblemsgainingentr ytothehousingmar ket. TheMinistr yofLocal GovernmentandRegionalDevelopmenthasreorganizedtheHusbankenloan schemestotar getthemmor etowardsyounganddisadv antagedpersonsand lesstowardsthegeneralpopulation.

4.7Cultureandthemedia Youngpeopleleadanactiv elifeintheirleisur etime. Theirrecreationaloccu- pationsv ary, butsomeactivitiesar emor epopularthanother s. Thecinema, sports, music, booksandtelevisionplayaprominentroleintheeverydayactiv- itiesofchildrenandyoungpeople.Statisticalsurveysshowthatcinemas,sports andlibrariesarethecultur alfacilitiesusedb ythelar gestnumberofc hildren andyoungpeople. Thepercentagewhousethesef acilitiesisf arhigherthan theper centagewhomak euseofotherf acilitiesandhasr emainedsta ble throughoutthe1990s. Onthewhole, childrenandy oungpeoplear emor e activeusersofculturalfacilitiesthanothera gegroups, bothasaudiencesand asperformers.

4.7.1Voluntarychildandyouthor ganizations VoluntarychildandyouthorganizationsinNorwayrunawiderangeofactivi- tiesandplayapivotalroleintheeverydaylivesofchildrenandyoungpeople. Thesenon-governmentalorganizationsserveassocialmeetingplacesandr un activitiesr angingfr omc hoirsandtheatr eg roupstopoliticalactivitiesand activitiesbasedonabroadspectrumofbeliefsandvalues.Participationinsuch activitieshelpstotrainyoungpeopleandrecruitnewleadersandencourages 53 themtobecomein volvedandtof eelasenseofr esponsibilityforothers.The organizationspr ovidec hildrenandy oungpeoplewithac hannelthr ough whichtheycanexpresstheiropinionstotheauthoritiesatalllevels.Theorga- nizations’ internationalactivitiesof ferc hildrenandy oungpeopleanoppor - tunitytohavecontactwithotherpersonsoftheirownageoutsideNorwayand promotesinter nationalenga gement, cooperation, solidarityandpeace-build - ing. Thisimpor tantv oluntaryef fortdeser vesbetterw orkingconditionsand operatingpar ameters. Theor ganizationsar ear enasinwhic hc hildrenand youngpeoplecanspendtimewiththeirpeer sandesta blishandde velop friendships. However, theor ganizationsar enotjustimpor tantf orumsf or childrenandy oungpeople, theyalsoof feranoppor tunityf orlear ningand interactionacr ossa geandg enerationaldivisions, andf orimpor tantcontact withadultssuchasleadersandinterestedparents.

Participationinavoluntaryorganizationispartofthechildhoodexperienceof almostallchildrenandyoungpeopleinNorway.Around90percentofallchil- drenandy oungpeopleha vebeenamemberofanor ganizationorac lub. Duringadolescencethemember shipper centagedecr easesfr omar ound80 percentof13-y ear-oldstojusto ver60percentof18-y ear-olds. Thepar tici- pationrateintheactivitiesof feredbytheor ganizationsishighamongboth girlsandbo ysallo verNorway, althoughtheor ganizationsinwhic hgirlsand boysaremostactivevarysomewhat.Sportsorganizationshavethelargestnum- berofpar ticipants, andspor tistheor ganizedactivityonwhic hmember s spendthemosttime. Apartfr omthat, musicor ganizationsandr ecreational clubshavethebiggestmembership. Manychildrenandyoungpeoplearealso membersofphilanthropicorbelief-basedorganizations.

Thereisanong oingdebateastowhethertheor ganizationalcommunityasa wholeisc hanging. Anumberofor ganizationshaveexperiencedadec linein membershipinr ecenty ears, andne wtypesofor ganizationsar eemer ging. Manyofthetr aditional, idea-basedorganizationsthattookpar tinbuildingup Norwegiandemocracyarenowlosingground,andthereareagrowingnumber oforganizationswithmorespecificaims.

Non-governmentalchildandyouthorganizationsweregivenakeyroleinchild andy outhpolicyasearl yas1945, inthepoliticalpar ties’ jointpr ogramme. Since1950, centralgovernmentgrantshavebeenprovidedfortheseorganiza- tions.Thissupporthasbeendistributedinvariouswaysandbeenadministered byavarietyofbodiessinceWorldWarII.Throughoutthisperiod,however,task- sharingbetweenthecentralgovernmentandnon-governmentalorganizations hasbeenbasedonthepr inciplethattheor ganizationsarefreetocar ryout childandyouthworkontheirownterms,andthecentralgovernmentprovides financialsupportforthisworkbecauseithasanintrinsicvalueforchildrenand youngpeople.

InRepor ttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hc hildrenandy oung peopleg rowupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001- 2002)),theGovernmentemphasizesthatitisimportanttopromotevarietyand breadthintheor ganizationalcommunity, andtopr ovidegoodfinancialoper- atingparametersfortheorganizations’ workandsimplifyther ulesgoverning publicfunding. 54 In2003g rantstotallingar oundNOK70millionwillbepr ovidedb ythe MinistryofChildr enandF amilyAffairsforthecentr alactivitiesofv oluntary childandyouthorganizations.Thepurposeofthegrantschemesistofacilitate thepar ticipationofc hildrenandy oungpeopleinc hildandy outhor gani- zations.Theorganizationsaretobesecur edandstrengthenedasanar enafor co-determinationanddemocracy, andastoolsforchildandyouthparticipation insociety.Thegrantsareintendedtostim ulateactivityandpr omotediversity inor ganizationallif e. In2002, 58or ganizationswithatotalmember shipof around300,000receivednationaloperatinggrantsthroughthisallocation.

Grantsforthecentr alactivitiesofc hildandy outhorganizationsareadminis- teredbytheFordelingsutvalget(AllocationsCommittee),aseparatebodyunder theMinistr yofChildr enandF amilyAffairs. Theadministr ationoftheg rant schemeisregulatedbytheregulationsongrantsforvoluntarychildandyouth organizations.Thegrantschemehasalonghistor y, butnewregulationswere adoptedinDecember2002, inwhic hemphasisw asplacedonmakingthe schememoreappropriatefornewandsmallorganizationsandonsimplifying therulessoastomak eboththesubmissionandpr ocessingofapplicationsa lesstime-consuming, costlyprocess.

Thecentralgovernmentalsopr ovidesfundingf orvoluntarychildandy outh workatthelocallevel. OnthebasisofReportNo. 27(1996-97)totheStorting onthecentralgovernment’srelationshiptovoluntaryorganizationsandReport No. 44(1997-98), asupplementar yr eportonthecentr alg overnment’sr ela- tionshiptovoluntaryorganizations, specialgrantschemeswereestablishedin 2000forvoluntarychildandyouthworkinthefieldsofsportandculture. For 2002atotalofNOK86millionin“gamingrevenues”(surplusfromthestatelot- tery, NorskTipping)wasallocatedforgrantsforlocalsportsclubsandassoci- ations.Allvoluntary, membership-basedsportsclubsthatrunactivitiesforchil- drenand/oryoungpeopleareeligibleforfundingthroughthegrantscheme. Thegrantschemeintheculturalsector, theVoluntaryFund, isadministeredby theNorwegianYouthCouncil, theCouncilforMusicOrganizationsinNorway andtheNorwegianAmateurTheatreCouncil, andisplacedundertheadminis- trationoftheMinistr yofChildr enandF amily AffairsandtheMinistr yof CultureandChur chAffairs. In2002, fundingprovidedbytheVoluntaryFund totalledNOK70.8million.Amajorityofgrantsareallocatedtovoluntarychild andyouthorganizationswithacentralheadquarters, whileasmallproportion isprovidedtolocalc lubsandgroupswithnoconnectiontoan ycentralunit. Fundingforlocalc lubsandg roupsthatar enotconnectedtoanesta blished centralor ganizationar eanimpor tantmeansofencour agingc hildrenand youngpeopleatthelocalle veltolaunchnew, voluntaryinitiatives.Therewill beasubstantialincr easeinfundingbecauseasfr om2003theg rantscheme alsoreceivesfundsfromthesurplusfromthestatelottery.

4.7.2Sportsandphysicalactivity Childrenandyoungpeoplearekeytargetgroupsforcentralgovernmentpoli- cyonsports.InReportNo.14(1999-2000)totheStortingonachangingsports sector-centr algovernment’srelationshiptospor tsandph ysicalactivityand ReportNo. 39(2000-2001)totheStor tingonoutdoorr ecreation, particular importanceisattac hedtopr ovidingf avourableconditionsf oranall-r ound rangeofsports,physicalactivityandoutdoorrecreationforchildrenandyoung 55 people.Activitiesofthisnatur eprovidefertilegroundforsoundattitudesand purposefulengagement.

TheSurveyofLivingConditionsconductedbyStatisticsNorwayin1997shows that82percentofthepopulationaged6-15takepartinphysicalactivityinthe formofwork-outsorexerciseatleastonceaweek.AccordingtotheMMIchild andyouthsurvey, closeto60percentofchildrenandyoungpeopleaged8-15 takepartinspor tsthroughsportsclubs.Thecorrespondingfigurefor16-19- year-oldsisbetween30and40percent. Thusthepercentageofchildrenand youngpeoplewhopr acticeaspor tandcompetewithinthefr ameworkofa sportsclubdeclinesastheygrowolder. Dance/balletandaerobicsaretypical activitiesforg irls. Football, alpineskiing, telemarkskiing, snowboardingand rollerbladingar emor epopularamongbo ysthanamongg irls. Ine verya ge group, moreboysthangirlspracticeasportandcompeteinasportsclub.The percentageofchildrenunder12yearsofagewhopracticeasportinaspor ts clubhasremainedstableinthe1990s,butthepercentageofyoungpeople,par- ticularlygirls, hasdecreased.

InthelightofRepor tNo. 27(1996-97)totheStor tingonthecentr algovern- ment’srelationshiptovoluntaryorganizationsandRepor tNo. 44(1997-98), a supplementaryreportoncentralgovernment’srelationshiptovoluntaryorgan- izations, anewgrantschemewasdevelopedfortheworkoflocalsportsclubs forchildrenandy oungpeople(6-19y earsold). Thegrantschemewasestab- lishedin2000.Allvoluntary, membership-basedsportsclubsthatrunactivities forchildrenand/ory oungpeoplear eentitledtosuppor tthr oughtheg rant scheme.

4.7.3Outdoorrecreation InReportNo. 39(2000-2001)totheStor tingonoutdoorr ecreation, attention isfocusedonc hildrenandy oungpeopleandtheirpar ticipationinoutdoor recreationalactivities. An umberofmeasur esareproposedintheRepor tto encouragechildren, youngpeopleandf amilieswithc hildrentotak epar tin outdoorrecreation.Themostimportantofthesemeasuresinclude: •increasingthepossibilitiesforchildrenandyoungpeopletodevelopphys- ically, mentallyandsociallybyplayingin, walkinginandexperiencingnat- uralsurroundings •maintainingandintensifyingthefocusoninformation, activitiesandtrain- ingrelatingtooutdoorrecreationwhichtargetchildrenandfamilies •strengtheningeffortstomotiv ateandencour agechildren, youngpeople andfamiliestoenjoyoutdoorrecreationbyincreasingthegrantforactivi- tiesrunbyoutdoorrecreationalorganizations •buildingupe xpertiseatthem unicipalle velwithg eneralf ocusonthe valueofoutdoorr ecreationandspecialf ocusonitsimpor tancef or children’shealthanddevelopment •conductinganationalcampaigntopr omoteoutdooractivitiesindaycare centres, schoolsanddaycarefacilitiesforschoolchildren •increasingthecapacityofoutdoorpursuitscentrestoensurethatallpupils areg iventheoppor tunitytosta yatacentr einpr imaryandsecondar y school •makingfreshwatersportsfishingcheaperandmoreaccessible TheStortingendorsedthemainelementsoftheRepor t, whenitwaspresent- edtoit. 56 4.7.4Artisticandculturalactivities Inthe1990sther ehasbeeng rowingfocusonthecomm unicationofculture andtheartstochildrenandyoungpeople.Childrenandyoungpeoplearenow aprioritytargetgroupformostartandculturalinstitutions, andtheavailability ofartisticandculturalprogrammesinschoolshasincreased.

Certaing roupsofc hildrenandy oungpeoplear edependentone xtraassis - tanceandconditionsspeciallyadaptedtotheirneedsinordertobeabletopar- ticipateincultur alactivitieslik eotherpeople. Thisapplies, forinstance, to childrenandy oungpeoplewithdisa bilities. Theyar enotahomog eneous group, andtheiractivityandpar ticipationintheculturalsectorvaryconsider- ably.Toimprovethesegroups’ possibilitiesforparticipation, newculturalfacil- itiesthatarebuiltmustbespeciallyadaptedtotheneedsofdisa bledpersons.

Since2001theMinistr yofCultur eandChur chAffairshasallocatedfundsto enterprisesthatar rangeculturaleventstowhic hticketsaresoldonthecon - ditionthatper sonspossessingof ficialidentificationasaccompan yingperson fordisa bledper sonswhopur chaseafull-pr icetickettoacultur aleventare entitledtoafreeticket.Thereisasimilarar rangementforsportsevents. Many municipalitiesha veno wintr oducedasystemofof ficialidentif icationf or personsaccompanyingdisabledpersons.

4.7.5Schoolsofmusicandthear ts ReportNo. 40(1992-93)totheStor tingadvocatedajointpr ogrammeofar t, cultureandmusicforchildrenandyoungpeopleincollaborationbetweenday carecentres, daycarefacilitiesforschoolchildren, primaryandlowersecond- arysc hools, musicsc hoolsandv oluntarym usicandcultur alor ganizations. Whenastatuter equiringmunicipalitiestoestablishschoolsofmusicandthe artsw asadoptedin1997, suchsc hoolse xistedinmostm unicipalitiesin Norway. Inthe2000-2001sc hooly ear, 431m unicipalitieshadesta blished schoolsofmusicandthear ts, eitherindividuallyorjointlywithotherm unici- palities. Around70,000pr imaryandlo wersecondar yschoolchildrenpar tici- patedintheseprogrammes, inadditionto7,000pre-schoolchildrenandclose to9,000pupilsa bovelowersecondaryschoolage.Anumberofactivitiesar e alsoorganizedinthef ormofpr ojects, suchasm usicalsandplays, withinthe frameworkofschoolsofmusicandthearts.

4.7.6Libraries Publiclibrarieshavealongtr aditionofdevelopinggoodservicesforchildren andyoungpeople. Mostlibrarieshavespecialdepar tmentsfortheseg roups andar rangee ventspar ticularlyf orthem. Developmentpr ojectsinpub lic librariespar ticularlydesignedf orc hildrenandy oungpeoplear ethemost importantar eaoff ocusf ortheNorw egian Archive, LibraryandMuseum Authority.Thereisemphasisoneffortstostimulatetheinterestofthesegroups inr eadingandbooks, butInter netaccessisalsoanimpor tantandpopular libraryserviceamongyoungusers.

Datafromlocalyouthsurveysshowthatlibrariesareafacilityusedparticular- lyfr equentlyb yg irlsfr omethnicminor itybac kgrounds. TheMinistr yof CultureandChur ch Affairssuppor tsalibr aryser vicef orimmig rantsand 57 refugeesinOslothr oughtheNorw egian Archive, LibraryandMuseum Authority.Theservicefunctionsasanationalexchangeforinter-librarylending ofliter aturef orr efugeesandimmig rants. Municipalitiesinwhic hther ear e morethan100immigrantshavebeenencouragedtoestablishlibraryservices forthisgroupwithintheframeworkofexistingprogrammes, andanumberof municipalitieshavefolloweduponthisrequest.

TheNorw egianLibr aryof TalkingBooksandBr aillepr oducesliter aturef or childrenandy oungpeoplewhoar eblindorvisuall yimpaired.Talkingbooks areproducedforbothusergroups, buttactilebooksarealsoproducedforthe veryyoungestuser s, i.e. booksinwhic hther eadingexperienceispr imarily stimulatedwhenthereadertouchesandfeelsthebooks’ materialsandlessby anytexttheymaycontain.

4.7.7Museums 340ofNorw ay’sc loseto800m useumscur rentlyr eceivedir ectorindir ect grantsthroughthecentr algovernmentbudget. Oneoftheg oalsofm useum policyistoensur ethatallg roupshaveaccesstom useumservices, withpar- ticularemphasisonchildrenandyoungpeople.

TheNorw egianMuseum Authorityhasar rangedse veralpr ojectstar geting childrenandy oungpeople, withspecialf ocusonde velopingteac hing programmesincooper ationwithm useumsandpr imaryandsecondar y schools. Thenationalcur riculaforpr imaryandsecondar yschoolhavebeen keydocumentsinthedevelopmentoftheseprogrammes. Samimuseumscom- municateinformationonSamiculturetomanygroups, includingchildrenand youngpeople.TheMinistryofCultureandChurchAffairshasinitiatedplansto establishadepartmentintheGlomdalMuseuminElv erumtopresentthecul- tureoftheRomanipeopleandane wcentreforKvencultureinPorsanger.

4.7.8Pictorialart Childrenandy oungpeoplear eapr ioritizedtargetgroupfortheser vicesof pictorialartinstitutions, severalofwhichhavespecialdepartmentsforschools oreducationalpr ogrammes.TheNationalTouringExhibitions, Norway, which isresponsibleforprovidingnation-wideservices,produces,facilitatesandpres- entsexhibitionsforschoolswhicharesentfromplacetoplaceinNorway.

Thedesignandqualityofbuildingsandconstr uctionprojectsexpressvalues, shapeattitudesandinf luencebehaviour.Thedecorationofschoolbuildingsis animportantpartoftheactivityoftheNationalF oundationforArtinPub lic Buildings.Aprogrammeentitled“SchoolsandtheirSurroundings”,whichisrun byNorskForm, alsocontributestowardsdevelopingschoolsaslocalcultur al centres, promotingaesthetics, qualityandfunctionalityinschoolbuildingsand emphasizingcontentandw orkingmethodsinar tsandcr aftsteac hingpr o- grammeswithspecialfocusonarchitectureanddesign.

4.7.9Theatre Oneofthemaingoalsistoensurethatasmanypeopleaspossiblehaveaccess totheatre, operaanddanceperf ormancesofahighar tisticqualityb yprovid- ingcentralgovernmentallocationsfordramaticartinstitutionsandindepend - 58 enttheatr eg roups. Childrenandy oungpeoplear eak eytar getg roup, and institutionsareexpectedtofurtherdevelopservicesthroughwhichdramatic artispr esentedtoc hildren, youngpeopleandne wg roups. Severalofthe institutionsadaptpr oductionsandperf ormancesf orc hildrenandy oung people, partlyincooperationwithschoolsandlocalandr egionalauthorities. In2000, theatrespresented6,450perf ormances. Childrenandy oungpeople werethepr imarytargetgroupofjusto ver40percentoftheatr icalproduc- tions.

4.7.10Music Throughtheprovisionofcentralgovernmentallocationsformusicinstitutions, theaimistomak emusicofahighar tisticqualityavailabletoasmanypeople aspossibleandtopromoteartisticinnovationanddevelopment. Childrenand youngpeoplear eak eytargetgroup. Institutionswhichreceivecentralgov- ernmentfundingar eobligedtofur therdeveloptheirm usicservicesforchil- drenandyoungpeople.

Norconcert(theNorw egianConcertInstitute)hasapar ticularresponsibility forconcer tsforc hildrenandy oungpeople. In2000, 95percentofallthe concertsar rangedorsuppor tedb yNor concertw ereg ivenf orthattar get group. Norconcertenter sintoa greementswithcountiesr egardingtheplan - ningandpresentationofconcertsatschoolsanddaycarecentres.

4.7.11Themediaandcommunication ItistheresponsibilityoftheGovernmenttodevelopamediapolicythatsaf e- guardsfr eedomofe xpression, diversityandquality . Thisalsoappliestothe policyforchildrenandyoungpeople.Theymustbeassuredofaccesstogood mediaservicesandtheirneedf orinformationandpossibilitiesf orexpressing theirviewsmustbemet, whilekeepinginmindtheimpor tanceofprotecting childrenandy oungpeoplefr omhar mfulmediacontent. Itisalsoag oalto ensurethatalltheinha bitantsofNorw aybenef itfr omnewtechnologyand newchannelsofcomm unication. Thesear enationalobjectiv esthatar ealso underscoredintheUNConventionontheRightsoftheChild, whichcontains aspecial Articleonther ightofc hildrenandy oungpeopletofr eedomof expressionandinformation.

Manypeoplehavepointedoutthatwheredevelopmentsinthefieldofmedia andtechnologyareconcerned, youngpeoplehavefunctionedasinnovatorsin devisingnewwaysofmakinguseofa vailabletechnology.Theyarethefirstto applynewtechnologicalsolutionsandadaptthemtotheirownneeds. Recent researchsho wsthatthew ayinwhic hchildrenandy oungpeopleusene w mediaandformsofcommunicationhasclearpositiveaspects, andtoagreater degreethanbeforereflectstheirroleasparticipantsratherthanmerespecta- tors.Theircuriosityaboutandinterestinexploringnewmediadonotreplace theiractiveexperiences, buttheyalternatemorebetweendifferentactivities. Childrenandyoungpeoplemasteranddevelopnewformsofcommunication. Theybecomeaccustomedtoc hoosingbetw eendif ferentopinionsand becomemoreawareoftheiro wnneedsanddesir es.Theydevelopnewways ofdealingwithinf ormation.Theiridentityandcultur eareinf luencedbythe globalcommunicationsnetwork.Seenasawhole,thevastspreadofnewmedia 59 andnewformsofcommunicationhasledtonewandincreasedpossibilitiesof obtaininginformationandbuildingexpertise.

Althoughnewtechnologyof fersnew, enhancedoppor tunitiesforcommuni- cation, whichinitselfisapositiv ede velopment, thistr endalsohassome negativeaspects.TheMinistryofChildrenandFamilyAffairs’ plancalledBarn, ungeogInternett(Children,YoungPeopleandtheInternet)containsanumber ofmeasur esdesignedtoensur esaf eruseoftheInter net. Norwayisalso involvedininternationalcooperationaimedatstrengtheningeffortstoprevent thepresentationanddistr ibutionofunla wful, harmfulcontentthr oughnew media.ThroughtheEEAAgreement, Norwayhaspar ticipatedinapr ogramme toestablishcriteriaforcommonEuropeanagelimitsforcomputergames. 60 61

5Safe,inclusive localcommunities

5.1Introduction nRepor ttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandy oung peoplegrowupandliveinNorway(ReportNo. 39totheStorting(2001- I 2002)), theGovernmentstatesthatsecur e, inclusivelocalcomm unities areimportantifchildrenandyoungpeoplearetogrowupinagoodenviron- ment.Thelocalcomm unityprovidesanimpor tantframeworkforinteraction andactivityandf orasenseofbelong ingtoalar gercomm unity. The Governmentregardsitasimportanttofostersafe, inclusivelocalcommunities throughinter actionbetw eenpub licauthor ities, non-governmentalor ganiza- tionsandv olunteers, parents, andc hildrenandy oungpeoplethemselv es. Accesstogood, inexpensivemeetingplacesforinteraction, self-expressionand activityisimpor tant. Meetingplacesm ustbedesignedinsuc haw aythatall childrenandyoungpeoplehaveanopportunitytoparticipateinthecomm u- nity. TheGovernmenttak esthevie wthatg ood, inclusive, attractivemeeting placescanhelptor educesubstanceabuseandcrimeandcombatr acismand discrimination.

Localauthoritieshaveanimportantresponsibilityinef fortstoprovideasafe, inclusivelocalenvironment.Toachievesatisfactoryresults, municipalitiesmust plantargetedactivitiesthr oughinteractionbetweenlocala genciesandser vi- cesandv oluntarypla yers. Cooperationanddialoguewithc hildren, young peopleandpar entsisextremelyimportant. Bothcentralandlocalauthor ities faceclearchallengesasr egardsthepr ofessionalcontentandde velopmentof suchactivitiesand, notleast, theinfluenceandparticipationofyoungpeople.

5.2Meetingplacesandyouthpr emises 5.2.1Youthpremises Premisesf orthee xclusiveuseofy oungpeoplear eal wayshighonthelist whenyoungpeopleareaskedwhattheywantmoneytobespentonintheir municipality. Onthebasisofrequestsfor“somewheretobe”, manymunicipal- itiesha veesta blishedy outhc lubs, youthcentr es, multi-activitycentr esand othermeetingplacesforyoungpeople. 62 Youthpremiseshavealonghistor y.Thefirstyouthcentrewasestablishedby theNorw egianYouthAssociationasearl yas1896. Othernon-g overnmental organizationsfollowedsuit, andin1950aspecialcentr alg overnmentg rant schemew asesta blishedf orcomm unityhalls. Officialin volvementhas increasedsincethen.

Thef irsty outhc lubw asesta blishedinOsloin1953. Otherm unicipalities followeditsexampleafewyearslaterandthenumberofyouthclubsincreased sharplyaround1970.Themaingoalwassocio-political–theclubswereintend- edtopr eventproblemsamongy oungpeople. Towardstheendofthe1970s, youthclubsalsoacquiredaculturalpolicyplatformandtheintr insicvalueof youthclubsascultur alarenaswasemphasized. Today, therearealmost1,000 youthclubs,mostofwhicharerunbymunicipalauthoritiesalthoughthereare alsoprivateyouthclubsrunbyotherorganizations. Datafromlocalyouthsur- veysshowthatalar geproportionofyoungpeopleattendy outhclubsinthe municipalitieswheretheyexist.Thisunderlinestheimpor tanceofpr oviding placeswhereyoungpeoplecanmeetandha veinformalcontactswiththeir peers.

Manydif ferentactivitiesar einc ludedintheconceptofy outhc lubs. Their organizationisbasedonsocialinter actionandinf ormalactivity, andtheyare opentoall. Manyyouthclubsaredividedintoajuniorclubforchildrenunder theageof12anday outhclubforteenagers. Nospecialskills, knowledgeor feesarerequiredtopar ticipate.Theclubsattractawider angeofy oungpeo- ple, notleastthosewhodonotfeelathomeinmoreorganizedactivities.Youth clubsaregenerallyrunbyacommitteeofy oungpeopleandtheirf ormand contentareintendedtode velopinstepwiththeneedsandwishesofne w generations. Nevertheless, theyvarywidelyintermsoftheirmember s’ feeling ofparticipationandho wfarlocalc lubdemocracygoes.Thequalityofy outh clubsvaries, andtherearesignificantdifferencesbetweenmunicipalitieswith respecttotheesta blishmentofc lubactivities. Experienceshowsthaty outh clubsreachmanychildrenandy oungpeoplewhodonottak epartinother organizedactivitiesandprovideabaseforimportantpreventivework. Inorder toensurethatthe ydoag oodjob, employeesmusthaveadequatee xpertise. Premises, staffing, openingtimesandinter nalclubdemocracyalsosetimpor - tantparametersfortheiractivities.Aspartoftheefforttoimprovemunicipali- ties’ competenceinthey outhc lubsector , theNational YouthandLeisur e Associationhaspublishedamunicipalguideforworkinyouthclubswiththe supportoftheMinistr yofChildrenandFamilyAffairs.TheNationalYouthand LeisureAssociationisavoluntary,nationwideorganizationforusers,employees andvoluntaryworkersinm unicipalandm unicipally-supportedleisureactivi- ties.

Interactionandcooperationbetweenemployeesintheyouthclubsectorand municipalagenciesandservicesareimportantforgoodlocalworkwithyoung people.Youthclubpersonneloftenpossessag reatdealofkno wledgeabout youthgroupsandalsohavecontactswithyoungpeoplewhoparticipatevery littleinotheractivitiesandser vices. Inmanycases, clubstaffandleader sare abletobuildtr ustingr elationshipswithy oungpeoplewhootherwiseha ve littleconfidenceinadults, andactasalinktootheragencies(suchasthechild welfareservice, thepoliceorsc hools)andasneutr alsupporters. Inorderto ensurethaty oungpeoplestr ugglingwithpr oblemsr eceiveadequateassis - tance, itisimpor tantforemployeesinthey outhclubsectortobew ellquali- 63 fied.Localauthoritieshaveanimportantresponsibilitytoensurethatthisisthe case, notleastb ytrainingandeducatingtheiro wnemplo yees. Trainingand educationintheyouthclubsectorshouldbeimproved.InReportNo.39tothe Storting(2001-2002)r elatingtotheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandy oung peopleliveandgrowupinNorway, theMinistryofChildrenandFamilyAffairs statesthattheGo vernmentwillencour agehumanr esourcede velopmentin thisarea.

Multi-activitycentreshavebeendevelopingsincethebeg inningofthe1980s. Theiractivitiesrangefromrunningcaféstotraditionalculturalactivities, such asartexhibitionsandtheatres.Whileyoungpeoplearethemostimportanttar- getgroup, manyofthesecentr esalsocaterf orotherg roups.Thereisstr ong emphasisonpersonalactivity.Theoperationalmethodsandlevelsofactivityin thevariouscentresvarywidely.

Youthcultureisdiv ersifiedandperhapsmor eglobalthanbef ore. Interestin musicisoneimportantcommondenominator, interestinfilm, computersand mediaisanother.Therearemediaworkshopsforchildrenandyoungpeoplein severalm unicipalities. Thebest-de velopedmediaw orkshopsof ferall-r ound mediaproductionandmediatheor yininter actionwithothercultur alactivi- ties, suchasmusic, danceanddrama. Somemediaworkshopsalsoworkwith localmedia,whichusethechildren’sandyoungpeople’sproductsintheirown publicationsandbr oadcasts. Severalm usicandmediaw orkshopsalsoof fer alternativeeducationf orpr imaryandlo wersecondar ysc hoolpupilswho cannotcopewithordinaryschoolsubjects,oroptionallowersecondaryschool subjects. Mediaworkshopshavebeenestablishedasseparateservicesintheir ownpremisesorarelinkedtoyouthclubs, multi-activitycentresorotherlocal meetingplacesf orchildrenandy oungpeople. Theexperiencegainedsof ar hasbeenpositiv eandmediaw orkshopsshouldbeesta blishedinf armor e municipalitiesthantheyaretoday.

Localandr egionalcultur albuildingsar ealsoimpor tantmeetingplacesf or childrenandy oungpeople. Thepurposeofthecentr alg overnmentg rant schemeforlocalandregionalculturalbuildingsistoensurethatgoodpremis- esareprovided, withspaceforavarietyofculturalactivitiesthatar eopento all. Non-governmentalorganizationsareoftenresponsiblefortheconstruction andoperationofthesebuildings, insomecasesincooperationwithmunicipal authorities. Localandregionalculturalbuildingsareopentoallageandpopu- lationgroupsandareimportantculturalandsocialmeetingplaces.

Theneedforpremisesvariesfromonemunicipalitytothene xtanddif ferent solutionsarerequired.Therearemanygoodexamplesoflocalcultur albuild- ings,schools,day-carecentresandyouthclubsbeinglocatedinthesameplace. Ifco-locationistobesuccessful, thepremisesmustbeproperlyplanned. Itis alsoimportanttoensurethatchildrenandyoungpeoplewithdisabilitieshave goodaccesstothepr emises.Theestablishmentandoperationofyouthprem- ises, suchasy outhc lubs, multi-activitycentr esandmediaw orkshops, area municipalresponsibilityandtherearenospecialcentralgovernmentschemes tosuppor tthem. However, variousaspectsoftheseser vicesar eelig iblefor fundingfr omtheMinistr yofChildr enandF amilyAffairs’ grantsc hemesfor activitiestar getingy oungpeopleinlar gerurbanm unicipalitiesandinr ural municipalities(seeCh. 6), centralgovernmentgrantschemesfor“substance- freeenvironment”activitiesundertheMinistryofSocialAffairs’budget,andthe 64 MinistryofCultureandChurchAffairs’ grantschemeforlocalandregionalcul- turalbuildings.

Althoughmanymunicipalitieshaveavarietyofpremiseswhereyoungpeople canmeetandinteract, ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchil- drenandy oungpeopleg rowupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39tothe Storting(2001-2002))emphasizestheimpor tanceofmor emunicipalitiesgiv- inggreaterprioritytothisarea.Informalmeetingplacesareimportant,bothfor interactionbetweenpeersandculturalexpression, andtheyplayapivotalrole inpreventiveeffortsforchildrenandyoungpeople. Ineffortstopreventsub- stanceabuseandotherantisocialbehaviouramongchildrenandyoungpeople, good, safemeetingplacesar eespeciall yimpor tant. Meetingplacesthatar e opentoall, whereno-oneisexcludedonthegroundsoftheira bilityorfinan- cialsituation, alsor eachc hildrenandy oungpeoplewhopar ticipateinf ew otherorganizedactivitiesintheirleisuretime.

5.2.2Sportsandlocalfacilities ReportNo. 14totheStor ting(1999-2000)onc hangesinthespor tssector statesthatc hildren’sandy oungpeople’spossibilitiesf orall-roundsportand varied, challengingphysicalactivitymustbeensured. Prioritymustbegivento facilitiesinthelocalcommunitythatencourageandmeettheneedofchildren andy oungpeoplef oractivityinor ganizedandself-or ganizedf orms. Young peoplemusthaveinfluenceontheprocesseswhereactivitiesandfacilitiesare planned. Facilitiesshouldfunctionasgoodsocialmeetingplacesinlocalcom - munities.TheReportalsoemphasizesthatwhenordinaryactivitiesforchildren andy oungpeoplear ede veloped, itshouldbeapr erequisitethatthe yalso includedisabledpeople. Inordertoimpr oveservicesforchildrenandyoung people, theGovernmentwillgiveprioritytofacilitiessuchasfootballpitches (gravelandar tificialgrass), multi-purposehallsands wimmingpools. Special prioritywillbegiventolargetownsandurbanareas(seeCh. 6).

Childrenandy oungpeopleoftenaskf orspacesintheirlocalcomm unity wheretheycanplay,playballgames,skateboardandengageinvarioustypesof adventureactivities.Theywanttobeabletoengageinactivitiesontheiro wn terms, andthe yw anttodeter minethef ormandcontentofsuc hactivities themselves. Consequently, theMinistryofCultureandChurchAffairshasallo- catedgamingfundsf orlocalfacilities. Sine1994, morethanNOK350million hasbeenallocatedforsimplefacilitiesdesignedforvarioustypesofself-organ- izedphysicalactivity, primarilyforchildrenandy oungpeople. Localfacilities areimportantinstrumentsinef fortstoencouragechildrenandyoungpeople toengageinph ysicalactivity. Since2000thissc hemehasbeene xpandedto includeoutdoorfacilitiesonschoolsites.

InRepor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)r elatingtotheconditionsin whichc hildrenandy oungpeopleliv eandg rowupinNorw ay, the Governmentstressestheimportanceofyoungpeoplehavinginfluenceonthe processesthatleadtotheconstr uctionofthef acilitiestheywillbeusing. In thisconnection, itwillbeimpor tantthaty oungpeoplethemselv esand, not least, localdecision-makersdevelopawarenessofstr ategiesforinf luenceand participation. 65 5.3Youngpeople,drugsandalcohol InReporttotheStortingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeo- plegrowupandliv einNorway(ReportNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)), theGovernmentstatesthatitisimpor tanttopromotegreatereffortstocom- batsubstanceabuseamongyoungpeople.Thechallengeistomobilizetheabil- ityofchildrenandyoungpeopletorefrainfromsubstanceabuseandfocuson activitiesthathelptopostponethea geofdebutandr educeconsumption. If wearetosucceed, broadmobilizationandin volvementareimportant.Young peoplemustencounterresponsibleadultswhotakeaclearstandagainstdrugs andalcohol, andpositive, attractivemeetingplacesf oryoungpeoplemustbe establishedinthelocalcommunity.

Preventingsubstanceabuseamongyoungpeoplehasbeenapriorityinefforts toensureag oodlocalen vironmentforoury oungsters. Officialpoliciesha ve emphasizedtheimpor tanceofbr oadmobilizationandg oodinter action betweenpub licauthor ities, parents, non-governmentalor ganizationsand youthgroups. InReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildren andyoungpeoplegrowupandliveinNorway(ReportNo. 39totheStor ting (2001-2002)), theGo vernmentstr essestheimpor tanceofesta blishingand maintainingattr active, substance-freemeetingplacesandleisur eactivities underbothmunicipalandprivateauspicestopreventanearlydebutandlimit consumption.

Inautumn2002, theGovernmentpresentedaspecialPlanofActiontocombat drugandalcoholpr oblems. Thisplanemphasizesbothpr eventivemeasur es andimprovedtreatmentforsubstanceabusers. Childrenandyoungpeopleare aprioritytargetgroupinthePlanofAction.

5.3.1Youngpeople’suseofdrugsandalcohol TheNationalInstituteforAlcoholandDrugResearch(SIRUS)carriesoutannu- alsurveysoftheuseofdrugsandalcoholamongyoungpeopleaged15-20.This surveysho wsthatsubstancea buseamongy oungpeoplehasbecomemor e widespreadinr ecentyears. Alcoholisstillthemostcommonsubstance, and theonethatleadstothemostinjuries, accidentsandviolence,bothwithinand outsidethehome. Whilecalculatedaveragealcoholconsumptioninthe15-20 age-groupwasequivalenttoapproximately3litresofpurealcoholinthef irst halfofthe1990s, ithasr isento5.5litr esinrecentyears.Thisincreaseissur- prisinglylarge, eventhoughadultalcoholconsumptionhasalsor iseninthe sameper iod. Althoughtheper centager iseina veragealcoholconsumption wassomewhathigherforgirlsthanforboys, onaverage, boysstilldrinkmore thang irlsofthesamea ge. Theper centager iseinalcoholconsumptionhas beengreatestinthey oungestage-group, althoughthea verageageofalcohol debuthasremainedunchangedinrecentyears.Theaverageageatwhichyoung peoplefirsttryalcoholisappr oximately15. Today’s17-18y ear-oldsconsume aboutthesameamountofalcoholastheadultpopulation. Beerisclearlythe preferredalcoholicbeverageandaccountsformorethanhalfofallthealcohol drunkbyyoungpeople.YoungpeopleinOslodrinklessspiritsandmoonshine thanthenationalaverage.

Inthecountryasawhole,thepercentageof15-20year-oldswhostatethatthey haveusedcannabisatsometimehasdoubledsince1990,butitappearstohave 66 remainedfairlystableinrecentyears(between15and18percent). Theper- centagewhohaveusedamphetamineshasincreasedfrom1.2percentin1990 to4.6percentin2003, whiletheper centagewhoha veusedcocainehas increasedfromaround0.5%in1990tojustover3%in2003. Ecstasyappeared onthemarketinthemid-1990sandjustover3%ofyoungpeopleinthe15-20 age-groupstatethattheyhaveusedecstasyatsometime.Forotherdrugs(hero- in, LSDandGHB)therehasbeenlittlechangeandveryfewyoungpeoplestate thattheyhaveeverusedthesesubstances(lessthan1%f oreachdrug). Inthe caseofmostdr ugs, thepercentageofy oungpeoplewhoha veusedthemis higherinOslothaninther estofthecountry.

Mostyoungpeoplewhouseortr ycannabis, amphetamines, ecstasyorother drugsdonotde velopalong-ter maddiction. However, althoughther eisno automatictransitionfromonesubstancetoanother, varioussurveysshowthat thebarrieragainsttryingdifferentdrugsisreduced. Sincemoreyoungpeople areexperimentingwiththelessharmfuldrugs,thereisreasontofearthatmore ofthemwillbecomeaddictedtothehar derdrugs.

Experimentswithdrugsandalcoholstar twhenpeopleareyoung. Patternsof drugandalcoholuseareformedinasocialcontext; duringleisuretime, atpar- tiesorontr ipstoca binsinthecountr ywithothery oungpeople. Theylearn todrinkalcohol–anduseothersubstances–fromotherpeople,drinkinsocial situationsandteac hother swhatthe yhavelear nedthemselves. Inef fortsto preventsubstancea buse, itisther eforeimpor tanttoesta blishpositiv e, sub- stance-freemeetingplacesthataremoreattractivethanhome-alonepartiesor otherarenaswhereyoungpeopleusedrugsandalcohol.

Ithasbeensho wnthaty oungpeopletendtobelie vethattheirfr iendsdrink morethanthe ydo. Thisphenomenon, whichhasbeencalled“amajoritymis- conception”, mayleadtoaf ictitiouspr essuretoconsumealcohol. Thisis importantinformationthatshouldbeatopicofdiscussionamongy oungpeo- ple, parentsande veryoneincontactwithandw orkingwithc hildrenand youngpeople.

Thosewhomak etheirdebutatanearl ya gehaveprovedtobepar ticularly activeinothertypesofnor m-breakingbehaviour. Surveysshowthatviolence oftenoccurswhenpeopleareundertheinfluenceofalcoholordrugs, andthe probabilityofbeingavictimofviolenceincreaseswhenapersonisunderthe influenceofalcoholordr ugs. Severalsurveysshowthatar oundeightoutof everytenviolentinjuriesarealcoholordrug-related. Moreover, alcoholisoften af actorinaccidents, crime, abuse, domesticviolence, undesiredse xual approachesandunprotectedsex.

ANorwegiansurveyhassho wnthatamongalcoholuser s, alcoholconsump- tionisthr eetimeshigheramongthosewhow eregivenalcoholb ytheirpar - entsthanamongthosewhow erenotg ivenalcoholb ytheirpar ents. Those whow erenotg ivenalcoholathomew erealsointo xicatedf arlessoften. Givingalcoholtoyoungpeopleatanearlystagetoteachthemtocontroltheir drinkingispr obablycounter-productive. Consequently, itisimpor tanttofur - therdevelopmeasuresaimedatmakingpar entsawareoftheimpor tanceof beinggoodrolemodelsasr egardsalcoholconsumption. Thisalsomeansthat parentsmustlearnmoreabouttoday’ssubstanceabuseproblems, haveamore consciousattitudetotheiro wnconsumptionandhelppr omoteacommon 67 attitudeandstrategyinrelationtoyoungpeople. Forminggroupsofparentsto discussandexchangeadviceandexperienceonmattersrelatingtosubstance abusehaspr ovedsuccessful. Youngpeoplecanalsobeinc ludedinsuc h activities. 5.3.2Challengesandfuturemeasurestocombatdrug andalcoholabuse InRepor ttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hc hildrenandy oung peopleg rowupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001- 2002)), theGovernmentpointsoutthatitisimpor tanttor ealizethaty oung peopleencounterdrugsandalcohol. Usingthemmaybepartofthetransition fromchildhoodtoadulthood, andtheremustthereforebeemphasisonpr e- ventivemeasuresthatareaimedatgivingyoungpeoplethenecessarytoolsto dealwiththisr eality. Conversationanddiscussionm ustbeencour aged, and bothyoungpeopleandadultsm ustbemotiv atedtobepositiv erolemodels andopinionleader s. Theresponsibilityofpar entsandtheirfunctionasr ole modelsar epar ticularlyimpor tant. Oneofthefutur ec hallengeswillbeto devisegoodmethodsformobilizingthea bilityofchildrenandyoungpeople torefrainfromsubstancea buse, andtof ocusonactivitiesthathelptopost - ponetheageofdebutandreduceconsumption. Inthisconnection, substance- free, meaningfulleisureactivitiesandmeetingplaces, bothmunicipalandpri- vate, areimportant. Itisimportantforyoungpeopletomeetresponsibleadults whotakeaclearstandagainstdrugsandalcohol.Theleadersofvoluntarychil- dren’sandyouthorganizationsandsportsactivitieshaveanimportantroleto playhere,asdotheemployeesofmunicipalleisurefacilities.Itshouldbeamat- terofcour sefortheleader sofsuc hgroupstor efrainfromusingsuc hsub- stancesinthepresenceofyoungpeopleandpromoteasubstance-freelifestyle.

Childrenandy oungpeoplem ustbeactiv elyinvolvedinthedebateonsub - stanceabuse.Thebestarenaforthisisthelocalcommunitywherechildrenand youngpeoplegrowup. Oneimportantmethodinthisconnectionisy outh-to- youthinformation.Theinvolvementofyoungpeopleandtheiro wnabilityto promotetheirviewsinlocal, long-termeffortscanhaveagreaterimpactthan periodiccampaigns.

Inef fortstopr eventsubstancea buse, theentirecommunity, notmerelythe authorities, mustbeinvolved.Attitudesareformedamongfriends, inthefami- lyorwithf ellowpupilsandw orkcollea gues. Itisther eforeimpor tantthat thesegroupsmobilizetocombatsubstancea buse.Atthesametime, through legislationandcontrolmeasures, theauthoritiesmusttakeaclearstandagainst substanceabuse. Strongereffortsonthepar tofsc hools, thepolice, thechild welfareser viceandothera genciesresponsibleforthelocalen vironmentin whichchildrengrowuparealsoimportantareasoffocus. Itisalsoimpor tant toincreasetheinvolvementofparents. Broad-basedmobilizationisrequiredif wearetosucceed.

Therearemanyindicationsthatpropagandawhichexaggeratesthedetrimen- taleffectsofusingvarioussubstancesmayattractratherthandetersomeyoung people.Ineffortstoreducesubstanceabuseandsubstance-relateddamageand injury,itisthereforenecessarytoprovidebalanced,objectiveinformation.Such informationmustbedisseminatedamonganddiscussedb ytheyoungpeople themselves, parentsandadultsatsc hoolandinotherar enaswher ey oung 68 peoplecongregate. Nationalandinter nationalresearchshowsthatlong-ter m andoftenunpopularmeasur es, inthef ormofhighpr icesandlimiteda vail- ability, havetheg reatestimpactandthemostlong-lastingef fectinlimiting alcohola buse. Limitingaccesstodr ugsandof feringpositiv ealter nativesto drugabuseareprobablyalsothemostimportantmeasures.Themainchallenge forthefutureistomaintainarestrictivealcoholanddrugspolicy.

5.4Youthcrime Initseffortstoensureagood, safelocalenvironment, inReporttotheStorting ontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandy oungpeopleg rowupandliv ein Norway(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)), theGovernmentstates thatitwillmakeaspecialefforttocombatcrimeandviolenceamongchildren andyoungpeople. Agreatdealofattentionhasbeenf ocusedonpr oblems relatedtocrimeandviolenceinr ecentyearsandthesituationg ivescausefor concern.Thereisreasontoaskiftherehasbeenatrendtowardsbrutalization insomegroupsofchildrenandyoungpeople.

Violenceandcrimeoccurinallpar tsofthecountr yandaffectmanychildren andyoungpeople, bothasvictimsandasperpetrators.Althoughtheproblems aremorecomprehensiveandcomplexinthelargesttowns,violenceandcrime arenotonl yanurbanphenomenon. Norisser iousand/orr epeatedcriminal behaviourlimitedtochildrenandyoungpeoplefromobviouslydisadvantaged backgrounds.

Theminimumageofcr iminalresponsibilityremainsfixedat15. Thismeans thatchildrenundertheageof15maynotbepunished. Allresearchandexpe- rienceindicatesthatpunishmentdoesnothaveapositiveeffectonthisgroup. However, thesechildrenmustbehelpedtostoptheirnegativ ebehaviourand measuresm ustbeimplementedquic kly. Childrenm ustnotbeshuttled betweenthepolice, thechildwelfareservice, theserviceforalcoholanddrug addictsandthehealthser vice.Amongotherthings, thevariousagenciesmust cooperatebetterinordertonipapotentialcriminalcareerinthebud. Follow- upservicesforchildrenandyoungpeoplewhoha vecommittedcrimesmust bestrengthenedandfur therdeveloped, withfocusonbothg eneral, primary preventivew orkandindividualmeasur es. InRepor tNo. 40totheStor ting (2001-2002)onchildandyouthwelfare,theGovernmentstatesthatpreventive workinmunicipalitiesmustbestrengthened. Inordertoachievethis, various agencies, suchasthechildwelfareservice, schools, theleisuresector, outreach servicesandthepolicem ustworktogether. Itisimpor tanttomak easingle agencyresponsibleforthecoordinationofsuchcooperation. Inmostcases, it willbenatur alforthec hildwelfareservicetoassumethisr esponsibility, but municipalitiesmustdecidef orthemselveswheresuchresponsibilitywilllie. Thisdoesnotmeanthatthechildwelfareserviceistoberesponsibleforother agencies, butthatthec hildwelfareservicemustcoordinatemeasuressothat agenciesworktogetherratherthanpullingindifferentdirections.

Bothstr ongerpr eventiveef fortsandac learerallocationofr esponsibility betweenthevariousagenciesthatdealwithcr imescommittedbyminorsare required.TheGovernmentwill, therefore, makeactiveeffortstofosterbinding cooperationbetw eenthela wenf orcementa gencies, thew elfareser vices, parentsandyoungpeoplethemselvessothatallyoungcriminalsexperiencea 69 reactiontotheircr imethatwillhelptomak ethemr esponsibleandther eby provideopportunitiesforpositivedevelopment.

5.4.1Childandyouthcrimeinfigur es Crimestatisticsshowthatonlyasmallminorityofchildrenandyoungpeople areregisteredashavingcommittedacrime–lessthanhalfofonepercentof childrenundertheminim umageofcr iminalresponsibilityandtw otothr ee percentofy oungpeopleuptothea geof20(StatisticsNorw ay2001). However, itisdif ficulttopr ovideexactinformationabouttheoccur renceof crimeamongc hildrenandy oungpeople. Allthesour cesofdataha vetheir weaknesses, whetherthefiguresarebasedonregisteredcrimes, self-reporting orsurveysofvictims. However, thedatafromself-reportingstudiesidentifiesa smallgroupofser iouslydisturbedy oungpeoplewithe xtensivebehavioural problems.

AlthoughchildandyouthcrimeratesarelowinNorwaycomparedwithmany othercountries, therehasbeenar iseinr egisteredchildandy outhcrimein recentyears. Thenumberofy oungcr iminalshasincr easedinmostar easof crime, butthemostser iouscrimescommittedb yyoungpeople(a ged15-20) areusuallyrelatedtotheft, drugsorv andalism(StatisticsNorw ay2001). With respecttogenderdifferences,thecrimestatisticsshowthatboyscommitmore crimesthang irls. In2000, theproportionofcr imescommittedb ygirlswas lowest(13.9percent)f orgirlsundertheminim umageofcr iminalresponsi- bilityandhighest(17.4percent)inthe15-17a ge-group.

Thetr endsinsometypesofr egisteredcr imeg ivecausef orconcer n. This appliespar ticularlytothetr endindr ug-relatedcr imes, butalsotoviolent crimeandrobbery.Thefiguresforthe15-20age-groupwereparticularlynega- tive.Therehasbeenrelativelylittlechangeamongchildrenundertheageof15, exceptforvandalism(graffiti), wheretherehasbeenasharpr ise.

5.4.2Measuresandchallengesinef fortstocombat childandyouthcrime Aspartoftheefforttopreventandcombatchildandyouthcrime, in1999the MinistryofChildrenandFamilyAffairspresentedReportNo. 17totheStorting (1999-2000)Planofactiontocombatchildandyouthcrime.Theplanisbeing implementedoveraperiodoffiveyears(2000-2004).Thefocusisonimproved coordinationofpr eventiveef fortsandimpr ovedf ollow-upmeasur esf or childrenandyoungpeoplewithser iousbehaviouralproblems, youngoffend- ersandyoungcriminalgangs.Theplanwasdrawnupincooperationbetween theMinistryofChildrenandFamilyAffairs, theMinistryofJustice, theMinistry ofEducation, ResearchandChur chAffairs, theMinistr yofSocial Affairs, the MinistryofHealthandtheMinistr yofLocalGo vernmentandReg ional Development.

Theplanprovidesanoverviewofhoweffortstopreventandcombatcriminal activitiesandimpr ovetheen vironmentinwhic hchildrenandy oungpeople growupwillbestrengthenedandfurtherdeveloped.Theplanidentifiesmore thanfortycurrentornewareasoffocus, andmeasureswithinsixmainareas: •coherent, coordinatedpreventiveactivities •effortsinschools 70 •effortstargetingleisuretimeandthelocalcommunity •follow-upforchildrenandy oungpeoplewithser iousbehaviouralprob- lems •follow-upforyoungoffendersandcriminalgangs •developmentofknowledgeandresearch Theseactivitiesandmeasurescoverawidefield,rangingfrompreventivework withchildrenandyoungpeopletosanctionsf orcriminalacts. Municipaland countyfollow-upactivitiesoftentak eplaceincooper ationwithcentr algov- ernment. Centralg overnmentf ollow-uptak esplacethr oughcooper ation betweenministries.TheseactivitiesarecoordinatedbytheMinistryofChildren andFamilyAffairs.Theprioritizationofinputsandnewmeasuresandprojects aree valuatedonanong oingbasis. Allthear easoff ocusandmeasur escon - tainedintheplanarefollowedupbytheministriesresponsibleforthem. Broad-basedeffortsarerequiredtopreventandcombatcr ime.Thefamilyand thelocalcomm unityareimportantifw earetomo veinther ightdirection. Itisalsoimpor tanttoensur ewide-ranging, inter-disciplinaryworkandg ood cooperationbetweenthepub licauthoritiesandc hildren, youngpeople, par- ents, non-governmentalorganizationsandothergroups. Effortstopromoteintegrationinanordinarychildandyouthenvironmentand anactivelocalcommunitymaybeoneofthebestwaysofpreventingviolence andcrime. Supportingchildren’sandyoungpeople’sowneffortsandcommit- mentisanespeciallyimportantelementofpreventiveefforts. Givingchildren andyoungpeopler esponsibilityisapositiv esignthatthe yarebeingtak en seriously. Schoolsareavitalarena, aswellasnon-governmentalchildren’sand youthor ganizations, youthc lubs, sportsandothercultur alandr ecreational activities.

Theeducationalsystemisapar ticularlyimpor tantar enaforpr eventiveand awareness-raisingactivitiesanditise xtremelyimportantthatteachers, pupils andpar entsaddr essthesepr oblemstog ether. Althoughman ysc hoolsha ve alreadydoneag reatdealtocombatviolence, bullyingandotherantisocial behaviour,moredeterminedeffortsarerequiredinmanyplaces.Goodroutines topreventandreduceantisocialbehaviourinschools, strengthentheworkof pupils’ councilsinthisareaandincreasetheinvolvementofparentsareimpor- tantforgoodresults.Aspartofthiseffort, theOlweusanti-bullyingprogramme isof feredtoallm unicipalauthor ities(whoar eresponsibleforpr imaryand lowersecondar ysc hools). Inadditiontothispr ogramme, comprehensive effortstoimpr ovethelear ningen vironmentinsc hoolsar ebeingmade throughotherpr ogrammes, measuresandpr ojects. In2002, theStortingalso adoptedaproposaltotightenupsomeofthepr ovisionsintheEducationAct, amongothersthoserelatingtothepsyc ho-socialenvironment, cf. Proposition No. 72totheOdelsting(2001-2002).

Alar gepr oportionofviolentcr imesar ecommittedundertheinf luenceof drugsoralcohol. Thisunderlinestheimpor tanceofstr engtheningef fortsto preventalcoholanddr uga buseamongc hildrenandy oungpeople. Good culturalandleisureactivities, alcohol-freemeetingplacesinthelocalcomm u- nityandg reateref fortsonthepar tofsc hools, thepolice, thechildwelfare serviceandothera genciesr esponsiblef orthelocalen vironmentinwhic h childrengrowupareimportant, asisgreatercommitmentonthepar tofpar- ents. 71 Improvedf ollow-upofy oungpeoplewithser iousbeha viouralpr oblemsis necessaryinor dertoensur ethatthesituationimpr oves. Newmethodsf or workingwithchildrenandyoungpeoplewithser iousbehaviouralproblems, suchasParentManagementTraining(PMT),WebsterStrattonandMultisystemic Therapy(MST), arepromising.ThesemethodshavebeentestedintheUSAand verygoodresultshavebeendocumented. Themethodsar ehome-based. The mostimportantobjectivesaretoprovidetherighthelpforchildrenandyoung peoplewithbehaviouralproblemsandtheirparentsasearlyaspossibleandto preventinstitutionalizationofc hildrenandyoungpeoplewhocanbehelped intheirf amilyoraf osterfamilyinthelocalcomm unity. Sofar, theresultsof thesemethodsinNorw ayhavebeenv erygood. Programmesthatha vebeen provedtobeef fectiveforthisgrouparenewinNorwayandgivegroundsfor optimism. TheMinistr yofChildr enandF amilyAffairsandtheMinistr yof Healthwillf ocusonfur therde velopingthesepr ogrammessothatmor e peoplecanbehelped. (Formoreinformationaboutthechildwelfareservice, seeCh. 4.4.)

Therewillbef ocusonthefur thertestingofne wmethodstopr eventantiso- cialbehaviourandchildandyouthcrime.Thiswilltak eplaceincooper ation betweentheMinistryofChildrenandFamilyAffairs, theMinistryofHealth,the MinistryofSocial Affairs, theMinistr yofEducationandResear chandthe MinistryofJustice. Itiscrucialtoincreaseresearchandhumanresourcedeve- lopmentprogrammesforprofessionals.Inordertohelptheexecutiveagencies toselectandimplementthebestmethods,anewNorwegianCentreforStudies ofBehaviouralProblemsandInno vativeTherapyhasbeenesta blishedatthe UniversityofOslo.TheCentrewillpromotehumanresourcedevelopmentand network-buildingbetweenuniversities, collegesandcentr esofe xpertise.The goalistobuildanationalnetworktodevelopresearchandmethodologyinthis field.

Measurestofollowupyoungcriminalsandcr iminalgangsplayapivotalrole ineffortstocombatyouthcrime. Rapidreaction, rationalizationofthecriminal justicepr ocess, improvedpr obationser vicesandincr easeduseofvictim- offendermediationar epar ticularlyimpor tant. Furthermore, in2001 Youth ContractsweretestedinsevenNorwegianmunicipalities.YouthContractsare analternativeformofsanctionforcriminalbehaviourthatparticularlytargets youngpeopleinthe15-17age-groupwhohavenotyetdevelopedapermanent patternofcriminalbehaviour.TheYouthContractisanagreementbetweenthe youngperson, withtheconsentofhisorherpar entsorguardian, ontheone handandthepoliceandthemunicipalauthoritiesontheother. Underthecon- tract, theyoungpersonpromisestoengageinspecificactivitiesprovidedthat thejudicialauthoritiesrefrainfromfurtherprosecution.Thecrimemustbeof atypethatnor mallyresultsinaw aiverofprosecution, asuspendedsentence orafine.Thecontractmustcontainmeasuresaimedatchangingtheyoungper- son’sbehaviourandsupporttodevelopapositivelifestyle.Thistrialprojectis beingrunincooperationbetweentheMinistr yofJusticeandtheMinistr yof ChildrenandF amily Affairsintheper iod2001-2003, afterwhic hthetw o ministrieswillconsiderwhethertocontin uethepr ojectonthebasisofthe experiencegained.

AsafollowuptoRepor tNo. 17totheStor ting(1999-2000)PlanofActionto combatchildandy outhcr ime, apropositiononc hildandy outhcr imewas submittedin2002, entitledPropositionNo. 106totheOdelsting(2001-2002) 72 concerninganActrelatingtoamendmentstotheCr iminalProcedureActand thePoliceAct, etc. (legalmeasurestocombatchildandyouthcrime).Thepur- poseofthesepr oposalsistoensur emor eappr opriatef ollow-upofcr imes committedbychildrenandy oungpeopleandimpr ovecooperationbetween theofficialagenciesinvolved.Thesemeasuresareintendedtopr eventyoung peoplefromdevelopingcr iminalbehaviour. Theproposalswereadoptedb y theStortinginspring2003.

5.5Racismanddiscrimination InReporttotheStortingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeo- plegrowupandliv einNorway(ReportNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)), theGo vernmentstatesthatef fortstocombatr acismanddiscr iminationare importantinordertoprovideagoodlocalenvironmentforchildrengrowing up. OneoftheGovernment’sprimarygoalsistoensurethateveryone, regard- lessoforiginorgender, hasequalopportunities, rightsandobligationstopar- ticipateinsocietyandutilizetheirresources. Nevertheless, immigrants, nation- alminoritiesandSamipeoplestille xperiencediscrimination, eventhoughit maydifferinnatur efromoneg rouptothene xt. Childrenandy oungpeople fromminoritybackgroundsmayexperiencebullying, harassment, neglectand exclusion, bothatsc hoolandelse whereintheire verydaylives. Ineffortsto provideequaloppor tunitiesf orallc hildrenandy oungpeople, measuresto combatracismanddiscriminationthereforeplayacrucialrole.

Givingeveryoneequaloppor tunitiesmayentailspecialmeasur esforcertain groupstoensurethatno-onee xperiencesdiscriminationorexclusion. Efforts toincludedifferentgroupsofchildrenandyoungpeopleareaprerequisiteif everyoneistobea bletopar ticipateonequalter ms. Effortstopr omoteinte- grationandpar ticipationpar ticularlyf ocusonaccesstoeducation, employ- mentandhousing, andgenerallyimprovingtheconditionsinwhic hchildren andy oungpeopleliv eandg rowup. Thereisac loseconnectionbetw een measurestopr omoteinteg rationandmeasur estocombatdiscr imination becausetheaimofbothistoensureequalopportunitiesforall.Discrimination andracismareobstaclestointeg ration, andifw emanagetor educethedis - criminationsuf feredb ycer taingroups, oneoftheimpor tantresultswillbe improvedintegration.

Ineffortstocombatr acismandintegrationitisimpor tanttomobilizebr oad- basedlocalin volvementandg oodinteractionbetweenlocalandcentr algov- ernmentauthor ities. Authoritiesatallle velsar er esponsiblef orcombating racismanddiscr iminationandensur ingthate veryonehasanequaloppor tu- nitytopar ticipateinallar easofsociety. Itisther esponsibilityofthepub lic authoritiestoensur ef ormalequality, thate veryonehasequalr ightsandis equalunderthelaw. Furthermore, theauthoritiesmustensuregenuineequali- tybetweenminoritiesandtherestofthepopulationbyhelpingtoremovethe barrierstoparticipationinsociety. Effortstocombatracismanddiscrimination aredependentoncooperationbetweencentralgovernment, counties, munici- palitiesandnon-governmentalorganizationsaswellascoordinated, proactive effortsonthepar tofse veralcentralgovernmentagencies. Itisnecessar yto implementmeasurestoensuregenuineequalitysothate veryoneactuallyhas thesamepossibilitiestoparticipateinsocietyandutilizehisorherr esources. 73 Continuous, long-termef fortsarerequiredtocombatr acismanddiscr imina- tion. In2002, theGo vernmentpr esentedane wPlanof Actiontocombat racismanddiscr imination. TheMinistr yofLocalGo vernmentandReg ional DevelopmentisresponsibleforcoordinatingworkonthePlanofAction,which focusesonthefollowingpriorityareas:

•workinglife •schools/education •documentation/monitoring •theInternet •police/prosecutingauthority/judicialsystem •publicservices •thelocalcommunity •str engtheninglegalpr otectionfr omethnicdiscr iminationandr acist expression

Awareness-raisingactivitiesinsc hoolsareanimpor tantpartofthisef fort. All pupilsinprimaryandlowersecondaryschoolshavebeenaskedtoformulate guidelinesforaculturallydiverseNorway, characterizedbytoleranceandfree- domfromracismanddiscr imination. Theguidelinesw erepresentedinJ une 2002.TheGovernmentwillfollowthemupbypreparingteachingmaterialson thebasisofpupils’inputsanddisseminatinginformationaboutgoodexamples. Pupilswillbemadeawareofthevaluesinherentinfundamentalhumanrights, andofthef actthathumanr ightsar econstantl ybeinga bused. Inor derto strengthenawareness-raisingactivities, HolocaustMemorialDay(27J anuary) willbeobservedinschoolseachyear. Onthisday, aprizewillbeawardedtoa schoolthathasexcelledinitseffortstocombatracismanddiscrimination.

Manychildrenandyoungpeopleareactivelyinvolvedinanti-racismactivities, andtheactivitiesofnon-g overnmentalchildren’sandyouthorganizationsand youthg roupsar evitallyimpor tant. Manyc hildren’sandy outhor ganizations haveparticipatedinawareness-raisingactivitiestocombatdiscr iminationand manyareworkingonpr acticalanti-racismandanti-discr iminationprojectsat bothnationalandinternationallevels.Theday-to-dayactivitiesoftheseorgani- zationsar eespeciall yimpor tantbecausethe ycanhelptopr ovidepositiv e meetingplacesf orc hildrenandy oungpeoplefr omdif ferentcultur albac k- grounds–meetingplaceswhichmakeculturaldiversityamatterofcourseand helptog ivechildrenandy oungpeoplefr omethnicminor itybackgroundsa naturalfootholdinthelocalcommunity.

Bothlocalandcentr algovernmentauthoritiessupporttheef fortsofchildren andyoungpeopletocombatr acismanddiscr imination.Amongotherthings, theMinistryofChildrenandFamilyAffairsprovidesfundingformulti-cultural activitiesforchildrenandy oungpeoplethr oughtheg rantschemesfornon- governmentalchildren’sandyouthorganizations. Otherschemestoencourage childrenandy oungpeopletoactiv elycombatr acismincludetheIdeasBank andUrbanYouthProjects(forfurtherinformationabouturbanyouthprojects, seeCh. 6). ThroughtheIdeasBank, whichiscur rentlyadminister edb ythe NorwegianYouthCouncil, grantshavebeenprovidedsince1998formulti-cul- turalactivitiesforchildrenandyoungpeoplerunbynon-governmentalorgan- izationsorlocaly outhgroups. Thepurposeistoencour ageactivityanddia - loguebetw eenc hildrenandy oungpeoplefr omdif ferentcultur albac k- grounds. TheIdeasBankisalsor esponsibleforstoringandpassingoninf or- 74 mationa boutmeasur esandpr ojectstocombatr acismanddiscr imination. Experiencehasshownthatlimitedfundsgenerateamultitudeofactivities.The IdeasBankhasbeenacontributoryfactorinensuringthatmulti-culturalactiv- itiesr unb ychildren’sandy outhor ganizationshavehigherpr iority, andthe schemehasencouragedmanysmallorganizationsforyoungpeoplefrometh- nicminor itybac kgrounds. Thesc hemehasalsoledtocooper ationandthe exchangeofideasbetweentraditionalNorwegianchildren’sandyouthorgani- zationsandyouthorganizationsforethnicminorities.Ourexperiencehasbeen positiveandinReporttotheStortingontheconditionsinwhichchildrenand youngpeoplegrowupandliveinNorway(ReportNo.39totheStorting(2001- 2002))theGovernmentstatesthatitwillcontin uetoprovidecentralgovern- mentfundingfortheseactivities.

InRepor ttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hc hildrenandy oung peopleg rowupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001- 2002)), theGo vernmentunderlinestheimpor tanceofhelpingtopr omote greaterawarenessamongc hildren’sandy outhor ganizationsa boutthevital roletheirworkplaysincombatingr acismanddiscr iminationandsuppor ting thein volvementofc hildrenandy oungpeopleinthisissue. Therem ustbe openarenasinwhichchildrenandyoungpeoplefromdifferentculturalback- groundscanmeet, buttheremustalsobepossibilitiesf oryoungpeoplefrom minoritybackgroundstoestablishtheirownorganizationsandraiseawareness ofthesegroupsinsociety. Moreover, wemustencouragecooperationbetween theseorganizationsandgroupsandthemoreestablishedchildren’sandyouth organizations.

5.5.1Nationalistyouthgroups InRepor ttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hc hildrenandy oung peopleg rowupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001- 2002)), theGovernmentstatesthatineffortstocombatviolence,crime, racism anddiscr imination, specialmeasur esar er equiredtocombatnationalistand neo-nazigangsandy outhg roups. Theg rowthofandr ecruitmenttothese groupsisaser iouspr oblem, bothf orthec hildrenandy oungpeoplewho becomeinvolvedinsuchmovementsandfortheirfamiliesandlocalcomm u- nities. Membershipofagroupofthisnaturecanquicklyleadtoisolationfrom otheryoungpeople, marginalizationandexposuretoviolenceandcr ime.The roadbacktoa“normalyouth”canbelonganddifficultbecausetieswithother youngpeoplehavebeenbrokenandthemember sofnationalistandneo-nazi groupsarestigmatized.Theseextremeandsometimesviolentgroupsmayalso poseathr eattothesaf etyofother s, bothyoungpeopleandadults, whoare eitheridentif iedasenemiesorcomeintocontactwiththemb yc hance. In effortstopr eventther ecruitmentofy oungpeopletosuc hgroupsandhelp thosewhohavebeenrecruitedtoleavethem, broad-basedeffortsarerequired onthepartofparents, non-governmentalorganizationsandofficialagencies.

Despitethefactthat,soonerorlater, mostmemberswishtoleavesuchgroups, manyofthemfinditdifficult.Thismaypartlybebecausetheyhavepositiveties tofellowmembersandfeelthattheyhavenowhereelsetogo. Somemayalso fearthattheymaybeleftalone,vulnerabletooldenemies.Othersmayfearthat theirfriendswillregardsomeoneleavingthegroupasatraitorandasecur ity risk. Inordertoovercomethesebarriers, itisveryimportanttoofferpossibili- 75 tiesforobtainingpracticalhelpdur ingatransitionalphase. Theymayinclude helptomovetoanothersc hooloranotherplaceofr esidence, work, training, housing, ortheopportunitytobelongtoamorepositivesocialenvironment.

Parentspla yapiv otalr oleinef fortstohelpy oungpeoplelea venationalist groups. Manypar entsf inditdif ficulttotac klethistaskaloneandneedthe supportofothers, whethertheybeschoolsandteachers, childwelfareservic- es, educational-psychologicalservices, thepolice, youthworkers, non-govern- mentalor ganizationsorg oodneighbour sandr elatives. Onemodelthathas beendevelopedconsistsofnetw orkswherethepar entsofc hildrenwhoar e memberstoviolent, racistg roupscanbeg ivensocial, moralandpr actical supportbyothersinthesamesituation.

Althoughfewlocalcomm unitiesareaffectedbynationalistorneo-nazigangs andgroupstoday, itisimportanttomonitordevelopmentsandbepreparedto provideguidanceandsuppor tf orlocalmeasur es. Aspar tofthisef fort, the MinistryofChildr enandF amilyAffairshaspr ovidedsuppor tforar esearch project, thepurposeofwhic histosuppor tmunicipalities’ effortstocombat racially-motivatedviolenceandseriousconflictsbetweenyouthgroups, andto splitupnationalistyouthgroups.Thisprojectcoversathree-yearperiod(2001- 2003)andisconcentr atedoncer tainmunicipalitiesthatha vehadlong-ter m problemswithnationalistyouthgroups.

Thechallengesinthisareamustbeviewedinaninter nationalperspective.To encourageg reatercooper ationbetw eentheNor diccountr ies, Norwaywill contributetotheesta blishmentofaNor dicf orumofe xpertsonr acism, neo-nazismandcriminalgangs. 76 77

6Localchallenges

6.1Focusonyoungpeopleinr uraland urbancommunities nsuringthatc hildrenandy oungpeopleallo verNorw ayha veag ood childhoodenvironmentandlivingconditionsposesasignif icantchal E lengeforfamilies, thegeneralpopulationandcentr alandlocalautho - rities. Forseveralyears, centralgovernmentauthoritieshaveconductedspecial campaignstargetingyoungpeopleinruralandurbancommunities.Thegoalof thesecampaignsistostimulatepositiveforcesandinitiativesatthelocallevel andmakebothy oungpeopleandtheirpar entsawareoftheiro wnresponsi- bilities.Themainfocusofthesecampaignsisonthetargetgroups’ ownefforts andjointresponsibility.

Childrenandy oungpeopleinlar geto wnsoftenencounterc hallengesand problemsthatdifferfromthoseoftheirpeersinotherpartsofthecountry,and manyofthemmaygrowupindif ficultconditions. Althoughmostofthemdo well, thepercentageofurbanchildrenandyoungpeoplewhoareaffectedby apoorc hildhoodenvironmentandunsatisf actorylivingconditionsishigher thantheper centageforthecountr yasawhole. Intowns, moreover, alarger percentageofc hildrenandy oungpeopleliv einlo w-incomehouseholds. Livingconditionsvaryinthelargesttowns, andunfavourablelivingconditions aremoreprevalentincertaindistrictsandneighbourhoods. Examplesofsuch unfavourableconditionsar ecr imeandinsecur ity, socialisolationandloneli - ness,lowmaterialstandardsoflivingandstrainedfinances,unemploymentand loosetiestothelabourmarket, poorlivingenvironmentsandtrafficproblems. Itiswhenadv erselivingconditionsofthistypemountupincer taindistricts andneighbourhoodsthatthe ybecomeapr oblemandaspecialc hallengeto thecommunityatlarge.

Whilehighlivingcosts, environmentalproblems, lonelinessandinsecurityare characteristicdrawbacksofurbanlife,manypeopleareattractedbythegreater rangeofoptionsasregardsculture, services, jobsandeducation. Inruralareas, manypeoplef eelag reaterproximitytonatur e, thelocaleconom yandtheir livingenvironmentandperhapsfeelastrongersenseofsharedresponsibility fortheirlocalcommunity, whichoffersincreasedopportunitiesforsocialcon- tactandcommunalefforts. 78 ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeople growupandliveinNorway(ReportNo.39totheStorting(2001-2002))affirms thatfocusontheconditionsinwhichchildrenandyoungpeoplegrowupisa decisivefactorineffortstosecuresettlement.Withoutchildrenandyoungpeo- ple, ruralareaswillbecomedepopulated.Agoodchildhoodmaymakeayoung personwishtocontinuetoliveinormovebacktothemunicipalityinwhich heorshegrewup.

6.2Migrationandsettlementpatterns Seenina20-y earper spective, thepopulationofe verycountye xceptf or Finnmark, NordlandandHedmar khasg rown. Then umberofinha bitantsin everyregionofNorway, exceptforNorth-Norway, hasincreasedbetween1980 and2000. Withinthev ariouscountiesandr egions, however, thetr endis towardscentralization. Growthhasbeenstrongestinregionswithlargetowns andbuilt-upareas. Inthepastf ewyears, theOsloregionhasexperiencedthe greatestpopulationgrowth.Almost80percentoftheNorw egianpopulation nowliveinurbanr egions(withaccesstocentr eswithatleast15,000inha bi- tants), and40percentofthemliv einmajorurbanr egions(withaccessto centreswithatleast50,000inhabitants).Thenumberofinhabitantsinthemost peripheralregionshasstagnatedordeclinedinthepastfewyears.

Giventhene wpopulationsituation, withdec liningbir thr atesandamor e skewedagedistributioninse veralruralregions, theconsequencesofpeople movingawayaregreaterthanbef ore. Manymunicipalitieswille xperiencea declineinpopulatione venifnoonemo vesa way. Populationpr ojections indicatethatthepopulationofbetw een126and224ofNorw ay’smunicipali- tieswilldecreaseinthenextdecade.Ineffortstopreservethemainsettlement patterns, therefore, itisparticularlyimportanttofocusattentiononthepr efe- rencesofyoungpeopleasregardstheirplaceofresidence.

6.3Youthmigrationandsettlement Migrationandsettlementmustbeperceivedfromalifestageperspective.The choicesanddesir esofy oungpeopleasr egardstheirplaceofr esidencevary accordingtotheirage, interestsandlifesituation. Fortheyoungest, recreation- alactivities,meetingplacesandeducationalopportunitiesarethemostimport- antfactors. Foryoungpeopleintheprocessofestablishingtheirownhome, a widerangeofjobopportunities, reasonablypricedhousing, goodculturaland recreationalfacilities, serviceandwelfarefacilitiesandagoodenvironmentfor childrenarekeyfactorsintheirchoiceofresidence.

Ingeneral, peoplenowtendtoesta blishamorepermanentresidencelaterin life, becausemorepeoplearepursuingahighereducationandstar tingafami- lyatalatera ge. Mostpeoplemoveoneormoretimesbetweentheagesof15 to35,butsignificantlyfewermoveaftertheageof35.Womenmovemorethan men. Betweentheagesof15and35, asmanyas75-80percentofallw omen and65-70percentofallmenmo ve.

Educationisafactorthataffectsmigrationpatterns.Inthelastfewdecades,the levelofeducationamongtheNorw egianpopulationhasr isensignif icantly. 79 Whenyoungpeoplemoveinordertoobtainaneducation, theirtieswiththe municipalityinwhichtheygrowupareweakenedandtheyformnewtiesto theplacewher etheystudy.Whilepeoplewithhighereducationha vealways movedmorethanlesseducatedpeople,thisdoesnotmeanthateveryonewith ahighereducationmovesawayfromruralareas.Educationdoesnothaveauni- formimpactonyoungpeople’sdesiresasregardstheirplaceofresidence.The levelofeducationinruralmunicipalitieshasalsorisensteadily.

Youngpeople’schoiceofwheretoliveisstillaffectedbytheirwishtohavea senseofbelongingtoalocalcomm unity. Manyyoungpeoplechoosetomove backtotheirchildhoodmunicipality, andinthepastdecadethepercentageof youngpeopleaged15-35whodonotchangeresidencehastendedtoincrease, despitetheincreaseintheirlevelofeducation.

Studiesshowthatitisoftenalackofjobopportunitiesonthelocallabourmar- ketthatisayoungperson’sgreatestobstacletorealizingthedesiretosettlein hisorherhomeregion.Themorespecializedaperson’seducation, thebigger, morediversifiedlabourmarketsheorshewillhavetolooktoinordertofind relevantjobs, particularlyifacoupleistr yingtofindemployment.

Accesstoemplo ymentandthec hoiceofthe“right” educationarenecessary, butnotdeterminantconditionsforayoungperson’schoiceofresidence. Even youngpeoplewiththe “right” educationalbackgroundchoosetosettleelse - wherethanintheirc hildhoodm unicipality. Municipalitiesalsof indthat, on average, halfofthosewhomoveinlatermoveaway.

Ayoungperson’schoiceofresidencecanalsobeseeninthecontextofhisor hervalues, rootsandidentity.Today, veryfewyoungpeoplewhog rowupin urbanareaschoosetosettleinaruralmunicipality.Foryoungpeoplewhohave grownupinalesscentr allylocatedm unicipality, asimilarm unicipalityisas attractiveaplacetosettleasthecentr alurbancommunities.

Measuresthatmightenticenewgraduatestoreturntotheirchildhoodmunic- ipalitiesinr uralareascouldbelo whousingcosts, daycareservicesandcon - tactwiththeirr elatives.Thesefactorsareimportantformanypeople. Recent researchhasfocusedonwhatpeoplewhoar eintheprocessofestablishinga homeandwhochoosetomovetoasmallplaceciteasthereasonsmotivating theirchoice. Formanypeople, thedecisionislink edtoadesir eforalifestyle thatisdif ferentfromthelif etheywouldhaveledinalar getown. Anactive localcomm unity, ag ooden vironmentf ortheirc hildrenandag oodneigh - bourhoodaregroundsgivenbypeoplef orsettlingther e. Bycomparingindi- vidualmunicipalitiesandregions,researchhasalsoidentifiedthenaturaladvan- tageslinkedtoclimateandnaturalsurroundings, proximitytoatownandwell developedser vicesandcultur alfacilitiesasimpor tantfactorsformunicipali- ties’ attractionasaplaceofr esidence. Therearemunicipalitiesinwhic hthe numberofr esidentshasincr easeddespitethef actthatther ehasbeenno increaseinlocalemplo ymentopportunities. Similarly, therearemunicipalities wherethereislabourmarketgrowthbutnoincreaseinimmigration. 80 6.4 Focusontargeting youngpeopleinruralareas 6.4.1Centralgovernmentefforts Centralgovernmenteffortstargetingyoungpeopleinr uralareasrangefrom integrationofy outhpolicying eneralr uralandr egionalpolicytospecial campaignsaimedatthatgroup.

TheMinistr yofLocalGo vernmentandReg ionalDe velopmenthaslar gely soughttointeg rateeffortstargetingyoungpeopleintotheg eneralpolicyon ruralandr egionalde velopment. TheMinistr ytr ansfersfundsf orr uraland regionalde velopmentmeasur ese veryy ear, emphasizingthatthev arious administrativeagenciesshouldfocusparticularlyonyoungpeople.

Youth-relatedef fortsdir ectedto wardsbusinessandindustr yar epr imarily focusedonpr ovidingjoboppor tunitiesforyoungpeopleinr uralareas, and providingthenecessar yconditionstoena blethemtoesta blishtheiro wn businesses. Emphasisisonf acilitatingentr epreneurship, creativeideasand innovation.

Intheeducationsector, workhasbeeninpr ogressforseveralyearsondevel- opingentrepreneurshipintheeducationalsystem. TheMinistryofEducation andResear chhaspla yedak eyr oleinthisef fort, whichhasalsoin volved extensivecooperationbetweenseveralministriesandotherplayers. Examples ofprojectsincludepupilandy outhenterprises, Internet-basedteachingpro- grammesforruralschoolsandschool-privatesectorpartnerships. Severalmin- istrieshavenowjoinedforcestothesubstantiallystrengthentheeffortsofthe YoungEntrepreneurshipprogrammetodevelopentrepreneurshipandyouth- runenterprisesinprimaryandlowersecondaryschoolsandcolleges.Infuture, farmorepupilsandstudentswillbeof feredanoppor tunitytode velopthe skillsrequiredtoestablishacompany.

Adequaterecruitmenttothea griculturalsectorisessentialtoac hievingthe agriculturepolicyg oalsofavia ble, sustainableagriculturalsectorthr oughout Norway.Throughruraldevelopmentfundingsc hemes, itispossib letoobtain grantsforminorinvestmentsrelatingtogenerationaltransitionsintheagricul- turalsector. Supportisalsoprovidedforanagriculturaltraineeprogramme(to covertr ainees’ wages, employers’ nationalinsur ancecontr ibutions, etc.) Farmerswhoar einterestedbecometr aineehosts, andacontr actisenter ed intobetw eenhostandtr ainee. Thetr ainingpr ogrammeislink edtothe Agriculture, FishingandF orestrypr ogrammeof feredb yuppersecondar y schools. RuraldevelopmentfundsareadministeredbytheCountyDepartment ofAgriculture.

TheMinistryofFisherieshasimplementedmeasuresaimedatrecruitingmore youngpeopletoF ishery Tradestr ainingpr ogrammesinuppersecondar y school.Thesemeasurestargetyoungpeopledirectly, aswellasprovidingtrain- ingforteachers. Exercisebooksandothermater ialsha vebeenpr eparedto enableprimaryandlowersecondaryschoolstolinkteachingandprojectwork morecloselytof isheryandmar inetrades. TheMinistr yalsotak espartinan internationalexchangeprogramme, inwhichjobsar eexchangedinor derto createmarketcontact.Theprogramme’stargetgroupincludesyoungpeople. 81 Since1999, theMinistryofChildrenandFamilyAffairshashadaspecialg rant schemef ormeasur estar getingy oungpeopleinr uralar eas. Throughthis scheme, ruralm unicipalitiesthate xperienceastr ongdec lineinpopulation havebeeninvitedtoapplyforgrantsforlocalyouthprogrammesinthecultural andr ecreationalsector s. Whenallocatingfunds, theMinistr yhasbeencon - cernedtoensur ethatactivitiesandpr ojectsar eplannedlocall y, andthat municipalitiesadoptacoher entappr oachintheiref fortstostr engthenthe localen vironmentf ory oungpeoplethr oughinter actionbetw eeny oung peopleandthemunicipalauthorities.Thepurposeoftheschemeisnotonlyto promotey outhactivitiesinthem unicipality, butequall ytof osterdialogue betweenthemunicipalauthoritiesandyoungpeople.Theschemehasgenera- tedconsiderableinterestinr uralmunicipalitiesandman yyoungpeoplear e activelyinvolved.Therelativelysmallamountsg rantedhaveproducedsignifi- cantr esults, becausethe yha vestim ulatedy oungpeopletomak eanef fort themselves.TheMinistryofChildrenandFamilyAffairswillmaintainitsf ocus ony oungpeopleinr uralar eas. Futurec hallengeswillbetocontin ueto strengthencultur alandr ecreationalser vicesf orandwithy oungpeoplein smalllocalcomm unities, inordertopr omoteacr eative, stimulatingenviron- mentinwhichyoungpeoplethriveandcanputtheirr esourcestouseinthe localcommunity. In2001, theMinistr yoftheEn vironmentinitiatedapr ogrammetopr omote environmentallysound, attractiver uralto wns. Thisf ive-yearpr ogrammeis beingimplementedincooperationwithsixotherministries.Theprogrammeis partoftheGo vernment’sr uraldevelopmentpolicy, andthepar ticipationof childrenandyoungpeopleisakeyelement. 6.4.2Countyandmunicipalef fortsforyoungpeople Youngpeopleha vebeenapr iorityareaoff ocusforcountyauthor itiessince the1990s, andspecialstr ategiesandplansofactionha vebeende velopedin whichacr oss-sectoral, wide-rangingappr oachhasbeenadopted. Insur veys carriedoutb ycer taincounties, youngpeoplear eregardedasastr ategically importantgroupfortheemploymentandrecreationsector, andasastabilizing factorforsettlementpatterns. Makingthelocalcommunityanattractiveplace foryoungpeopletoliveandimprovingtheirqualityoflifehavealsobeencon- sideredanimportantobjective. Somecountieshavegivenveryhighpriorityto effortstargetingyoungpeopleandhavepreparedspecialcountysub-plansfor thisgroup.

Regionalde velopmentpr ogrammesar eanimpor tanttoolf orcoor dinating countyeffortsmoreeffectively, aprocessthatwasinitiatedbytheMinistr yof LocalGovernmentandRegionalDevelopmentinthemid-1990s.Themainpur- posew astoimpr oveinter action, betteradaptpolicyinstr umentstomeet regionalchallengesandpromotetarget-based, ratherthanr ule-based, manage- ment. Certainstrategiesandmeasuresareaconsistentcomponentofthepr o- grammeswhereyouth-relatedeffortsareconcerned. Focusontherelationship betweenschoolsandbusinessandindustr yisak eyfactor, andincludesboth traininginentr epreneurshipandmeasur estopr ovideinformationtosc hools onlocalandregionalbusinessandindustry. Measuresaimedatcreatingasense ofbelong ingtothelocalcomm unityandstr engtheninglocalidentity , for instancethroughlocaldevelopmentprojects, arealsocommon. Onthewhole, theprogrammesreflectthedesiretointegrateayouthperspectiveintogener- aldevelopmentprogrammes. 82 Manylocalcomm unitiesandm unicipalitiestr ytosta yintouc hwithy oung peoplewhoha vemovedaway, forexamplebyinvitingthemtotak epar tin communalactivitieswhenthe ycomehomeonholida y. Othermunicipalities haveestablishedspecialgrantschemesforyoungpeoplepur suingcoursesof studyinordertoencouragethemtosettleinthemunicipalitywhentheyhave completedtheirstudies. Youngpeoplearealsoapr ioritytargetgroupforcer- tainpolicyinstruments. Forinstance, theadministratorsofmunicipalbusiness developmentfundshavebeenrequiredtogiveprioritytoyoungpeople. Many ruralmunicipalitiesalsomak eactiveef fortstopr omotethepar ticipationof youngpeopleinthelocalcommunity.

Throughaspecialcampaignf oroutl yingm unicipalitiescar riedoutb ythe MinistryofLocalGo vernmentandReg ionalDevelopmentduringtheper iod 1997-2001, specialattentionwasfocusedontheinvolvementandparticipation ofy oungpeopleinlocalcomm unities. Themeasur esthatw ereinitiated involvedbothyoungpeoplewholivedinthemunicipalityandthosewhohad movedaway, andinnovativeprojectsweredevelopedbasedonholisticstr ate- giesaimedatencour agingy oungpeopletosettleinthem unicipalities. Acknowledgementofthef actthatjobsar enotasuf ficientincentiveinthe competitionforyoungpeopleasfutureresidentshasbeenasignificantfactor. Thelessonslear nedinthecampaignf oroutl yingm unicipalitiessho wthat therewillbekeencompetitiontoattractyoungpeopletothosemunicipalities inthefuture, butthatm unicipalitiesthatde velopafullr angeofser vicesand facilities, therebyrenderingthemselvesattractive, arelikelytoemergeaswin- ners.

6.4.3Providingfavourableconditions oryouthsettlementinr uralareas Youngpeople’schoiceofresidenceisdeterminedbyanumberoffactors, such asvariedjobopportunities,reasonablypricedhousing,goodculturalandrecre- ationalfacilities, healthandwelfareservicesandag oodenvironmentforchil- drentogrowupin. Municipalitiesplayapivotalroleinef fortstomeetthese needs.Theyestablishimportantframeworkconditionsandpr ovidenecessary services, bothtoinha bitantsandtobusinessandindustr y. Municipalitiesthat canoffertheirpopulationagoodrangeofservicesandfacilitieshaveafarbet- terchanceofbeingperceivedasdynamic, attractivecommunities.

Municipalpolicyhasemphasizedthef actthatahapp ychildhoodandy outh canmakeayoungpersonwanttoremaininormovebacktohisorherhome municipality. Ruralmunicipalitieshavethereforesoughttopr omotepositive experiencesforchildrenandyoungpeopleandprovidethemwithagoodenvi- ronmentinwhichtogrowup, partlybyensuringthattheyhaveampleoppor- tunitiestopar ticipateande xertinf luenceontheirlocalcomm unity. Inrural municipalities, participationisnotjustaquestionofassur ingthedemocr atic rightsofchildrenandyoungpeople-itisalsoaquestionofassuringthefuture ofthem unicipality. Beinginvitedtog ivetheiropinion, beingtakenseriously andseeingthattheirsugg estionsareactedong iveyoungpeopleapositiv e impressionofbeingimpor tanttotheirm unicipality. Ify oungpeopleha ve influence, itmightleadthemtoenvisageafutureintheirlocalcommunityand wishtosettleinthemunicipality. 83 Manymunicipalitieswillbedependentonnewcomers, particularlyyoungpeo- pleestablishingtheirfirsthomes,inordertobevibrantlocalcommunities, and tobeabletofillpositionsintheprivateandpublicsectorwiththerightexpert- ise.Thesemunicipalitieswillfacethechallengeofhavingtorecruitbothper- sonswithtiestotheregionandpersonswhohavenotgrownupthere.Thefact thatthelabourmarketinruralareasdoesnotcorrespondtoyoungpeople’sjob aspirationsmakesrenewingthelabourmarketapivotalchallenge.

Almostallaspectsofcentralgovernmentpolicyhaveimplicationsforregional andruraldevelopmentpolicyg oals. Inthepr ocessoffur therdevelopingthe ruralde velopmentpolicycampaigntar getingy oungpeople, emphasishas thereforebeenplacedonensuringthebroad-basedinvolvementofcentralgov- ernment, countyandmunicipalauthorities. Interactionandcooperation, com- binedwithfruitfuldialoguewithyoungpeople, arekeyelements.

ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeople growupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)) indicatesthattheGovernmentwillcontinuetofocusonyoungpeopleinrural andregionaldevelopmentpolicy. Potentialinnovatorswillbethemaintar get groupforselective, business-orientedpolicyinstr uments.Thebusiness-orient- edy outhpr ogrammesar emainl yaimedatpr ovidingjoboppor tunitiesf or youngpeopleinr uralareasandf acilitatingyoungpeople’sesta blishmentof theiro wnbusinesses. Providingf avourableconditionsf orentr epreneurship, creativeideasandinno vationwillbeak eyobjective.TheGovernmentunder- scorestheimpor tanceofincreasingthea bilityandwillingnessofy ounggirls andboystobeinnovativebygivingschoolpupilspracticalknowledgeofwhat theprocessofestablishingacompanyactuallyentailsandb yencouragingan active, creativeenvironmentforyoungpeopleinruralareas.Atthesametime, youngpeopleareexpectedtobenefitfromthereorientationofpolicyinstr u- mentsto wardsastr ongerfocusone xpertiseandinno vation, sincemanyof themacquireahighereducation.

6.5Effortstargetingyoungpeople inmajorurbancommunities Toensureag oodchildhoodenvironmentallo verNorway, itisimpor tantto focusspecialef fortsonthelar gesturbanm unicipalities. Certainlargetowns areaf flictedwithadv erselivingconditions, whichma ycr eateadif ficult environmentforchildrenandy oungpeopleandmak elocalneighbourhoods unsafe.ThisappliesespeciallytothethreelargesttownsandtoOsloinpar tic- ular.

Forseveralyearsthecentralgovernmenthasassumedaspecialr esponsibility forimprovingtheconditionsinwhichchildrenandyoungpeoplegrowupin majorurbancomm unities. Importantmeasur esinc ludetheMinistr yof ChildrenandFamilyAffairs’grantschemeforurbanyouthprojects,theMinistry ofCultureandChur chAffairs’ focusonspor tinlar gecities, andcooperation betweencentralandm unicipalgovernmentonaplanofactionf ortheinner easterndistrictofOslo. Moreover, thecentralgovernmenthasf oryearscon- tributedsubstantialfundingforhousingandurbanrenewalinthethreelargest towns.Thishasresultedintherenovationofmanyhousingareasandthepro- visionofgood, safeplayareas, buildingcourtyards, parksandoutdoorspaces. 84 Inspring2002, theGovernmentpresentedReportNo. 23(2001-2002)tothe Stortingonabetterenvironmentintownsandvillages, whichlaysdownprin- ciplesfortheg oodphysicaldesignofurbanstr ucturesandlocalneighbour - hoods.Thegoalispartlytopromotesafe, beautifulandstimulatingtownsand villageswithhighen vironmentalandhousingstandar dsf orinha bitantsand urbanstructuresthatfosterahealthylifestyle. Designingtownsandlocalcom- munitiestoincludecommunalurbanspaces, greenstructures, sportsfacilities andenvironmentallysoundmeansoftransporthasasignificantimpactonchil- dren’sandyoungpeople’sopportunitiesforplay,physicalactivityandahealthy childhoodenvironment.

Inspring2003, theGovernmentpresentedReportNo. 32(2002-2003)tothe Stortingonthede velopmentofpolicyr elatingtomajorurbancentr es. Inthe Government’sopinion, majorurbancentr esar easignif icantf actorf orthe growthoftheirsur roundingareas. Itisthereforeimportanttoseether oleof suchcentresinbothanationalandaregionalperspective.Thereportalsodeals withthespecialpr oblemsofmajorurbancentr es, particularlythesocialc hal- lenges. Particularattentionisfocusedinthereportontheconditionsinwhich childrenandyoungpeoplegrowup. 6.5.1Livingconditionsandchildhoodenvir onments Populationtrendsshowthatalar gepercentageofchildrenandyoungpeople growupinlargetownsandthesur roundingmunicipalities. Inadditiontothe childrenandy oungpeoplewhosec hildhoodarenaisamajorurbancentr e, largetownsattractyoungpeoplefromruralareas. Seenasawhole, thismeans thatthetr ansitionfromyouthtoadulthoodisincr easinglytakingplaceina largeurbanenvironment.

Animportantcharacteristicoflargetownsisthefactthattheyserveascentres intheirrespectiveregionsofthecountryandhaveacommonhousing, labour, culturalandeducationalmar ket. Inthepastf ewdecades, largetownsandthe surroundingm unicipalitiesha veg rownsignif icantlyandar eincr easingly becomingunifiedurbancomm unities. Ithasther eforebecomenecessar yfor largetownsandsur roundingmunicipalitiestocooper ateonef fortstargeting childrenandyoungpeople.

Largetownshavetraditionallyhadsoundf inances, andtheyhavebeenahead ofmanyothersmalllocalcommunitiesintermsofprovidingtheirinhabitants withgoodlivingconditions.Typical“urbanbenefits”areoftendefinedasagood financialsituation, fewerlow-wageworkers, moreeducationaloppor tunities, morejoboppor tunities, abr oaderr angeofser vicesandmor ecultur aland recreationalfacilities.Urbanproblemsareoftenassociatedwithvariousaspects ofhousingandlocalneighbourhoodssuc hasnoiseandpollution, cramped housingorpoorhousingstandards, fewersocialrelationshipsandmorecrime andinsecurity.Theactualsituationinmajorurbancomm unitiesisv erycom- plex, andtherearebothadvantagesanddisadvantagestolivinginlargetowns inNorway.

Highdensity, neighbourhoodsegregationandaheterogeneouspopulationare someofthecharacteristicsoflargetowns. Insuchtownsthereisagreaterpos- sibilityforgroupswiththesamebackgroundandlifesituationtoliveinacon- centratedarea. Surveysoflivingconditionsshowthatsocialandeconomicdif- 85 ferencesar econsider ablymor epr onouncedinlar geto wnsthaninsmall municipalities.ThisisparticularlythecaseinOslo.Whilesomepartsofthecity offerthebestlivingconditionsinNorw ay, otherpartshavethew orstcondi- tions.

Aconcentrationofunfavourablelivingconditionsinapar ticulargeographical areadoesnotnecessarilymeanthatthesameistrueattheindividuallevel, and mostchildrenandy oungpeopledow ellinlar geto wns. Foryoungpeople, growingupinalar getownmaygivetheme xtensivefreedomofactionand ampleopportunitiestodevelopandexperiencelifeontheirown.

Anurbanen vironmentof fersadiv ersityofr ecreationalactivities, butalso entailsthepossibilityofc hildrenandyoungpeoplebeinge xposedtoanega - tiveenvironmentofviolence, crimeandsubstanceusethatmaygenerateinse- curity.Thetown, andparticularlythetowncentre, attractsmanyyoungpeople, especiallyonweekendsandinthee vening.Thetendencyofy oungpeopleto commutebetweentheirhomesandthecentr eofto wngivescausef orcon- cern, particularlyinrelationtoyoungpeoplewhodonotfeelathomeintheir ownneighbourhood, whetheritbeanurbanneighbourhoodoraneighbour - ingmunicipality. Youngpeoplewhodr opoutofsc hool, jobsandtr aditional recreationalactivitiesandwhoa voidcontactwithadultsha veatendencyto drifttowardsthetowncentrewheretheycaneasilycomeintocontactwitha negativeenvironmentcharacterizedbysubstanceuse,violenceandcrime.This callsf orc losecooper ationbetw eenoutr eachser vices, thec hildw elfare serviceandthepoliceinlar getownsandthesur roundingurbanneighbour - hoodsandmunicipalities.

Initsef fortstoensur eag oodr ecreationalen vironment, inRepor ttothe Stortingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeoplegrowupand liveinNorw ay(ReportNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)), theGovernment emphasizedtheimportanceofgood, reasonablypriced, youthactivitieswhere alcoholanddr ugsar epr ohibited, bothinlocalcomm unitiesandinto wn centres.Theprovisionbybothvoluntaryorganizationsandmunicipalauthori- tiesofg oodmeetingplacesf orsocialcontactandactivityisanimpor tant objective. Theremustbeg reaterfocusonthen umerousvoluntaryor ganiza- tionsandthe ymustbeg ivengoodoperatingparameters. Goodresultshave alsobeenac hievedthr oughy outhcentr esorm ulti-activitycentr es, where youngpeoplecanbecomein volvedinconstr uctiveactivitythr oughla bour market, employmentortrainingprogrammes.

Inrecentyears, youthgangsthatengageinviolentorothercriminalbehaviour inlargetownshaveattractedconsiderableattention.Whilethesegangsarenot large,theirmembersrepeatedlyappearincrimestatisticsforviolence,robbery, crimesofgainanddr ug-relatedof fences. Thegangsspr eadfearandanxiety amongchildrenandyoungpeopleandinlocalcomm unities. Suchgangsalso seemtohaveatendencytoattractyoungpeoplewhofeeloutofplaceinsoci- ety. Iftherearenopositive, attractivearenasinwhichyoungpeoplecanfind supportandputtheirresourcestoconstructiveuse, theywillbeatgreaterrisk ofbeingattr actedtocr iminalgroupsandviolentgangs. Itisther eforeimpor- tantthatto wnssuppor tinclusive, safeandmeaningfulr ecreationalactivities wherechildrenandyoungpeoplecanmakeuseoftheirresourcesinapositive way. Negativetr endsiny oungg roupsm ustbecombatedthr oughtar geted effortsandeffectivecooperationbetweenlocalagenciesandservicesandwith 86 voluntarygroups.Theparticipationofchildrenandyoungpeopleisessential. Experiencesho wsthatpr eventiveef fortsar eef fective, andthatthebest methodinthelongter mistoimpr ovetheconditionsinwhic hchildrenand youngpeopleliveandgrowup.

Aspecialcharacteristicofsomelargetowns, particularlyOslo, isthehighper- centageofc hildrenandy oungpeoplefr omethnicminor itybackgroundsin certainurbanneighbourhoodsanddistricts. Manyofthemcomefromfamilies whoselivingconditionsar epoorerthanthoseofther estofthepopulation. Thisgivesrisetochallengesinrelationtoschooling, work, housing, healthand recreation, andcallsf orbroad-based, targetedeffortstopr omotetheinteg ra- tionandinc lusionofsuc hg roups. ThesituationinOsloise xceptionalas regardstheper centageofc hildrenandy oungpeoplefr omethnicminor ity backgrounds. In2000, over31percentofprimaryandlowersecondarypupils camefromaminoritylanguagegroup. However, thisvariesfromaround90per centatsomeschoolstoaround5percentatother s.

Childrenandy oungpeoplefr omethnicminor itybac kgroundsf acespecial challengesrelatingtolanguage, schoolingandwork.Theyparticipatetoaless- erdegreeinorganizedrecreationalactivitiesandmoreofthemdropoutofthe educationalsystemthanc hildrenandy oungpeoplewithaNorw egianback- ground. Studiesshowthatasmallerper centageofy oungpeoplefr omethnic minoritybackgroundshavecompletedpr imaryandlo wersecondar yschool andattenduppersecondaryschoolsthanyoungpeoplewithanethnicmajor- itybackground, andthatthe yhavegreaterdifficultyinmakingpr ogressand advancingthroughuppersecondar yschoolthantheirethnicmajor itypeers. Thisposessignif icantc hallengesf orsc hoolsandlocalneighbourhoodsin urbanm unicipalities. Itisther esponsibilityofsc hoolstopr ovideallpupils witheducationadaptedtotheirneedsanditisimpor tanttode veloplocal schools. Educationalqualificationsarearesourceonthelabourmarketandare importantforbothanindividual’ sper sonalde velopmentandf orhisorher standardofliving.Youngpeoplewhohavepoorliteracyskills, cannotkeepup atschoolandha vedifficultyobtaininganeducationorajobar eamongthe mostvulnerable, at-riskgroupsinsocietytoday.

Someethnicminorityparentsparticipatelittleineverydayschoollife.Aschool thatfacilitatesgoodcooperationwithpupils’ homessothatpar entscansup - porttheirc hildreninda y-to-daysc hoolactivitiespr omotesinteg ration. Experienceofsc hool-homecooperationshowsthatitispossib letoac hieve goodresultsevenatschoolswhereahighpercentageofthepupilscomefrom ethnicminoritybackgrounds. However, itisimportantthatmoreschoolstake stepstoensuregoodcooperationwithminorityparents.

Girlsfromethnicminoritybackgroundstakelittleadvantageofavailablerecre- ationalactivities. Somegirlsandy oungwomenliveinisolationandha veno contactwithNorw egiansociety. Isolation, forcedmarriageandfemalegenital mutilationhavebeentopicsofdebateinthepastf ewyears. Itisimportantto supporteffortstostrengthentheidentityofy ounggirlsfromethnicminority backgroundsandpreventthemfrombeingisolated, marginalizedanddiscrim- inatedagainst. Forseveralyears, therefore, thecentralgovernmentauthorities havesupportedprogrammesandprojectsaimedatincreasingtheparticipation andintegrationofyounggirlsfromethnicminoritybackgrounds. Inthereport totheStortingontheconditionsinwhichchildrenandyoungpeopleliveand 87 growup, theGovernmentaffirmsthatef fortsinthisf ieldwillbeintensif ied andfurtherdeveloped. Asregardsforcedmarriageandf emalegenitalmutila- tion, plansofactionha vebeenpr eparedandr enewedwiththeaimofmain - tainingdialogueandidentifyingthesepr acticesasunlawfulandoffensiveacts ofabuse.

Surveysshowthatchildrenandyoungpeoplewhohaveexperiencedwarare over-representedincer tainlar geto wns, whetherthe ybeunaccompanied refugeesorcametoNorw aywiththeirf amily.Thisisavulner ablegroupwho requirespecialf ollow-upandwhoposemajorc hallengesfortheauthor ities. Amongotherthings, itisimportanttoensurethattheseyoungpeoplearefol- lowedupcloselyasregardshousing, school, workandrecreation.Thereisalso anunmetneedf orpsychosocialassistanceandsuppor t. Childrenandy oung peoplewhohaveexperiencedwarshouldbeof feredtheopportunitytotake partinacon versationgrouporotherspeciall yadaptedactivitiesandpsyc ho- logicaltherapytailoredtotheirindividualneeds.

Anothercharacteristicoflargetownsisthelargerpercentageofchildwelfare casesthaninsmallm unicipalities. Somepr oblemsareexacerbatedinmajor urbancentr es, bothbecausethelar geto wnsha veatendencytobecomea refugef ory oungpeoplewhodonotf itintolocalcomm unitiesinsmaller towns, andbecausecer tainaspectsofamajorurbancomm unitycanha vea marginalizingeffectonsomey oungpeople. Itisalsoeasiertohidea wayand avoidcontactwithw elfareser vices. Sincethesocialmonitor ingsystemand socialsafetynetseemtobeweakerinlargetownsthaninsmallmunicipalities, itisimpor tanttoha vepr ogrammestar getingc hildrenandy oungpeople. Employmentandser vicesthatcang ivechildrenandy oungpeoplecar eand support, therebyenablingthemtocopewiththeproblemsintheirlivesinthe bestpossib lew ay, arer equired. ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsin whichchildrenandyoungpeoplegrowupandliveinNorway(ReportNo. 39 totheStor ting(2001-2002))ther eforeemphasizesthatpolicyinstr uments mustbedesignedtopr omoteself-helpandindependence, andpreventchil- drenandy oungpeoplefr ombecomingsocialc lients.Thisrequiresclosefol- low-upandlow-thresholdprogrammesiftheneedsofchildrenandyoungpeo- plewhodropoutofschool, jobsorrecreationalactivitiesaretobemet. Close interdisciplinaryandinter-a gencycooper ationispar ticularlyimpor tantif youngpeoplearetoreceivethenecessaryhelpandsupport.

6.5.2Focusonyoungpeopleinmajorurbancommunities In1982, aspecialcentralgovernmentgrantschemewasestablishedforyoung peopleinmajorurbancommunities.Thisscheme, calledUrbanYouthProjects, isadministeredbytheMinistr yofChildr enandFamilyAffairs, andcomprises thetenurbanm unicipalitiesofOslo, , Trondheim, , Kristiansand, Drammen, Tromsø, Skien, FredrikstadandSandnes. Thescheme alsocompr isesaspecialpr ogrammecur rentlybeingcar riedoutinOslo, BergenandTrondheim.

Thegoalofthegrantschemeistoimprovetheconditionsinwhichyoungpeo- pleinmajorurbancomm unitiesliv eandg rowup. Thesc hemeispar tly designedtoaddresstheadverselivingconditionsinamajorurbancommunity, whichinturnexacerbatesocialproblems. 88 Thegrantschemetargetsyoungpeoplea ged12to25. Theprogrammesand projectsthatreceivesupportareintendedtof ormpartofacoher ent, overar- chingyouthpolicy, andeffortstargetingyoungpeoplewithspecialneedswill beg ivenpr iority. Prioritywillalsobeg iventopr omotingy oungpeople’ s participationinandinfluenceonplanningandimplementation. Emphasisisto beplacedonpr eventingundesirablesocialbehavioursuchasviolence, bully- ing, crime, substanceuseandracism, combatingprejudiceanddiscrimination, andpromotingm utualrespect, thepar ticipationofg roupsofy oungpeople whomakelittleuseofa vailableculturalandr ecreationalfacilities, inclusion andtheestablishmentofalternativelearningarenas, equalityandequaloppor- tunitiesforgirlsandboys, equalopportunitiesfordisabledpersonsandwork andprogrammesaimedatreachingyoungpeoplewithpovertyproblems.

Prioritywillbeg iventopr ojectsandpr ogrammesinwhic hy oungpeople themselvesaretheinitiator sandpr imemoversandareinvolvedindesigning andmanagingthemeasures, andtoeffortstargetingyoungpeoplefromethnic minoritybac kgroundsandg roupsofy oungpeopleatr isk. TheMinistr yof ChildrenandF amilyAffairswishestopr omotegreatercooperationbetween andcoordinationoftheworkofmunicipalities, urbanneighbourhoods, volun- taryorganizationsandyouthgroupsandprivateinstitutionstoimprovechild- hoodenvironments.

Youngpeoplefr omethnicminor itybackgroundshavebeenapr ioritytarget groupforthepastdecade, andtheirneedsar elargelyaddressedthroughthe measuresandactivitiesthathavereceivedfunding.

Centralgovernmentpolicyinstrumentsthattargetyoungpeopleinlargetowns areadminister edb yman ydif ferentministr ies. TheMinistr yofChildr enand FamilyAffairsisr esponsibleforcoor dinatingyouthpolicy. TheMinistr ywill initiateeffortstocoordinatemeasurestargetingchildrenandyoungpeoplein majorurbancomm unities, partlythroughtheesta blishmentofaninter-minis - terialworkinggroupinthisfield.

ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeople growupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)) emphasizesthattheMinistr yofChildrenandFamilyAffairswillfurtherdevel- opandstrengthentheurbanyouthprojectsscheme.Youngpeoplefromethnic minoritybackgroundsfacespecialc hallenges, andparticularimportancewill beattachedtopr ogrammesandpr ojectsthatpr omoteintegration.Therewill continuetobespecialf ocusontheselectedurbanm unicipalitiesofOslo, Bergenand Trondheim. Youngpeopleatr iskwillha vepr iorityintheurban youthprojectsscheme, andeffortswilltoagreaterdegreebedirectedtowards townsandareaswheretheneedsandadv erselivingconditionsar ethegreat- est. Cooperationbetweenlargecitiesandthesur roundingmunicipalitieswill alsobeencour agedwithavie wtosolvingcommonc hallengesr elatingto youngpeople.

6.5.3Sportsinurbancommunities Thelargesttownsalsofacespecialchallengesinrelationtospor ts, asregards bothactivitiesandf acilities.Theyhavetoof ewsportsfacilitiesandtheones theyhavearegenerallypoorlymaintained. Furthermore, inseveralareasofthe 89 townstheg eneralpopulationtak eslittleinter estinspor ts, andhumanand financialresourcesarelimited.Itisdifficult,forinstance,torecruitcoachesand leaders.Thisproblemispar ticularlyprominentinurbandistr ictswithalar ge ethnicminoritypopulation.

In1993, theMinistryofCultur alAffairsstartedaspecialurbanpr ojectinthe fieldofsports.Theproject’smaintargetgroupsarechildrenandyoungpeople andwomenfromethnicminorities.Theactivitiesaredesignedforpersonswho donotbelongtoanorganization.ThetownsthathavebeeninvolvedareOslo, Bergen,TrondheimandStavanger(upto1995),aswellastwomunicipalitiesin thecountyofAkershus(OppegårdandLørenskog).

Throughtheurbanspor tsproject, attentionhasbeenf ocusedonther oleof sportsinbuildingacommunityandinbridgingthegapbetweendifferentcul- tures. Activitiesm ustbelo w-thresholdser vices, inwhic hpeopletak epar t accordingtotheirownabilitiesandneeds. Sofar, theprojecthassucceededin generatinggreaterinterestinactivitiesamongchildrenandyoungpeoplefrom ethnicminoritybackgrounds, andhasresultedinmoremembersofthisgroup beingrecruitedtosportsteamsandclubs. However, thisisnowaymeansthat theclubshavemanagedtoretainthemovertimeasgreateremphasisisplaced onskills, performance, regularattendance, equipment, thesupportandvolun- taryeffortsofparents, etc.

ReportNo. 14(1999-2000)totheStor tingonc hangesinthespor tssector stressesthattheGo vernmentwishestocontin uetheurbanpr ojectasf aras sportsactivitiesar econcerned. Sincethedistr ibutionofgamingr evenuesfor 2001, grantsforsportsinmajorurbancomm unitieshavebeenplacedunder theitem “Physicalactivity , localbelong ingandsocialinteg ration”. The NorwegianConf ederationofSpor tsandOl ympicCommitteeha vebeen requiredtocoordinateeffortsonthebasisofpaste xperience, andtoassume responsibilityforfurtherdevelopmentoftheproject.Thetargetgroupswillbe childrenandyoungpeople(aged6-19),childrenandyoungpeoplewithbehav- iouralpr oblemsandimmig rants. Otherurbandistr ictsbesidesthosealr eady mentionedmayalsoapplyforfundsforactivityprogrammes. 90 91

7Youngpeople’sparticipation andinfluence

7.1Participationand influenceatdifferentlevels orse veralyearsthepub licauthor itieshaveg ivenpr ioritytoef fortsto ensurethatc hildrenandy oungpeopleha veaninf luenceonthew ay F societyde velops. Boththr oughleg islationandb yr atifyingtheUN ConventionontheRightsoftheChild, Norwayhasaf firmedthepr incipleof therightofchildrenandyoungpeopletostatetheiropinionandtobehear d. Article12oftheUNConventionontheRightsoftheChildstatesthatchildren areentitledtoexpresstheirviewsfreelyinallmattersaffectingthem, andthat theseviewsshallbegivendueweightinaccordancewiththeageandmaturi- tyofthec hild. Beingg iveninf luenceassur esandstim ulatesthea bilityof childrenandyoungpeopletobecomeactivelyinvolved, assumeresponsibility andthinkinnovatively.

Severalstatutescontainpr ovisionsthatsaf eguardther ightofc hildrenand youngpeopletoe xpresstheirviewsonmatter saffectingthem. Thisisstated intheActrelatingtoChildrenandParents(theChildrenAct)andintheChild WelfareAct, whiletheEducation Actcontainspr ovisionsconcer ningpupil democracyatthevariouslevelsofschooling.

Inschool, childrenandy oungpeoplear erequiredtolear nwhatdemocr atic principlesmeaninpr acticethroughthesystemofpupildemocr acyandthe workofthepupils’ councils. ReporttotheStortingontheconditionsinwhich childrenandyoungpeoplegrowupandliveinNorway(ReportNo. 39tothe Storting(2001-2002))emphasizestheneedtofacilitatecooperationwithother municipalagencies, soastogivepupilsapossibilitytoparticipateinmunicipal planningandinshapingchildandyouthpolicyatthelocallevel.Timemustbe setasideinsc hoolschedulestoena blepupilstodiscusstheappear anceof theirlocalneighbourhood,beitthedesignoftheirschoolyard, trafficsafetyfor childrenmakingtheirwaytoandfromschool, thelocationofthefootballfield orthedesir etoesta blishy outhc lubsorotherr ecreationalf acilitiesinthe municipality.Thisisalsoinlinewiththeintentionsonwhichthereformofpri- maryandlowersecondaryeducationwasbased, andtheprinciplesandwork- ingmethodslaiddowninthecorecurriculumforthetenyearsofprimaryand lowersecondaryschool. 92 Intheculturalandrecreationalsectoraswell, childrenandyoungpeoplemust beensur edpossibilitiesf ortakingpar tinplanning, designinganddir ecting servicesandactivities. Animpor tantg oalofy outhpolicyistoensur ethat youngpeopleha veg reaterinf luenceinv oluntaryor ganizations, municipal recreationalprogrammes, youthclubsandotherr ecreationalactivitiesatthe localle vel. Throughpublicpolicyoncultur e, thepublicauthor itiesarecon- cernedtofulf iltheneedsandinter estsofc hildrenandy oungpeople. Thisis firstandforemostacountyandmunicipalresponsibility,butthecentralauthor- itiesalsohavearesponsibilitytosupporteffortstopromotetheparticipation ofchildrenandyoungpeopleintheplanningandimplementationofcultur al andrecreationalactivities. Onewaythatthiscanbeac hievedisb yrequiring municipalitiestoensurethatchildrenandyoungpeopletakepartinpreparing applicationsforfundingfromgrantschemes.

Forseveralyearsthecentralauthoritieshavesupportedlocaleffortstostimu- latetheparticipationofchildrenandyoungpeopleinmunicipalplanningand decision-makingprocesses.Althoughtherehasbeenmarkedprogressinrecent years, therearestillsignificantvariationsfromonemunicipalitytoanotheras regardsopportunitiesforyouthparticipation, andasregardswhetheraccount hasbeentakenoftheirwishes.Thereareprobablystillmanymunicipalitiesthat mustcomplymorecloselywiththeprovisionsthathavealreadybeenadopted toensurethattheneedsandinter estsofc hildrenandy oungpeoplear emet andrespected.

Participationisimportantwhenlearningaboutdemocracy, andhasresultedin youngpeoplebecomingmoreinvolvedinpoliticalactivitiesandtakinggreater interestinlocaldemocr acy. Givingy oungpeopleinf luencema ydeter mine whetherthe ycanen visageafutur eintheirlocalcomm unityandwishto settleinthem unicipality. ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic h childrenandyoungpeoplegrowupandliveinNorway(ReportNo. 39tothe Storting(2001-2002))pointsoutthatthepar ticipationofchildrenandyoung peoplealsohasitslimitations. Itemphasizesthatadultsplayanimportantrole inprovidingguidanceandm ustensurethefr uitfulpar ticipationofc hildren andyoungpeoplethroughsupervisionandcleardefinitionofresponsibilities. Youngpeoplem ustbetak enseriously, butmustnotbeg ivenmoreresponsi- bilitythantheyareabletotackle, accordingtotheReport.

7.2Frameworksandoppor tunities forparticipationandinfluence Ensuringthatchildrenandyoungpeopleinfluencetheformulationandimple- mentationofchildandyouthpolicyisregardedasanimportantgoalatalllev- elsofpublicadministration.However,theprogressthathasbeenmadetowards achievingthatg oal, andthefr ameworksandoppor tunitiesthate xist, vary. Issuesandtopicsthatareapartofdailylifeforchildrenandyoungpeopleoffer thegreatestopportunitiesforinfluence, andsof arattentionhasmostl ybeen focusedoneffortsatthemunicipalandcountylevel. InReporttotheStorting ontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandy oungpeopleg rowupandliv ein Norway(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)), theGo vernment emphasizestheimpor tanceofstr engtheningef fortsatallle velsofpub lic administrationtoensur ethatchildrenandyoungpeopleha vegoodopportu- nitiesforparticipationandinfluence. 93 Theparticipationofchildrenandyoungpeoplecantakeplaceinvariousforms andthroughvaryingdegreesofinfluence.Thereisacleardistinctionbetween activeandpassiv eparticipation, andfourformsorle velsofpar ticipationcan beidentified:

•childrenandy oungpeoplear eusedassour cesofinf ormationforother personswhodotheplanningandmak ethedecisions-passiv epar tici- pation •childrenandyoungpeoplecontributeinformationandviewsinadialogue -participationthroughdialogue •childrenandy oungpeoplepar ticipateinapr ocessandcontr ibutesolu- tionsandproposals-activeparticipation •childrenandyoungpeopleorderprioritiesasregardstheuseofresources andthedesignofmeasur es-par ticipationthroughself-deter minationin definedareas

ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeople growupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)) emphasizesthatworkatalllevelsofpublicadministrationshouldbeorganized insuchaw ayastoensur ethatc hildrenandy oungpeopleha vetheoppor - tunitytopar ticipateande xertinf luencethroughallthea bovefourformsof participation.

7.3Participationandinfluence atcentralgovernmentlevel Atcentr alg overnmentle vel, childrenandy oungpeoplepar ticipatelittlein politicalprocesses, buthavetheoppor tunitytopr esenttheirvie wsthrough spokespersonsandthr oughdialoguewithpoliticiansandtheauthor ities. Dialogueswithc hildandy outhrepresentatives(atconf erences, discussions, brainstormingsessions, hearings, consultations, etc.)andr epresentativesof publiccouncilsandcommitteesar ethemostcommonw aysinwhic hpoliti- ciansandauthor itiesatthecentr allevelobtaintheopinionsofc hildrenand youngpeople.Politicalyouthorganizationsareachannelthroughwhichyoung peoplepresenttheirviewsdirectlytopoliticians. Knowledgeoftheopinions ofchildrenandyoungpeopleisalsoacquiredthroughchildandyouthsurveys andresearchontheseg roups. Childrenandyoungpeoplealsoha veopportu- nitiestoprovideinputforpolicyformulationatthecentr algovernmentlevel throughthemedia, theInternet, letters, campaigns, meetingsandotherf orms ofdirectcontact.

Toensuregooddialoguewithchildandyouthrepresentatives, theMinistryof ChildrenandFamilyAffairsarrangesannualconferencesforvoluntarychildand youthorganizationsandyouthgroups.Animportantpurposeoftheseconf er- encesistoexchangeinformationandobtainviewsoncurrentchildandyouth policyissues. Besidestheseregularannualmeetings, thereisongoingdialogue andregularcontactatthecentr algovernmentlevelwithv oluntarychildand youthorganizationsandyouthgroups, whoareinvitedtosubmitconsultative commentsonmattersaffectingchildrenandyoungpeople. Insomecases, the ministrieshavealsoar rangedspecialhear ingsormeetingswithc hildrenand youngpeopletosoundouttheirviewsandobtaininputforpolicyformulation 94 inf ieldsofsignif icancef orc hildrenandy oungpeople. Forinstance, the NorwegianPupils’ Organizationmeetsregularlywithboththeseniorpolitical staffandtheadministrativestaffoftheMinistryofEducationandResearch.

Aformofdialogueoftenusedb yor ganizationsandg roupsistoin vitek ey politicianstohearingsandotherforumstoanswerquestionspreparedbychil- drenandy oungpeople. Whilee xperiencefr omsuc hhear ingsv aries, when theyhavefocusedonfindingsolutionstheyhaveprovedusefultobothparties.

Toobtaininputastowhattheauthor itiescandotostr engthentheinf luence ofchildrenandyoungpeopleinciviclife, theMinistryofChildrenandFamily AffairsestablishedtheYouthForumforDemocracyinDecember1998.Theaim oftheF orumwastoensur ethaty oungpeopleha vemoreavenuesforparti- cipationandinf luenceinthede velopmentofsociety, andtopr ovideadvice andinformationinthisr especttothepoliticalauthor itiesatboththecentr al andlocallevels.TheForumwascomposedof16y oungpeopleaged15to26 fromallpartsofNorway, withanequalnumberofrepresentativesofeachsex. Themember scamefr omdif ferentchildandy outhor ganizationsandy outh groupsandthusrepresentedawiderangeofchildandyouthinterests.

TheForumpresentedproposalsinanumberoffields: astudyofpowerinsoci- ety, youthr epresentation, voterpar ticipation, ther ightsofy oungpeoplein workinglife, schoolissues, informationforyoungpeople, localdemocracy, and numerouschildandy outhpolicyissuesatthelocalandcentr alle vels. One lessonlearnedfromtheForumwasthatattentionwasfocusedonunexpected areasandproposalswereputforwardthatwouldprobablynothavebeenpre- sentedthroughotherchannels.Anotherlessonwasthattheestablishmentofa forumofthisnatur eatcentralgovernmentlevelhasalsohadimplicationsf or theinvolvementofthem unicipalauthoritiesinef fortstopr omotechildand youthinf luence, suchasthr oughtheesta blishmentoflocalf orums. Furthermore, theForumhashadanimportantsignallingeffect.

Whenconcludingitsworkinsummer2001, theYouthForumforDemocracy proposedthattheGo vernmentmaintainthesystemofay outhf orumf or democracyasasourceofregularinputastohowtogiveyoungpeoplegreater influence.IntheForum’sopinion,thereisalongwaytogobeforechildrenand youngpeopleacquiretheinfluencethattheyshouldhave, andthereisaneed foraforumthatcanpla yaproactiveroleinthisf ieldinfuture. Reporttothe Stortingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeoplegrowupand liveinNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002))statesthatthe Governmentdoesnotconsideritappropriatetoestablishanotheryouthforum fordemocracyatthistime, butwillfollowupthedialoguewithyoungpeople throughmor esystematicdir ectcontactwithv oluntaryor ganizationsand youthgroups.

7.4Participationandinfluence atmunicipalandcountylevel Sofar, childandyouthparticipationhashadthegreatestimpactinmunicipali- ties, whichiswherechildrenandyoungpeoplehavethegreatestopportunity toexertinf luenceonplanningandpolicyf ormulation. Thisisalsotheonl y levelofpublicadministrationwhereitispossibletoinvolvealargenumberof 95 childrenandy oungpeople. Effortstopr omotechildandy outhparticipation andinf luenceinm unicipalitiesha vede velopedconsider ablysincethef irst experimentswithparticipationinrelationtolocalneighbourhoodswereiniti- atedinthe1970s. Theenga gementofm unicipalitieshasbeenpar ticularly strengthenedinthe1990s, bothinter msofthen umberofm unicipalities involvedandthemethodsandworkprocessesapplied. However, eventhough considerableprogresshasbeenmadeinr ecentyears, thereisstillalongw ay togobeforeeverymunicipalityfulfilstherequirementsforactiveparticipation bychildrenandy oungpeople, includingther equirementslaiddo wninthe PlanningandBuildingActandintheNationalP olicyGuidelinestostrengthen theinterestsofchildrenandyoungpeopleintheplanningprocess(cf. chapter 4.1).

Atcountylevel, too, therehasbeengrowingfocusonthisareainrecentyears. Participationhasbeenassuredthroughavarietyofmethodsandatseverallev- els, rangingfromobtainingthevie wsofc hildrenandy oungpeoplethr ough questionnairesur veysandtheInter nettoactiv epar ticipationwher ey oung peoplethemselv esputf orwardpr oposalsandor derpr ioritiesthr oughthe YouthCountyCouncil, participationinconferences, workshopsonthefuture, etc.Althoughagrowingnumberofcountiesarefocusingonincreasingthepar- ticipationofc hildrenandy oungpeople, manyha vestillnotin volvedthese groupsdirectlyincountyplanning(cf . chapter4.1). Moreover, fewcounties havedevelopedpermanentarrangementsthatensurethatchildrenandyoung peoplesystematicallyparticipateinandexertinfluenceonpolicyformulation andprioritization. 7.5Theparticipationandinfluenceof childrenandyoungpeople inmunicipaldecision-makingprocesses Animportantprerequisiteforavibr antlocaldemocr acyisensur ingthatthe inhabitantsaregiventheopportunitytoinfluencethewayinwhichthemunic- ipalityorganizesitsactivitiesanddeter minesitspr iorities. Experienceshows thatthepar ticipationofc hildrenandy oungpeoplehasapositiv eef fectin localcommunities, andthatthesegroupsmakevaluablecontributionstolocal planninganddecision-makingpr ocesses. Givingc hildrenandy oungpeople opportunitiestopar ticipateande xertinf luenceisalsoanimpor tantwayof teachingthema boutdemocracyandsignif icantfortheirfur therinvolvement inlocalpolitics.

Inthecour seofthepastdecade, specialbodiesthr oughwhichchildrenand youngpeoplecane xertinf luenceha vebeenesta blishedinsome340of Norway’s434municipalities.Thesebodieshavetitleslikemunicipalboardfor children, municipalboardforyoungpeople, childandyouthcouncils, munici- palpupils’ council, liaisoncommitteesbetweenyoungpeopleandpoliticians, etc. Therear esignif icantdif ferencesfr omonem unicipalitytoanotheras regardsmandates, opportunitiesforparticipation, spheresofauthority, degree ofinfluence,possibilitiesforcontactandcooperationbetweenchildren,young peopleandthem unicipalauthorities, andresults. Somemunicipalitiesattach littleimpor tancetoinf luenceandmor etoinstr uctionindemocr aticpr inci- ples. Othersareconsciousoftheneedtoensur ethatchildrenandyoungpeo- plehaverealinfluenceandcanseether esultsoftheirinput. InReporttothe 96 Stortingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeoplegrowupand liveinNorw ay(ReportNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)), theGovernment underscorestheimportanceoftailoringmeasurestolocalconditions, making useofav arietyofworkingmethodsandar rangementsandallowingchildren andyoungpeopletopar ticipateontheiro wntermsandintheiro wnarenas. Moreover, itisimpor tanttoensur ethebr oad-basedparticipationofc hildren andyoungpeopleinthisw ork. Inadditiontoesta blishingspecialbodiesof influence, itisalsoimpor tanttof acilitatethepar ticipationofc hildrenand youngpeopleinexistingmunicipalstructures.

Anoverarchingprincipleineffortstopromotetheparticipationandinfluence ofchildrenandyoungpeopleisensuringgenuineinfluencethatproducesvis- ibleresults,inboththeshortandlongterm.Itisimportantthatthebasicprem- isesbeclearlydefined, sothatparticipationdoesnotleadtofr ustratedyoung peoplewhohavelostfaithintheideathatg ettinginvolvedcanmakeadiffer- ence. Effortsmustbeor ganizedinsuchaw aythatitispossib letofollowup someofthedesir esandneedse xpressedbychildrenandy oungpeople. Itis alsoimportanttoensurerapidfeedbackaboutfollow-upefforts.

Anotherimpor tantpr incipleisensur ingthatdif ferenta geg roupsha vethe opportunitytopar ticipateande xertinf luence. Thepar ticipationofc hildren andyoungpeoplewillnecessarilydiffersomewhatdependingontheirage,and themethodsandframeworksforparticipationmustbeadaptedtothevarious agegroups. Sofar, fewmunicipalitieshaveinvolvedyoungerchildreninsuc h efforts, butexperienceshowsthatitispossibletobegintheprocessasearlyas indaycarecentres. Infutureefforts, itwillbeimpor tanttofocusonw aysof providingmoreagegroupswithopportunitiesforparticipation.

Experienceshowsthatitisimpor tanttoesta blishasystematicw orkprocess thatisf ollowedupandfur therdevelopedfromoney eartothene xt. Itisin municipalitieswherethemayororprincipalmunicipalexecutivehasplayedan activeroleintheprocess,andwhereroutineshavebeenestablishedforobtain- ingtheviewsofchildrenandyoungpeople, thattheseeffortshavebeenbest integratedintothem unicipality’sotherw ork. Thesuccessofthepr ocess dependsonsuc hfactorsasc learguidelines/termsofr eferenceforthew ork, contactwithandbac kingfromtheadministr ativestaffandpoliticiansinthe municipality, availabilityofear markedresources, genuineinfluenceincer tain matters, clearroutinesasregardsfeedback, contactwiththeothermembersof theyouthcommunityandinformationonmunicipalactivities.

Oneformofsystematicparticipationthatmanymunicipalitieshaveadoptedin recenty earsistog ivec hildrenandy oungpeopleac hancetodecideho w fundsar etobespenteac hy earonimpr ovingthelocalcomm unity. After discussingthematterinc lass, pupilssubmitspecif icpr oposals, whichar e rankedbyorderofpr ioritybythepupils’ councilandpresentedatanann ual meetingatthetownhallwhichisalsoattendedb ypoliticiansandprofession- als. Experienceshowsthatchildrenandyoungpeoplear erealisticandkno w thattheycannotachievealltheirgoalsinoneyear.TheGovernmentintendsto urgeallm unicipalitiestoallocatesomefundswhoseusema ybedecidedb y childrenandyoungpeople, withincertainlimits.

Experienceshowsthatmunicipalitiesthathaveintroducedapermanentform ofpar ticipationb ychildrenandy oungpeopledonotdir ectlycop ymodels 97 fromotherm unicipalities. Municipalitieslearnlessonsfr omoneanother, and furtheradaptthef ormandcontenttotheiro wnneeds. Thereisaconstant processofchangeasregardsthetypesofmatterinwhic hchildrenandyoung peopleareallowedtoparticipate, andhowmuchinfluencetheyaregiven. In somematterstheyareaconsultativebodyortheiradviceisr equested, while inother sthe yha vether ighttomak epr oposalsorr ecommendations. In certaincases, childrenandyoungpeoplealsoha vedecision-makingauthority. Thisappliesparticularlyinmunicipalitieswherefundshavebeenallocatedfor usestobedecidedbychildrenandyoungpeoplethemselves.

ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeople growupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)) emphasizesthatthec hallengeinfutur eistoincorpor ateef fortstopr omote childandyouthparticipationandinfluencesowellthattheybecomeapartof ordinaryworkatallle velsofthem unicipaladministration. Italsopointsout thatthisworkmustundergocontinuousdevelopmentinordertoensurethat childrenandyoungpeoplehaveinfluence.

7.6Voterparticipationand politicalengagement Concernhasbeenvoicedinseveralconnectionsaboutyoungpeople’slackof engagementinpoliticalpartiesandtheirlowvoterparticipation. Surveyscited inOf ficialNorw egianRepor t2001:3onv oters, theelector alsystemand electeesshowthatmember shipofpoliticaly outhorganizationshasdec lined fromaround44,000in1977to23,000in1995. Moreover, voterparticipation amongyoungpeopleislo werthanamongadults. Thequestionsthatcanbe raisedarewhetherthismeansthatyoungpeoplearenotasengagedinpolitics astheadultpopulation, andwhetherthisisagrowingproblem.

Voterpar ticipationstatisticssho wthaty oungpeoplee xercisetheirr ightto votelessthantheirelder s, bothinlocalanding eneralelections. Amongfirst- timevoters, thepercentagewhov oteding eneralelectionsdec linedfrom72 percentin1981to56percentin2001. First-timevoterparticipationislower inlocalelectionsthaning eneralelections, where33percentv otedin1999 comparedwith53percentin1971. Brokendo wnb yg ender, therew ere approximatelyasmanywomenasmenamongfirst-timevoterswhoexercised theirrighttovote, inboththelastgeneralelectionandthelastlocalelection.

Althoughvoterparticipationistraditionallymuchloweramongfirst-timevot- ersthaninotherg roups, studiesofvoterparticipationingeneralelectionsby youngpeopleduringtheperiod1981-1997showthatitgenerallyincreasesin subsequentelections-tobesur e, wheno verallv oterpar ticipationr emains stable. Thusthelo wv oterpar ticipationamongf irst-timev oterscanbe explainedfromalife-cycleperspective, andthereislittleindicationofag ene- rationgapinr elationtopar ticipationing eneralelections. Nocorresponding studieshavebeencarriedoutforlocalelections.

Youngpeople’slowvoterparticipationispartlyascribabletothefactthat, toa greaterdeg reethantheirelder s, youngpeopleusedif ferentpoliticalinstr u- mentsandalternativeformsofpoliticalexpressiontothetraditionalsystemof voting. Studiesshowthatthereisac leartendencyforyoungerpeopletopar - 98 ticipatemorefrequentlyindirectcampaignsthanolderpeople. Ontheother hand, however, thereisnotendencyf orthosewhof ailtovoteinelectionsto participatemorefrequentlyindir ectcampaigns. Therearemanyindications thatyoungpeoplewhobecomeenga gedinthepoliticalpr ocessdosoacross abroadfront, whiletherearegroupsofyoungpeoplewhodonotenga gein anyformofpoliticalactivity.

Thepoliticalpar tiesfaceclearchallengeswhenitcomestor ecruitingyoung peopleandestablishingframeworksandopportunitiesforengagementwhich enableyoungpeopletoseethev alueofpar ties’ politicalactivity.Thepublic authorities, too, facechallengesintheiref fortstoensur ethebr oaderpartici- pationofyoungpeopleinpolitics. ReporttotheStortingontheconditionsin whichchildrenandyoungpeoplegrowupandliveinNorway(ReportNo. 39 totheStorting(2001-2002))underscorestheimportanceofmunicipalitiesand countiesactivelyseekingtostr engthenthepar ticipationandenga gementof childrenandyoungpeopleinlocalplanninganddecision-makingpr ocesses.

ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeople growupandliveinNorway(ReportNo.39totheStorting(2001-2002))points toseveralmeasuresthatmightincr easeyoungpeople’spoliticalengagement. Forinstance,municipalitiescanappointapersonwithspecialresponsibilityfor contactwithyoungpeople,makingiteasierforyoungpeopletofindoutabout municipalpolicy. Itmustnotbenecessar ytounder standthepoliticalsystem inordertobeabletoputforwardone’sviews. Furthermore, mentionismade ofbindingcooperationbetweenthecountycouncilandthey outhcouncilor asimilarbodyofinfluenceforchildrenandyoungpeopleinthemunicipality. Toensuresuchcooperation, themunicipalcouncilcanhostanopenmeeting onchildandyouthpolicyearlyoninitster mofof fice.Atthemeeting, itcan takestockofmattersraisedbyyoungpeopleandmattersonwhichthemunic- ipalcouncilhasworked.Themostimportantpurposeistodeterminethemat- tersonwhichtherecanbecooperationduringthecouncil’stermofoffice. It isalsoimpor tantthatthem unicipalcouncilandm unicipalboardsandcom - mitteesmakeitpossiblefortheinhabitantsofthemunicipality, includingchil- drenandyoungpeople, toputforwardquestionsandviews.Thiscanbedone, forinstance, duringanopenquestionssessioninconnectionwithcouncil meetings.

Youngpeoplecanbeelectedasrepresentativeswithfullrightstositonboards andcommitteeseventhoughtheirnameswerenotincludedonanelectorallist inm unicipalcouncilorcountycouncilelections. Thereisnominim uma ge limitforeligibilitytopopularlyelectedbodiesotherthanthem unicipalcoun- cilorcountycouncil, butyoungpeopleunder15y earsofa geshouldnotbe givenaccesstoconfidentialinformation.Today, however, fewmunicipalitiesor countiesappointy oungpeopletosuc hbodies. TheYouthDemocracyForum hasproposedthatapilotprojectbeinitiatedtoestablishquotasforyoungpeo- pleonmunicipalboardsandcommittees, andthatcommitteesthatdealwith mattersaf fectingchildrenandy oungpeopleshouldha veatleastoner epre- sentativeunder25y earsofa ge. ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsin whichchildrenandyoungpeoplegrowupandliveinNorway(ReportNo. 39 totheStor ting(2001-2002))statesthattheGo vernmentdoesnotconsiderit appropriatetoinitiateapilotprojectofthisnatureundertheaegisofthecen- tralgovernmentauthorities. 99 Atcentralgovernmentlevel, too, therearefewyouthrepresentativesoncoun- cils, boardsorcommittees. In2000aroundthreepercentofthemember sof centralgovernmentboardsandcommitteesw erea ged16-29y ears, whereas thata geg roupaccountedf or19percentofthepopulation. The Youth DemocracyF orumhaspr oposedthatwhencentr alg overnmentboar dsand committeesareappointed, theNorwegianYouthCouncilmustbeconsultedas towhethertheboar dorcommitteeshouldha veay outhrepresentative. The Governmentconsidersitimportanttoincreasetheproportionofyouthrepre- sentatives, andtheMinistr yofLa bourandGo vernmentAdministrationhas urgedministriestotak eaccountofthisobjectiv ewhenappointingmember s tocouncils, boardsandcommittees. However, itmustbeuptoindividualmin - istriestocontacttheNorw egianYouthCouncilormak euseofotherg roups withwhichtheyarefamiliarwhentheyseekyouthrepresentatives.

7.7Areasoffocusandfutur eefforts ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeople growupandliv einNorw ay(Repor tNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)) emphasizesthatboththepublicauthoritiesandvoluntaryorganizationsshould makeiteasierforchildrenandyoungpeopletoexertinfluence.Thisdoesnot meanthatc hildrenandy oungpeoplem ustmakedecisionsr egardingimpor- tantareasofsocietyentir elyontheiro wn, butthataccountm ustbetakenof theirideas, thoughtsandproposalsinplanning, policyformulationandday-to- dayworkinvariousarenas.

TheReporttotheStor tingalsounder scoredtheimpor tanceofbothcentr al governmentandm unicipalauthoritiesfollowingupfur thereffortstosecur e theparticipationandinf luenceofchildrenandyoungpeople.TheMinistryof ChildrenandF amilyAffairshasaspecialr esponsibilityforensuringaholistic approachintheseefforts, andforinitiatingmeasurestostrengtheninter-minis- terialcooperation. Effectivefollow-upisdependentoncountiesandm unici- palitiesalsofollowingupthroughpracticaleffortsatthelocallevel.

ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeople growupandliveinNorway(ReportNo. 39totheStorting(2001-2002))pres- entsthef ollowingmeasur esaimedatstr engtheningandfur therde veloping effortsatlocallevel: •Intensifiedeffortstosecuretheparticipationandinfluenceofchildrenand youngpeople. Greateraccountm ustbetak enoftheideas, thoughtsand proposalsoftheseg roupsinplanning, policyformulationandda y-to-day workinvariousarenas, atmunicipal, countyandcentralgovernmentlevel. •Incr easeddialoguewithy outhg roups. TheGo vernmentintendsto strengthenitsdialoguewithyouthgroupsthroughmoresystematic, direct contactwithvoluntaryorganizationsandgroupsofyoungpeople. •Systematicpar ticipationatm unicipalle vel. TheGo vernmentintendsto promoteanincreaseinthen umberofmunicipalitieswherechildrenand youngpeopleparticipateonasystematicbasis,andtohelpensurethatthis becomesanimportant, routineelementofworkatmunicipallevel. •Fundswhoseusema ybedecidedb yc hildrenandy oungpeople. The Governmentwillurgeallmunicipalitiestoallocatecertainfundsforuseby childrenandyoungpeoplefortheiro wnactivitiesandtheimpr ovement ofthelocalcommunity. 100 •Supportforlocalpilotprojectsanddevelopmentwork. Pilotprojectswill beinitiatedtof ocusontheinf luenceofc hildrenandy oungpeoplein politicaldecision-makingandprocessesatmunicipallevel. •Exchangeofinformationandexperience. Centralgovernmentauthorities willalsosuppor tlocalef fortsb yar rangingconf erencesandpr oviding informationandguidancematerial.Thiswillincludeabookletofideascon- tainingexamplesoflocalworktopromotetheparticipationandinfluence ofchildrenandyoungpeople. Systematicevaluationswillalsobeinitiated tostudylessonslearnedfrommunicipalandcountyeffortstoincreasethe participationofchildrenandyoungpeople. •Youthnetworksanddatabase. Effortswillbemadetostimulateexchanges ofideasande xperiencebetweenchildrenandy oungpeopleindif ferent municipalities. Thiswillbef ollowedupb ybuildingnetw orksandesta b- lishinganup-to-datedata baseofyouthcouncilsorsimilarbodiesofinf lu- enceinmunicipalities. •Increasedyouthparticipationinpublicboardsandcommittees. Municipal andcountyauthor itiesar eur gedtoensur ethaty oungpeopleha vea greateropportunitytopresenttheirviewsthroughparticipationinboards andcommitteesandatm unicipalandcountycouncilmeetings. Itisalso importanttoincr easeyouthrepresentationoncentr algovernmentcoun- cils, boardsandcommittees. Ministriesareurgedtotakethisconsideration intoaccountwhenappointingmemberstosuchbodies. •Impr ovedcontactbetw eenc hildren, youngpeopleandpoliticians. Municipalitiesareurgedtosecuremorebindingcooperationbetweenthe municipalcouncilandtheyouthcouncilorsimilarbodiesofinfluencefor childrenandyoungpeople. Itisalsoimportantthatthemunicipalcouncil andmunicipalboardsandcommitteesmak eitpossib leforlocalinha bi- tants, includingchildrenandyoungpeople, toputforwardtheirquestions andviews.Onemeansofdoingthisisbyhavinganopenquestionssession inconnectionwithmeetings. •Youthliaison. Toensurethaty oungpeopleha vemoreinf luenceinlocal politics, municipalitiesareurgedtohaveaspecialyouthliaisonofficer.

Thesemeasuresaredesignedtoensur ethatc hildrenandy oungpeopleha ve greaterinfluenceondevelopmentsintheirownmunicipality. 101

8Internationalcontactand cooperationintheyouthsector

8.1Increasedtransnationalengagement hede velopmentofsocietytoda yisinf luencedb yam ultitudeofeco nomic, socialandcultur alfactorsthattr anscendnationalboundar ies, T withther esultthattheseboundar iesha veincr easinglylesssignif i- cance. Newcommunicationstechnology, increasingmobility, anever-growing numberofsupr anationaldecisionsandc losertr ansboundarycooper ation requireustobecomemoreactivelyinvolvedininternationalandglobalissues. TheinternationalizationofsocietyposesnewchallengesforNorway.

Asar esultoftheglobalizationoftheinter nationalcommunity, infuturewe musthaveknowledgeofsituationsinothercountriesandexperienceofcoop- erationwithpeoplefr omothercultur esandbac kgrounds. Itisdif ficultto obtainsuchknowledgeande xperiencethrougheducationandatheor etical approachalone. Thebestw ayofacquir ingknowledgeofconditionsinother countries, culturaltraditionsandreligionsisb yexperiencingthemdirectly. It isthereforeimportantthatchildrenandyoungpeoplebegivenabetteroppor- tunitytoparticipateininternationalcooperationandthattheyacquireknowl- edgeandunderstandingoftheculturalandsocialtraditionsofothercountries.

Agrowingamountofkno wledgeisr equiredinnter msofbothlangua geand culturalunder standing. Internationaly outhcooper ationleadstoincr eased knowledgeandg ivespar ticipantse xperiencesfr omothercountr ies. This knowledgeandexperiencecanmak eanimpor tantcontributiontothede ve- lopmentofNorwegiansociety, particularlyintheculturalsphere.

Thefactthatcooperationgivesindividualsabetterunderstandingofthesitua- tioninothercountr iesandpr omotesgreatertoleranceofothercultur esand groupsisalsoimpor tant. Youthcooperationacrossnationalboundar iesisan effectivemeansofpreventingxenophobia. Personalcontactsandcooperation betweenyoungpeoplefr omdifferentcountrieslaythefoundationforreduc- ingintoleranceandcanthereforeplayavitalroleinpreventingracism.

Internationalcooperationisalsoimpor tantinr elationtothef ormulationof officialc hildandy outhpolicy. Inaglobalizedw orld, publicauthor itiesin differentcountr iesoftenencounterthesamepr oblemsandc hallenges. 102 Cooperationonresearch,educationpolicyandthedevelopmentofmethodsin effortstargetingchildrenandyoungpeoplearefieldsinwhichtheNorwegian authoritiesparticipateactivelyininternationalforums.

8.2Internationalcooperation -undervoluntaryandofficialauspices YoungNorwegianshavealwayssoughtcontactwithandknowledgeandinspi- rationfromothercountr ies. Inmanyways, thishasinf luenceddevelopments inNorwaybothinthecultur alsphereandinthea gricultural, industrialand otherbusinesssectors. Norway’shistoryasatradingandshippingnation, and asanexporterofyoungseamentootherEur opeancountries, isoneexample ofthistradition,asisNorwegianemigrationtoescapefromoverpopulationand poverty. Inalleras, moreover, youngNorwegianshavesoughthighereducation abroad.

TheNorwegianauthoritieshavetraditionallyleftmuchoftheworkrelatingto internationalcooper ationony outhissuestonon-g overnmentalc hildand youthor ganizations. In1958theor ganizationsesta blishedtheNational CommitteeforInternationalYouthCooperationasacommonplatformfortheir internationalcooper ation. In1980, theCommitteew asexpandedandtr ans- formedintotheNorwegianYouthCouncilasajointbodyforbothnationaland internationalcooperation.Throughthisor ganization, theeffortsofthev olun- tarychildandyouthorganizationsatthenationalandinternationallevelswere morestronglycoordinated.

Today, too, muchoftheorganizedinternationalcooperationinthefieldofchil- drenandy outhtakesplacethr oughnon-governmentalchildandy outhorga- nizations. Internationalcooperationandalliance-buildingisacentr al, natural partoftheactivitiesofman yorganizations. Inmostcases, Norwegianorgani- zationsthatshar ethesameideolog icalorpr acticalgoalsasor ganizationsin othercountr iesha vebecomeaf filiatedwithinter nationalc hildandy outh organizations. Cooperationoffersyouthleadersandmembersoforganizations inNorw ayv aluableoppor tunitiestotak epar tininter nationalconf erences, seminarsandstudytrips. Inthisw ay, youngNorwegiansgainexperienceand knowledgeandcomeintocontactwithy oungpeoplefr omothercountr ies. Thisr equiresthemtoha veana warenessoftheiro wncultur e, tolerancein encounterswithothercultur esandasenseofsolidar itywithpoorand oppressedpeople.

Thecentralgovernmentauthoritiescontributefundingforthechildandyouth organizations’ internationalcooperationthroughavarietyofsupportschemes. InReporttotheStortingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeo- plegrowupandliv einNorway(ReportNo. 39totheStor ting(2001-2002)), theGovernmentaffirmsthatitwillcontin uetoprovidesupportfortheinter- nationalcooperationofv oluntarychildandy outhorganizations.Thiswillbe donewithoutgovernmentinterferenceandwithrespectforthediversity, dis- tinctivecharacterandpr ioritiesofeac hor ganization. Itisalsoimpor tantto encourageNorwegianorganizationstoholdconf erences, seminarsandother internationale ventsinNorw ay. Thegeneralallocationf ortheor ganizations’ internationalcooper ationhasr emainedunc hangedf orman yy ears. Evenif 103 schemesliketheEUyouthprogrammesoffernewandalternativepossibilities forfinancingcontactbetweenyouthgroups,thereisaneedtoincreaseinvolve- mentintheorganizations.InReporttotheStortingontheconditionsinwhich childrenandyoungpeoplegrowupandliveinNorway(ReportNo. 39tothe Storting(2001-2002)), theGovernmentstatesthatitwilltak eacloserlookat theforminwhichpublicfundingshouldbeprovidedandreverttothismatter inconnectionwiththeannualbudgetproposals.

Evenifinter nationalcooperationbetweennon-governmentalorganizationsis thekeyfocus, internationalcontactinalessorganizedformbetweenindividu- alsalsoplaysacentralroleformanypeople. Itisthereforeimportanttofacili- tatebothinter nationalcooperationthroughnon-governmentalor ganizations andg roups, andoppor tunitiesf ortheinitiativ esofandcontactsbetw een individuals. Itisalsoimportanttopromotehigh-qualitycontentinthecooper- ationprojects. Humanresourcedevelopmentandleadershiptrainingarekey elementsofbothnationalandinter nationalwork.

Inadditiontocooperationbetweenvoluntaryorganizations,itisalsoimportant tode velopinter nationalcooper ationbetw eenauthor itieswhow orkinthe fieldofc hildandy outhpolicy.Themutualexchangeofmethodsandlessons learnedfromchildandyouthwork, andknowledgeofthesituationofchildren andy oungpeople, willbeusefulinde velopingnationalc hildandy outh policies. Thisapplies, forinstance, toissuesr elatedtothepar ticipationand influenceofc hildrenandy oungpeopleinciviclif e, measurestopr event racismandextremistgroups, thelifestyleandvaluechoicesofyoungpeople, issuesrelatedtothede velopmentofacivil, democraticsociety, andwaysof givingyoungpeoplecreditinthela bourmarketforthenon-formaleducation andtrainingtheyacquirethroughyouthwork.

8.3CooperationinNordic andinternationalforums TheNordiccountrieshavemanyaspectsincommon, therebymakingitnatu - ralforyoungpeoplefromthesecountriestocooperatewithoneanotherand establishcontact. Thetr aditionalideolog icalbasisf orNor diccooper ation betweenyoungpeopleisweakerthanitwasafewdecadesago. Nevertheless, itisstillimportanttopromotecontactbetweentheNordiccountries,strength- entheircommonhistor yandcultur alheritageandde velopthespir itofthe goodneighbourhoodbetweenthesecountries.

Inthefieldofyouthpolicy, theNordicYouthCommittee, whichistheNordic CouncilofMinisters’ advisorybody, hasbeenthedrivingforce.TheCommittee administerstheNor dicy outhallocationsc hemewhic hpr ovidesf inancial grantsforNordiccooperationprojectsandfundingf orcooperationbetween voluntaryor ganizations. Inadditiontostim ulatingNor diccooper ation, the allocationplaysanincreasinglyimportantroleincooperationonyouthpolicy issueswiththesur roundingareas, i.e. intheBalticSear egionandtheBar ents region.

Inthefieldofeducationpolicy,theNordicCouncilofMinistershasestablished theNor dplusJ uniorandNor dplusMinipr ogrammes. NordplusJ uniorw as 104 establishedin1989toincreasemobilitybetweentheNordiccountriesbypro- motingexchangesofuppersecondar yschoolpupils(a ged16-19)andteac h- ers.Theaimoftheseprogrammesistostrengthencooperationbetweenupper secondaryschoolsandincreasepupils’ understandingofNordiclanguagesand asenseoffellowship.IndividualschoolsapplyforsupportwithintheNordplus Juniorprogramme.ThemainideaisthataschoolinoneNordiccountryagrees onaprojectwithaschoolinanothercountry,afterwhichgroupsofpupilsand teacherspar ticipateinpr ogrammeactivitiesculminatingina2-8-w eek exchangeperiod. NordplusMini, theNordicCouncilofMinister s’ mostrecent programme, isagrantschemeforprimaryandlowersecondaryschoolclasses whichcooperatewithotherNordicclasses.Theschemetargetspupilsaged13- 16.

ThroughtheEEA Agreement, Norwayhaspar ticipatedinthew orkofthe EuropeanCommissioninthef ieldofy outhsince1994, onaparwithEU memberstates. EUyouthworkhaspr imarilybeenconcentratedonane xten- siveyouthexchangeprogramme.TheEUprogrammeYOUTHaimsatpromot- ingcontactandcooper ationbetw eeny oungpeopleinmemberstatesand increasingtheEur opeandimensionofinter nationalcooper ation. Thepr o- grammehasalsofocusedoncooperationwiththirdpartycountries, mainlyin theMediterraneanarea,LatinAmericaandCentralandEasternEurope.Thegoal istopr ovidefinancialsupporttopr omoteexchangesofy outhgroups, either bilaterallyoratthem ultinationallevel.Theprogrammetargetsyoungpeople aged15-25,andthecontentofcooperationprojectsmustfosterlong-termcon- tactandbeinlinewithpr ogrammeg oals. Moreover, thepr ogrammeof fers youngmenandw omenaged18-25anoppor tunitytospend6-12monthsin anothercountryandparticipate, onavoluntarybasis, inalocalpr ojectinthe fieldofyouthwork, environmentalprotection, socialworkorsomeotherform ofserviceforthelocalcommunity.

ThroughtheEEAAgreement, NorwayhasparticipatedintheEU’seducational programmes, SocratesandLeonar doda Vinci, since1994. TheSocr ates programmecoversgeneraleducation, whiletheLeonardodaVinciprogramme focusesonv ocationalandpr ofessionaltraining. Theprogrammesencompass pupils, studentsandteac hersatallle velsandinc ludebothcooper ationon projectsandexchanges.

ParticipationinEur opeancooperationoneducationcontr ibutestowardsful- fillingtheintentionsinthenationalcur riculaforbothprimaryandlowersec- ondaryanduppersecondar yeducation. Cooperationleadstog reaterorienta- tiontowardsprojectsandforeignlanguagetraining, aswellastomor eexten- siveuseofICTinteaching. Reportsandevaluationsofcooperationinthefield ofeducationshowthatithasalsoledtoincreasedinternationalunderstanding, ideas, innovationand, notleast, theesta blishmentofnetw orksthatpla ya valuableroleinla yingthef oundationforfuturecooperation. Byopeningthe educationprogrammestoallcandidatecountr ies, agoodbasishasbeenpr o- videdforcooperationoneducationwithmostofthecountr iesinCentraland EasternEuropeaswell.

TheCouncilofEur opehasbeenin volvedininter nationalyouthcooperation sincetheendofthe1960s. TheCouncilofEur ope’sapproachtoyouthissues differsfromthatofotherintergovernmentalorganizationsinthatitisbasedon 105 cooperationandjointmana gementinthedecision-makingpr ocessbetween theauthor itiesinmemberstatesandr epresentativesofv oluntaryor ganiza- tions, nationaly outhcouncilsandnon-g overnmentalinter nationalor ganiza- tions.

Cooperationinthef ieldofyouththroughtheCouncilofEur opewasinitially concentratedontr ainingy outhleader sandpr ovidingf inancialsuppor tf or internationaly outhe vents. Languagetr ainingw asalsoof feredf ory outh leaders, andtheCouncilofEuropeprovidedanimportantplatformforcoope- rationbetw eennon-g overnmentalc hildandy outhor ganizationsinEur ope. Gradually, closercooperationalsodevelopedbetweenthenationalauthor ities responsibleforyouthpolicyinmemberstates.Today,specialcooperationstruc- tureshavebeenesta blished, andtheCouncilofEur opearrangesregularcon- ferencesf orminister sr esponsiblef ory outhpolicyinmemberstates. The ReporttotheStor tingontheconditionsinwhic hchildrenandyoungpeople liveandgrowupinNorwayemphasizesthatNorwaywillcontinueitsworkin theCouncilofEurope.

TheConventionontheRightsoftheChildwasadoptedbytheUNin1989and ratifiedbyNorwayin1991. In2000thecon ventionhadbeenr atifiedby197 states.ThegoalofthisUNcon ventionistosecur ethecivil, political, econom- ic, socialandcultur alrightsofc hildren.Theterm“children” isdefinedasthe agegroupupto18yearsold.Theconventionisbasedonfourmainprinciples: allchildrenareentitledtolifeandhealth, educationanddevelopment, partici- pationandinfluence, andcareandprotection.

TheMinistryofChildrenandFamilyAffairsisresponsibleforcoordinatingthe implementationoftheUNConventionontheRightsoftheChild, andcooper- ateswiththeministr iesconcer nedonr eporting, informationactivities, pro- grammesandindividualprojects.TheUNhasappointedaspecialcommitteeof expertswhomonitorthewaytheconventionisimplementedbythecountries whohaveratifiedthete xt.ThesecountriesmustreporttotheUNatr egular intervalsonthede velopmentofnationalpolicyinthef ieldscoveredbythe ConventionontheRightsoftheChild.InApril2003Norwaysubmitteditsthird reporttotheUNCommitteeontheRightsoftheChild.

Norwayisalsoinvolvedineffortstoimprovetherightsandchildhoodandliv- ingconditionsofc hildrenandy oungpeoplethr oughotherinter national forumsandorganizations. In1992theInternationalLabourOrganization(ILO) establishedaspecialpr ogrammetocombatc hildla bour. In1998Norw ay decidedtoprovidefinancialsupporttotallingNOK66millionoverafour-year periodforthiswork. Norwayalsocontributesactivelytoeffortstargetingchil- drenandyoungpeopleundertheaeg isoftheUNPopulationFund, theWorld HealthOrganizationandtheWorldFoodProgramme.

YoungpeopleinNorw ayha vetheoppor tunitytotak epar tininter national workthroughtheNorw egianPeaceCorps, whichrecentlyhasbeenr eorgan- ised. Thisser viceseekstopr omoteexchangesbetw eentheNor thandthe Southandtoena bleyoungpeoplefr omdifferentpartsofthew orldtomeet andworktogether. Participantsmustmainlybebetweentheagesof22and35. TheNorwegianPeaceCorpssupportscooperationbetweenorganisationsand institutionsinNorwayandde velopingcountriesandassistswithr ecruitment 106 andtraining.ThevisionunderlyingtheNorwegianPeaceCorpsistopr omote developmentthr oughtr ansfersofe xpertiseandm utualcooper ation. Italso aimstocreateagentsofchangeinNorwayandabroad, andseveralvolunteers fromdevelopingcountriesarecurrentlyinNorway. 107

9Futurechallenges

oungpeopleareundergoingatransitionfromchildhoodtoadulthood. Inasocietywheresocialstructuresarelessrigidthanintheclasssoci- Y etyofearliertimes, ithasbecomemoredifficulttoidentifywherethe transitiontoy outhbeginsandends. Sinceitishar dtopinpointpr eciselyat whatagethissta gestartsandf inishes, youthisoftenar atherimprecisecon- cept. Itiscommontoregardgraduallyincreasingindependenceandautonomy asc haracteristicsofthepassa gefr omy outhtoadulthood. Independence meansthatapersonbecomesincreasinglylessdependentonparentsorother guardianswithr egardtodecisionsofsignif icancetohimselfandother s, and autonomyisdeterminedbyaperson’sabilitytosupporthimself. Itmightseem asthoughthestageofyouthhasbeenextendedatbothendstodaysincechil- drenaremoreindependentthanbefore, andsinceyoungpeopledonotestab- lishtheirownhomesuntiltheyareintheirlatetw entiesorearlythirties.This extensionofthey outhsta geistypicalofthekno wledgesociety, whichhas acquiredaspecialsta gethatcanbecalled “youngadults”. Inmanycontexts, however, youthisusuall ylimitedtothe16-24-y eara geg roup. Ag reatman y youngmenandw omenofthisa geareintheeducationalsystemandassuc h areclearlymakingthetransitiontoadulthood.

9.1Youth Youthisaperiodinwhichmanyyoungmenandwomenpursuetheirstudies andputoffestablishingahomewithapartnerandhavingchildren.Thismeans thatittakeslongerthaninthe1950sand1960sf oryoungpeopletoestablish ahomeforthemselves, withtheresultthatyoungpeoplearenottiedtoapar- ticularresidenceasearlyinlife.Youngpeopletodayfunctionintheinterf ace betweentheglobalandthelocalcomm unity, andhavegreateropportunities bothtor emainmobileandtoesta blishaf ixedresidencethanearlierg enera- tions. Althoughthepossibilitiesinman yar easar eg reaterthanbef ore, the degreetowhichyoungpeoplehaveoptionsstillv ariessignificantlyfromone individualtoanother . Akno wledgesocietymak esg reatdemandsasr egards training, qualificationsande xpertise. Theidealsofautonom yandindividual freedomarewidelyaccepted, yetmanyofthesocialdisparitiesoftheindustri- alsocietyhavebeenmaintained. 108 Someofthemainc haracteristicsofthesituationofy oungpeopleintoda y’s society:

•Youngpeoplebecomeesta blishedlaterinlif ethanbef ore: theyestablish theirfirsthome, enterintopartnershipsorgetmarriedlater, havechildren laterandjointheworkforcelater. •Youngpeoplehaveloosertiestoworkinglifethanbefore. •Youngpeoplehavehadslowerincomegrowththanothergroups insociety •Youngpeople’sconsumptionhasincreased

Theseg eneraltr aitsconcealindividualdif ferencesbetw eeny oungper sons, whiledescribingasituationfullofcontrasts.Becomingestablishedinafirstjob orhomegivesapersontheopportunityforgreaterfreedom, yetalowincome placeslimitationsonwhatheorshecandowiththatfreedom. Growthincon- sumptionisalsoane xpressionoffreedom, yetatthesametimeitcanleadto strainedfinancesandr educedfreedom.Tosomee xtent, thetraditionalsocial differencesseemtocontin uetoexistwhilenewonesbegintoemerge.Asfar aseducationisconcerned, amajorityofstudentsininstitutionsofhigheredu - cationandinman ysubjectsar eg irls. Thisdispar itybetw eeng irlsandbo ys appliesalloverNorway,butitappearstobegreaterinruralmunicipalitiesthan inmorecentralareas. Althoughgirlshaveenteredtheeducationalsystemin earnest, manyofthemar estillmakingquitetr aditionalchoicesasregardsthe subjectstheystudy. Inuppersecondar yschool, girlschoosesubjectstending towardsacareerinteaching, healthandsocialservices, humanistsubjectsand artsandcrafts,whileboyssticktosubjectsassociatedwithindustry,crafttrades andtec hnology. Thus, tosomedeg ree, boysar eor ientedto wardstr aditional branchesofagricultureandindustry, whilegirls’ choiceofsubjectspointstoa futureintheserviceindustry.

Fewyoungpeoplehaveafulltimejob.Agreatmanyofthemworkparttimein additiontoschoolandstudies, manyworkattimesoftheda ythatareoutside normalworkinghours, andmanyhavearelativelylooseconnectionwiththeir job. Onthewhole, youngpeoplehavepoorerconditionsonthelabourmarket thanotheragegroups.Alargerpercentageofthemhavetemporaryjobs,incon- venientworkinghoursandapoorworkingenvironment.Youngpeoplealsolag behindfinancially, comparedwithothera gegroups.Thisislink edtothef act thatmanyofthemcombineworkwithstudiesandthatunemploymentisrela- tivelyhighamongy oungpeople, butitalsohastodowiththef actthatthe labourmarkethaschangedsothatyoungpeoplewithnoeducationhaveafar poorerchanceoffindingajobthanbef ore.Alow, uncertainincomedoesnot provideagoodbasisforacquiringaplacetolive, asmaybeseeninthedecline inrecentyearsinthepercentageof16-29-year-oldswhoowntheirownhomes. Youngpeopleha veaslightl ymoreriskylifestylethanoldera gegroups.This appliestotheiruseofalcoholordr ugs, thedegreetowhichtheyareexposed toaccidents, andtopsyc hologicalandsocialpr oblemsofv ariouskinds. The riskisgreatestinrelationtotraffic, whereyoungpeopleareparticularlyprone toaccidents. 109 9.2Youthpolicychallenges Thechallengesasregardsyouthpolicyaretogiveyoungpeoplethenecessary conditionstoenablethemtospendtheiryouthinsuchawaythattheirtransi- tiontoadulthoodisinstr uctiveinthesensethatthe ycanacquireexperience thatwillprovevaluablelaterinlife.Thismeansthatthemeasur esimplement- edmustnotr elieveyoungpeopleofalltheirpr oblemsandw orries, butgive themthepossibilityofsolvingpr oblemsandcopingwiththetr ansitiontolife asanadult. Inthisconnection, itisimportanttobeawareofdevelopmentsin theeducationalsystemandonthelabourmarket, andthefactthatyoungpeo- plehaveinmanywaysbecomemoremarginalizedinthe1980sand1990s. It alsomeansthatthosewhoar etheleastsuccessfulinsc hoolandworkinglife mayha veg reaterpr oblemsthanbef ore. Inherentinthisobser vationisan emphasisontheimpor tanceofbeingaler ttovariationsamongyoungpeople asagroup, andonthefactthatnoteveryoneneedsthesametypeofassistance andsupport. Forinstance, thesituationofy oungpeoplewhow orkissignif i- cantlydifferentfromthatofyoungpeoplewhoarepursuinganeducationand whooftenliveoutsidewhatisf ormallyregardedastheirm unicipalityofresi- dence.

Manypeopleareinterestedinthesituationofyoungpeople,theproblemsthey experience, theirattitudesandhowtheywillfareinlife.Thisinterestin, andin somecasesthisconcernfor, youngpeopleisofcour serelatedtothefactthat youthisasta geoflifecharacterizedbyaseveranceofties. Asyoungpeople’s dependenceontheirparentsgrowsweaker,theirautonomyandindependence increasecorrespondingly.Theprotectionprovidedforthemb ytheirpar ents, daycarecentreandschoolisgraduallyreplacedbyalifeinwhichtheymust standontheirownfeet. Forthevastmajorityofyoungpeople, thisprocessof separationisrelativelyundramatic, oratleastitappearsthatwaytothosewho arewatchingitallfromtheoutside.Evenifoutwardlytheeventsdonotappear particularlydramatic, thingslookdif ferenttoy oungpeoplethemselv es, who arebeingputtothetestinr elationtotheirowndevelopment, friends, school orwork. Itisalsoimportanttobeawarethattheuseofgeneralconceptssuch asyoungpeopleandy outhcandetr actattentionfr omthef actthatoneper - son’sexperiencesarenotnecessarilythesameasthoseofotherpersonsinthe samea geg roups. Duetoindividuals’ differingbac kgrounds, differentf amily experiencesandvaryingfinancial, socialandculturalcircumstances, thesocial frameworksestablishedforyoungpeoplevary.

Youthise xperiencedindif ferentwaysbecauseitissignif icantlyaffectedby socialconditions, environmentalf actorsandther esourcesthatindividuals haveacquiredasthe yweregrowingup. Inthisconte xt, resourcesmeanthe abilitythaty oungpeopleha vedevelopedtocopewiththeire xistencemore generally, tosolveproblemsandr esolveconf licts, andtocr eatemeaningand coherenceintheirliv es. Environmentalfactorsrefertor elationswithf amily membersandpersonsinthelocalcommunity, andthewayapersongetsalong withhisorherpeer sinada ycarecentre, schoolandr ecreationalactivities. Socialconditionsrelatetothew ayeducation, workandleisureareorganized andarranged. Morefundamentaleconomic, socialandculturalfactorsarealso apar tofthispictur e. Thef actorsandcir cumstancesmentioneda bovealso affectpersonsinstagesoflifeotherthanyouth, butitisgenerallyassumedthat theinf luenceispar ticularlystr onginaper son’syouthbecausetheoptions opentothatper sonaregreateratthattimethanbothearlierandlaterinlif e. 110 Theabovelistoffactorsthatinfluencethewayyoungpeoplecopewiththeir lifealsoindicateswheremeasuresmustbeimplementedinorderforyouthto beperceivedasapositivestageoflife.

Thepublicauthoritieshavearesponsibilityforprovidingthenecessarycondi- tionstoensureagoodchildhood, regulatetheriskstowhichyoungpeopleare exposedortowhic htheymayexposethemselves, andhelpensurethateach youngmanorwomanacquiresthebestpossiblequalifications.Policyisaques- tionofc hoosingcour sesofactionandv alues, andthepolicyinstr uments selectedmustbeper ceivedinthelightofthekindofg oalsthatar etargeted andthekindofv aluesonwhichthesegoalsarebased. Whenitcomestothe useofinstr uments, thereisag eneraltendencyinoursocietyto wardsashift frommeasuresaimedatsocialc hangetomeasurestailoredtomeettheneeds ofindividuals. Behindthisshiftoff ocusliesnotonl yapoliticalv aluechoice, butalsother ecognitionthatsocietycannotbecontr olledtothedeg reethe publicauthoritiesbelievedpossiblebeforethestabilityofsocialde velopment inthepost-warerawasdisruptedintheearl y1970s. Thechangesinthetype ofmeasuresimplementedmaybedescribedasshowninthefollowingtable.

Uptothe1970s Afterthe1970s Society Planning, organization Providingfavourable andregulation conditionsforeconomic, socialandcultural development School, work, leisure Upbringing, controland Providingfavourable protection conditionsforlearning andexperience Individuals Adaptationtosocial Providingqualifications, norms, measures equippingindividuals targetinggroupssuch tocope, measures asyoungpeople targetingindividuals

Thetabledistinguishesbetw eenpastandcur rentthinkingasr egardsinstru- mentsandgoals, expressedinastreamlined, simplifiedforminordertoaccen- tuatethedif ferences, whichlargelyconsistinthef actthatplanning, control andregulationhavebeentoneddownandreplacedbyvariousformsoffacili- tation. Ofcourse, thesearegeneraltrendsandinpracticetherewillalwaysbe amixtureofthesetwotypesofmeasures, butthepointistomakeitclearthat therehasbeenachangeintheemphasisplacedonthevariousmeasuresinthe directionsuggesteda bove. Basedonthisr easoning, measurescanbeimple - mentedatthefollowinglevels:

•Socialconditions: influencetheg eneraldevelopmentofsociety , provide appropriateservicesandfacilitiesinthesc hool, workandrecreationsec- tors •En vironmentalf actors: influencer elationsbetw eenmember sofsociety throughmeasuresinthefamily, schoolandrecreationsectors •Individuals:influencetheexpertise, qualificationsandabilityofindividuals tocopewiththeirlifesituation.

Inthe1980sand1990sof ficialpolicyshiftedto wardsag reaterfocusonthe individual.Therearemanygoodargumentsinfavourofstrengtheningthequal- 111 ificationsofindividuals,butthereisnonethelessachallengeinfindingtheright balancebetweenmeasuresatthevariouslevels.

Historicaldatashowthatthesizeofa gegroupshasimplicationsfortheirwel- fare, opportunitiesandlimitationsinsociety.Thecurrentgenerationofyouthis relativelysmall. Theyouthgenerationinthe1950sand1960sw eretheba by boomersofthe1940swhoaccountedforalargeproportionofthepopulation. Demographicsundoubtedl ypla yedar oleintheattentionandpositionthat youngpeopleacquir eddur ingthesey ears. However, theconsequencesf or smallyouthcohortsarenotentir elynegativenorpositiv e. Beingyounginan ageingsocietyma ymeanthat, toag reaterdegree, youngpeoplewillha veto adjusttoasocietythatisrunonthetermsofitsoldermembers.Aspointedout, inabookony oungpeopler esultingfromthestud yofpo werinNorw egian society,societyisdesignedforthosewhohavebeenthereawhile1. Youngpeo- pleliveintheinterf acebetweenautonomyandadaptation, andtheg rowth forceinherentinthey oungergenerationmaybem uchindemandb ymany localcommunitieswhowillbecompetingtoattr actyoungpeople.

1)FredrikEngelstad(ed.)andGuroØdegård(ed.): Ungdom, maktogmening. Gyldendal, 2003 112 Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future among Norwegian youth Appendix to report to the Council of Europe about Norwegian youth politics

Elisabet E. Storvoll Geir Moshuus

Norwegian Social Research

August 2003

This appendix has been written jointly by the authors. Geir Moshuus has been mainly responsible for part 1-8, Elisabet E. Storvoll for part 9-12. The statistical analyses were done by Elisabet E. Storvoll. Elisabeth Backe-Hansen and Elisabet E. Storvoll have translated the appendix to English. 2 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – Contents:

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 5

2 METHOD ...... 6

3 PARTICIPATION AND INFLUENCE IN POLITICAL ISSUES ...... 7

4 LEISURE TIME ...... 10

5 PARTICIPATION IN ORGANIZATIONAL ACTIVITIES...... 12

6 RELIGION...... 15

7 PLANS FOR FUTURE EDUCATION AND PLACE TO LIVE...... 16

8 PART-TIME WORK ...... 18

9 TOBACCO ...... 18

10 ALCOHOL...... 20

11 ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR...... 22

12 EXPOSURE TO VIOLENCE ...... 26

13 FINAL DISCUSSION ...... 27

REFERENCES...... 29

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 3 4 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future among Norwegian youth

1 Introduction This appendix contains a description of how most young people of today spend their time, building on data from the new questionnaire study ”Young in Norway 2002”. To be more specific, NOVA was asked to present results pertaining to participation and influence in politics, how young people spend their time and what organizations they are members of, religious attitudes, plans for the future concerning education and where they want to live, and whether they work part- time. Further, we were asked to present results about tobacco and alcohol consumption, antisocial behaviour, and exposure to violence by others. To answer these questions we distinguish between girls and boys, and between students in junior high and high school. Where possible we have compared the descriptions of today’s situation with what we know about studies from the 1990ies. In particular we have made comparisons with publications based on “Young in Norway 1992” since the present study is based on this. Both are cross-sectional studies of the population of 13-19 year olds1 in Norway. There were several reasons to repeat a new, large-scale study of young people in 2002 (Rossow and Bø, 2003). First, it was of interest to study stability and change in young peoples’ living conditions and ways of life over a ten year span. During these years we have seen several probably significant changes, amongst other things two comprehensive school reforms2. The age cohorts have become significantly smaller, the labour market is tighter, and the availability and use of information- and communication technologies have increased greatly. It is supposed that changes have taken place in youth cultures, as well as in how leisure time is spent, value orientations, and consumption patterns. Second, we wanted to test the hypothesis that traditional social structures like gender, class, and ethnic affiliation have lost some of their former significance for young peoples’ possibilities and choices. And thirdly, we wanted to survey important aspects of young peoples’ living conditions and daily lives that had not been covered in

1 Covering the three years of junior high school and the three years of high school. 2 ”Reform 94” covered high school, while ”Reform 97” covered primary school and junior high school.

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 5 former Norwegian studies, like availability and use of information- and communi- cation technologies, poverty, and gambling with money. Ingeborg Rossow (2003) has recently published a preliminary analysis of results from “Young in Norway 2002”. Her conclusion is that a large majority of Norwegian teen-agers do well enough at school, their relationships with parents as well as friends are good, and their leisure activities are varied. These results can be a useful corrective to the picture that is often drawn in public debates, where both media and social researchers focus on problems and risk. Rossow’s publication and the results we will present here should serve to modify this picture. Actually, the dominating patterns that have been revealed combine to form a picture of stability over time: In 1992, young people in Norway mainly were well and did well. The same is the case in 2002. In the following we present results for the selected themes. We start with a general picture of how most young people spend their time, and what plans they have for the future (parts 3-8), and go on to present some more problematic aspects (parts 9-12). Finally we sum up some of the main findings in part 13.

2 Method For “Young in Norway 2002” 73 schools were selected, 47 junior high schools and 26 high schools. The original sample included 12.394 students, of whom 11.928 participated, giving a response rate of 92 %3. The response rate was a little higher in the junior high schools (94 %) than in the high schools (91 %). Also, the response rate was a little higher among students in theoretical streams in high school (92 %) than amongst those following work-related streams (90 %)4. Among the participants 51 % (N=5784) were girls and 49 % (N=5505) were boys, 51 % (N=5842) were students in junior high school and 49 % (N= 5564) in high school. The analyses covering part time work outside school, educational aspirations, and where the young people want to live when they are grown up were just done on the high school sample. In this sub-sample 48 % (N=2668) were boys and 52 % (N=2869) were girls. The distributions in the final sample in “Young in Norway 2002” have been compared with some variables that are known for the total population (cf. Statistics Norway). These include sex, age, type of community, family status, ethnic affili-

3 The response rate had probably been 95 % but for an influenza epidemic that hit one of the participating schools hard while data were collected. 4 Former studies of attrition in school-based survey studies among young people have shown that absence form school on a particular day is systematically associated with different types of problem behaviours (e.g. Bakken 1998). 56 of the participating schools conducted a second data collection. This made it possible to include an added 696 students, probably increasing the number of participants engaging in problem behaviour. Without this effort the response rate would have been 87 %.

6 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – ation, and country of origin. These comparisons confirm that “Young in Norway 2002” draws a representative picture of students in junior high school and high school5. The study was anonymous, thus no formal registering of the data in accordance with the Norwegian data protection legislation was necessary. Written consent was gained from the parents of the junior high school students, while the high school students (mostly between 16 and 18 years of age) consented on their own behalf. Information about the study was sent to their parents as well, however6. Results concerning different types of activities, how the young people judge these activities, reports concerning plans for the future and different events, are presented as percentages. When we present results about alcohol consumption and being drunk mean values are used. The results are cross-tabulated by sex and school type, or comparisons of mean values. We have chosen not to present results from statistical tests of group differences, as even small differences will be statistically significant in a sample as large as this one. We have rather chosen to highlight group differences of substantial interest in our efforts to understand the lives of young people in today’s Norway. However, what constitutes small and great differences also depends on the prevalence of a phenomenon. A difference of five percentage points can be considerable if the phenomenon under consideration is rare, but of little significance if it means for instance a participation rate of 50 versus 55 % in a particular activity.

3 Participation and influence in political issues In public debates it seems as if there is an increasing worry about young peoples’ level of political interest and activities. Are we actually confronted with a generation of young people who distances itself from participation in our political system? “Young in Norway 2002” contains questions about participation in 11 different political activities. More than half (59 %) had participated in at least one of these. We have divided the responses into three categories: conventional activities, action-oriented activities, and illegal actions (see Lidén and Ødegaard, 2002; Ødegaard 2001 and 2003). The same categorization is used by Sletten (2001 and 2003).

5 However, the response rate was much lower among those in their final high school year. This is related to two things. First, students attending work-related streams spend much time in their work-places during this year, and are not at school that much. Second, more students attending work-related streams drop out during their second and third years. Thus representativity is slightly lower among the oldest teen-agers. 6 See Rossow and Bø (2003) for a more comprehensive description of methods, ethical considerations etc.

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 7 Table 1 shows that participation in action-oriented activities (45 %) was greater than in conventional activities (33 %), while participation in illegal actions was limited (9 %). The most important action-oriented activities were signing petitions (37 %) and political demonstrations (19 %). Within the category called conventional activities being active in the school council was by far the most important type of participation (25 %).

Table 1: Participation in different political activities, by sex and school type. Percentages.

All Sex School type Junior High Boys Girls high school school Active in a youth organisation of a political party 10 10 10 9 11 Active in other political organisation 5 5 5 3 6 Active in the school council 25 21 28 24 26 Participates in a youth council 8 8 9 9 8 Participation in conventional 33 29 36 31 34 activities altogether Media coverage on a political issue 7 7 7 6 8 Signed petitions 37 32 42 25 49 Political manifestation (popular meetings, 19 16 23 12 27 demonstrations) Boycott of particular products or firms 12 12 12 7 16 Participation in action-oriented 45 41 50 34 57 activities altogether Illegal actions 6 9 3 6 6 Written opinions on walls 4 5 3 4 4 Damaged public or private property in protest 4 6 2 4 3 Participation in illegal actions altogether 9 13 5 9 9

When all these categories are combined it emerges that the girls participated a bit more than the boys (62 versus 55 %). This mostly reflects participation in action- oriented activities, which pertains to 50 % of the girls and 42 % of the boys. The situation is the opposite, however, where participation in illegal actions is concerned. Far more boys (13 %) than girls (5 %) answered that they had partici- pated in such activities. The table indicates that participation in political activities increases with age. Such participation was higher in high school (66 %) than in junior high school (51 %), particularly with regard to action-oriented activities (57 % in high school versus 34 % in junior high school). Whereas about one fourth of the students in junior high school had signed petitions, this pertained to about half of the students in high school. There is a marked difference where participation in political demonstrations is concerned as well; 27 % of the students in high school and 12 % of the students in junior high school reported such activities. Finally the number who had boycotted certain products or firms was much larger in high school (16

8 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – %) than in junior high school (7 %). Where conventional activities and illegal actions are concerned, there were hardly any differences between the older and the younger teen-agers. Compared to results from “Young in Norway 1992” the analyses show that the patterns that were found in young peoples’ participation in political activities were the same as 10 years earlier. According to Tormod Øia (1995) the girls were for instance more involved in concrete political issues than the boys, and political commitment was more firm among the older youth than the younger. The picture still looks like this. Young people are as concerned with political activities now as those who grew up 10 years ago. The most important finding is that young people now seem more concerned with specific issues than with the political system. Young peoples’ interest in political influence was measured with the help of seven questions. The participants were asked to assess the significance of different activities if the objective is to influence the development of society. The response alternatives were “Great significance”, “Some significance”, “No significance” and “Don’t know”. Since we are concerned here about the types of activities young people think would make a difference we have just included those who thought the different activities included here are very significant. As in table 1 we distinguish between conventional activities, action-oriented activities, and illegal actions. As table 2 shows, the picture painted in this way is fairly similar to the one demonstrated in table 1. It is worth noticing that not more than one third of the young people thought voting in municipal or national elections are of great significance. To have media attention was seen as equally important. The proportion thinking that participation in political manifestations is of great significance (20 %) equals the proportion thinking the same of participation in a youth organisation of a political party (18 %). On the other hand few thought that boycott of particular products or firms has much impact (9 %). Nor did many think that participation in illegal actions is very influential (10 %).

Table 2: Belief in different political activities, by sex and school type. Percentages.

All Sex School type Junior high High Boys Girls school school Conventional activities Active in a youth organization of a political party 18 14 22 19 17 Active in other political organisation 16 13 20 15 17 Voting in municipal or general elections 33 28 39 30 37 Action-oriented activities Media coverage on a political issue 32 32 33 26 39 Boycott of specific products or firms 9 9 9 9 9 Participation in political demonstrations 20 17 23 19 21 Illegal actions Participation in illegal actions 10 13 6 10 10

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 9 Where conventional, political activities are concerned, more girls than boys believed that participation in a youth organisation of a political party, working for other political organizations, or voting has great significance. In addition they had a little more confidence in action-oriented means than the boys. On the other hand more boys than girls believed in illegal actions as a political means. Where school level is concerned, it is worth noticing that far more students in high school than in junior high school attached great significance to media atten- tion, with the proportion increasing from 26 % to 39 %. In addition the proportion of students attributing great significance to voting increased from 30 % to 37 % between the two school levels. Otherwise the differences between the older and the younger sub-samples were small. Based on the same data set, political participation and interest in matters of importance to society are more comprehensively discussed by Guro Ødegaard (2003). One of the things she discusses is the prevailing view of today’s young people as not very politically interested or active. Ødegaard argues that the fact that young people participate relatively often in action-oriented activities necessitates a revision of such standpoints.

4 Leisure time What has happened to the ways young people use their leisure time? Since 1992 young people have had access to mobile phones, personal computers are far more common, and most in this age group are Internet users. Does this change the traditional patterns among Norwegian youth where the use of leisure time is concerned? To develop more knowledge about young peoples’ use of their leisure time participants in “Young in Norway 2002” were asked how often they had taken part in a series of activities during the preceding week. It was evident that most of them spent much time together with friends (cf. table 3), a large majority reported that they are together with friends in their own home (85 %), and almost as many are out with friends (79 %). Most of them also spend much time at home, helping out (77 %) or just being home, alone or with the family (75 %). However, far fewer have actually done something together with their mother or father (34 %). If we look more closely at leisure time activities, it appears that many had been active in a sports club (43%), while even more had done some exercise on their own (53 %). A far greater proportion had been to a café or snack bar (47 %) than participated in meetings in some organisation or other (26 %). About as many had used gambling machines (18 %) or hung out on a corner (19 %) as been to a youth club (18 %). An even greater proportion had visited a health studio (25 %). Finally, their reports about their reading habits show that newspapers were read far more often (85 %) than books (44 %).

10 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – Table 3: The proportion who had engaged in various kinds of leisure activities during the 7 preceding week, by sex and school type. Percentages .

All Sex School type Junior high High Boys Girls school school Been to a café or snack bar 47 42 51 38 55 Exercised in a sports club 43 47 38 51 34 Been to a health studio, squash, aerobics etc. 25 24 26 19 30 Done martial arts or self-defence 10 14 6 12 8 Exercised on their own 53 51 54 56 50 Been to a youth club 18 21 16 27 10 Meeting or rehearsals in a group or an 26 23 28 28 23 organisation Done something together with mother or father 34 33 34 37 31 (hobbies etc.) Spent most part of the evening with friends 79 77 80 73 84 elsewhere Worked on a car, motorbike or scooter 13 23 4 13 14 Been shopping 63 51 73 63 63 Helped out at home 77 71 83 80 74 Together with friends at home 85 86 85 85 86 Home alone, or with the family 75 71 79 78 72 Read a book (not a schoolbook) 44 37 51 48 40 Read a newspaper 85 85 84 80 89 Hung out on a street corner, outside a kiosk etc. 19 22 17 24 15 Used a gambling machine (with possibilities of 18 30 7 17 19 winning money)

More boys than girls visit cafes, they do more shopping, they help out more at home, and more girls read books. The boys do more physical activities in sports clubs, do more martial arts, use gambling machines far more often, and work more frequently on cars, motorbikes, or scooters. A slightly larger proportion of boys visit youth clubs as well. Otherwise there were few sex differences in the results presented in table 3. Students in high school differed from students in junior high school in that they visited cafes more often, more of them were out all evening with friends, or exercised in a health studio. Compared to the juniors they were more rarely seen on street corners, at meetings or rehearsals in a group or an organisation, at youth clubs, or exercising in a sports club. They did not exercise as often on their own. They read fewer books, but more newspapers. These results indicate that in spite of the fact that young people use new technologies in abundance much remains the same. During the last decade, few

7 The columns covering school type have been published previously in Rossow (2003).

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 11 changes can be observed in the ways young people use their leisure time. The patterns we find in 2002 are about the same as the ones found in 1992 (Øia, 1994). Being with friends is as important now as then. The 1992 survey as well as the one from 2002 show that the proportion of young people active with hobbies, sports, outdoor activities or activities in different kinds of organizations was lower among the older than the younger teenagers participating in the studies. Øia’s conclusion at the time was the “..The development from younger to older teenager can be de- scribed as a path from being together around common activities, to being together as the point of departure for cultivating common identities” (1994:9). The situation is the same today. Participants were asked if they do sports regularly. More than half reported that they do so, either by exercising but not participating in organised activities or contests, or by both exercising and participating.

Table 4: Participating in sports activities, by sex and school type. Percentages.

All Sex School type Junior high High Boys Girls school school Not doing sports of any kind 18 16 20 16 20 Not doing sports now, but did before 23 22 24 18 28 Doing sports, but not participating in organised 22 20 24 21 24 exercise or contests Exercising and participating in contests 37 42 32 45 28

More boys than girls do competitive sports. However, the sex differences become smaller if we look at those who do sports without participating in contests. In addition participation in competitive sports is more frequent in junior high school than in high school. If we look at results from “Young in Norway 1992”, it does not seem as if the patterns of doing sports have changed much (Øia, 1994).

5 Participation in organizational activities During the last decade young peoples’ participation in organisational activities has been much focused on. Detection of organised cheating on the number of members in some youth organisation in order to increase financial support from the State has led to negative attention. Do we find large changes in the level of participation in 2002 compared to 1992? To paint a picture of young peoples’ participation in organisational activities we asked whether they had been members of different types of organizations since they were 10 years old. For the sample as a whole we found that the majority (61 %) were members of one or more organizations (cf. table 5). One third had been members formerly, while very few answered that they never had been members.

12 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – These results clearly show how extensive membership in organizations is among Norwegian youth.

Table 5: Membership in different types of organizations after 10 years of age, by sex and school type. Percentages.

All Sex School type Junior high High Boys Girls school school A member at present 61 64 58 65 56 Have been a member, but have quit 33 30 35 28 38 I am not a member, nor have I ever been 767 7 6 a member

Table 5 shows that the majority of both sexes are members of different kinds of organizations. Only 6 % of the boys and 7 % of the girls never had been members. All over the sex differences are small within this area. The table also indicates that membership in organizations decreases somewhat with age, but the differences are not very large even here. More students in junior high school (65 %) were members at present, compared to students in high school (56 %). At the same time the proportion who had been members increased, to 38 % among the participants in high school compared to 28 % of those in junior high school. According to Øia (1994) the level of participation in different types of organizations had decreased in 1992 compared to Lars Grue’s study from 1982 (Grue, 1982). The results for the different age groups that are included in Øia’s analysis indicate that this decrease has continued. In 1992 between 79 % and 83 % of the 13 to 15 year olds were members of one or more organizations, compared to 61 % in the present study. Comparisons between high school students at the two points in time show the same tendency, which may indicate that active participation in organizational life may have decreased even further. However, the level of participation is still high, which gives rise to the assumption that spending their leisure time doing organised activities still means much to Norwegian youth. The results from “Young in Norway 2002” also show that almost all are members at least some of the time while they grow up. Thus, it may appear that the greatest challenge for the organizations is not to recruit new members, but to keep the ones they have. The participants in “Young in Norway 2002” were also asked to concretise the types of organizations they were members of, through a series of questions. Table 6 shows that most of them replied that they were members of sports clubs (40 %). 9 % were members of youth clubs and brass bands, choirs or orchestras. Between 4 % and 6 % were members of supporter clubs, political or religious organizations, youth organizations, or clubs for hunting or fishing. For the rest 3 % or less replied that they were members. According to table 4 a majority of Norwegian youth participate or have participated in sports organizations. Thus, it is not surprising that many were also

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 13 members of such organizations. The study also shows that no other type of organization comes near to being as popular as sports organizations where membership is concerned. It also seems reasonable that whatever type of organization the level of par- ticipation will exceed the level of membership. This pertains to sports as well. If we lump together those who just participated in sports activities with those who competed as well in table 4, we find that about 6 out of 10 participated in sports, compared to just 4 out of 10 being members of such organizations. This difference becomes even more distinct if we look at the youth clubs, where only 9 % replied that they were members while 18 % participated.

8 Table 6: Membership in different types of organizations, by sex and school type. Percentages .

All Sex School type Junior high High Boys Girls school school Motor club 2 4 1 2 2 Teetotal organization 1 1 1 1 1 Youth club 9 10 8 14 4 Sports club 40 45 36 45 35 Supporter club 6 10 2 6 7 Political organization 4 4 5 2 7 Religious organization 5 5 6 5 6 4H, rural youth organisations etc. 4 4 5 4 5 Red Cross etc. 2 2 2 1 2 Brass bands, choirs, orchestras 9 6 12 11 7 Clubs for keeping pets 3 1 5 3 3 Clubs for hobbies (stamps etc.) 2 2 1 2 1 Scouts 2 3 2 3 2 Clubs for hunting or fishing 4 7 1 3 5 Live role playing clubs 2 2 2 2 2 Environmental work organizations 1 1 2 1 2 Other organizations 11 11 10 11 11

If we look more closely at the types of organizations it appears that members of supporter clubs, clubs for hunting or fishing or motor clubs are mostly boys. More boys than girls are members of sports clubs as well, while the girls dominate in brass bands, choirs, and orchestras, and in clubs for keeping pets. Otherwise the sex differences were small. Tables 3, 4, and 5 all indicate that participation in organised leisure time activities decreases with age. This is the case for sports clubs, youth clubs, and brass bands. The opposite pertains to membership in political organizations or

8 The columns covering school type have been published previously in Rossow (2003).

14 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – clubs for hunting and fishing, where there is a marked increase between junior high school and high school. However, there are still relatively few who are members even in high school; 7 % in the former and 5 % in the latter. The patterns remain fairly stable between 1992 and 2002 concerning the types of organization young people are members of. Sports organizations attracted most of them both in 1992 and 2002, followed by youth clubs and brass bands. At the same time we again find the tendency to an all over decrease in membership. The decrease is smallest where sports clubs are concerned (from 50 % to 45 % among the boys) whereas the contrast is greatest where youth clubs and brass bands are concerned. In 1992 19 % of the boys were members of a youth club. The corresponding proportion in 2002 had decreased to 10 %. In 1992 20 % of the girls were members of brass bands, choirs, or orchestras, compared to 12 % in 2002.9 This strengthens our impression that the real challenges for the organizations in the future will be to keep their members. Both in 1992 and 2002 most young people had tried participating in one or more organizations. However, more had left them again in 2002.

6 Religion The participants were asked about their religious affiliation. In the sample as a whole 71 % saw themselves as Christian and 3 % saw themselves as Moslem (table 7). As the table shows there are no great differences according to sex or school type where religious affiliation is concerned.

Table 7: Religious affiliation, by sex and school type. Percentages.

All Sex School type Junior high High Boys Girls school school Christian 7168757073 Moslem 3 3 3 3 3 Other religious affiliation 3 3 2 2 3 No religious affiliation 23 26 21 25 22

Not more than 6 % of the total sample replied that religion means much in their daily lives (cf. table 8). Even though the large majority of the sample considers themselves Christians religion still has little (30 %) or no (53 %) significance.

9 The results from 1992 are from Øia (1994).

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 15 Table 8: The significance of religion in daily life, by sex and school type. Percentages.

All Sex School type Junior high High Boys Girls school school Very significant 6 7 6 6 7 Quite significant 10 10 11 11 9 Means little 30 27 33 32 29 No significance 53 56 50 51 55

Table 8 shows that there were few sex differences at this point. Nor were there any clear signs that religion changes its significance with age in any direction, the differences between students in the two school types were small. The question about religious affiliation was formulated somewhat differently in “Young in Norway 1992”, making direct comparison difficult. In 1992 more girls than boys answered that they were practising Christians. In addition this pertained to more students in high school than in junior high school. Could it be that sex and age differences have decreased in this area compared to ten years ago?

7 Plans for future education and place to live Our presentation of young peoples’ plans for future education and where they want to live are based on the answers given by the high school students who participated in “Young in Norway 2002”. For this subsample as a whole 59 % planned to go to University or University College (cf. table 9). A mere 1 % among those who followed the theoretical streams planned to end their education by the end of high school, while 18 % of those following the work-related streams had made such plans. Quite a lot did not know their future plans.

Table 9: Plans for future education, by sex. Percentages.

All Sex Boys Girls University or University College 59 52 66 No future plans – theoretical streams 1 2 1 No future plans – work-related streams 18 26 11 Other plans 4 4 5 Don’t know 17 16 18

Table 9 shows that just above half of the boys and close to two thirds of the girls planned to achieve higher education. Independently of sex there are few who plan to end their education by the end of high school. The majority of those who did so were boys attending work-related streams in high school. In addition we asked the participants from high school about where they wanted to live in the future. In “Young in Norway 2002” the question is whether

16 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – they want to remain living in their present locality when they have finished their education. Not more than 14 % answered that they would very much like to do this (cf. table 10). Just above one fourth would like to do so if things went like that, while one fourth did not want to do so. One third did not know where they want to live in the future.

Table 10: A wish to remain living in present locality, by sex. Percentages.

All Sex Boys Girls Would like to very much 14 17 10 If it happens that way 27 28 26 Don’t know 34 34 35 Wish to live somewhere else 25 21 29

More boys than girls answered that they would very much like to remain living in the same place, while more girls than boys answered that they would like to live somewhere else. Kåre Heggen (2002) cites Ivar Frønes (1996) in his description of a quiet “revolution” that has taken place within the field of education. In the aftermath of the sexual revolution girls have become leading where higher education is concerned, according to Frønes (op. cit.). This is confirmed by our findings, as we also find that more girls than boys plan higher education. However, Heggen (op. cit.) points out that there has been a change based on geography as well. Based on official statistics about education from 1999, he shows that the girls from rural areas are most concerned with achieving higher education. There were no great differences between counties where the boys’ plans were concerned, while the proportion attempting higher education was larger among the girls from Norway’s most sparsely populated counties. What, then, do the results from “Young in Norway 2002” show? How does degree of urbanisation in the place they lived influence the young peoples’ plans for where they want to live in the future? For both sexes it appeared that among those who lived in large towns on the one hand and small, rural villages on the other hand a larger proportion would like to come back to live, while this was not the case for those living in smaller towns or medium-sized localities. How does degree of urbanization influence young peoples’ plans for further education? Our results show that more girls than boys from large towns or small, rural villages wanted higher education. There were no such sex differences for those coming from smaller towns or medium-sized localities. Heggen (op. cit.) analyses where young people from different parts of the country live while they go to school or study. We measure young peoples’ aspirations for the future. This makes direct comparisons difficult. However, our results do not indicate that girls from the smallest communities mostly wish to live elsewhere, even though more of them plan to achieve higher education. On the

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 17 contrary they were among the girls who would really like to remain living in the same place. In addition just as many girls from the big towns planned to achieve higher education.

8 Parttime work Only the students in high school were asked about whether they were working outside school hours during the school year. About half did, more girls than boys (cf. table 11).

Table 11: Work outside school during the school year, by sex. Percentages.

All Sex Boys Girls Yes 49 42 55 No 51 58 45

In addition the young people who answered affirmatively were asked how many hours they worked each week (cf. table 12). Most answered that they worked part time from four to nine hours a week. Then followed between 10 and 15 hours a week. Not more than a small proportion (11 %) worked more than 16 hours a week. Although more girls than boys worked part time, there were no sex differences in how much they worked once they were working.

Table 12: Number of working hours a week, by sex. Percentages.

All Sex Boys Girls 1-3 hours 21 19 23 4-9 hours 41 43 39 10-15 hours 27 27 28 16 hours or more 11 12 10

In other words the main tendency is that part time work is usual among high school students, and that sex doesn’t seem to influence the amount of working even though more girls than boys do part time work.

9 Tobacco According to table 13 most teenagers neither smoke nor use snuff. About one in ten smoked occasionally and one in five smoked daily. Among the daily smokers, it was most common to smoke between 10 and 20 cigarettes a day (47 %). 17 % smoked 20 cigarettes or more. Only a few teenagers used snuff, both occasionally

18 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – (5 %) and daily (4 %). Among those who used snuff daily, most used about three boxes a day (44 %).

Table 13: Smoking and using snuff, by sex and school type. Percentages.

All Sex School type Boys Girls Junior high High school school Smoke Do not smoke 71 74 69 80 62 Smoke, but not daily 11 10 13 10 13 Smoke daily 17 16 19 10 25 Use snuff Do not use snuff 92 84 99 93 90 Use snuff, but not daily 5 9 1 4 5 Use snuff daily 4 7 0 3 5

The proportion that smoked both occasionally and daily was slightly higher among girls than among boys, but this sex difference was not large (cf. table 13). This corresponds to data from surveys conducted among junior high school students by the National Council on Tobacco and Health, which indicate that the proportion of daily smokers is somewhat higher among girls (11 %) than among boys (9 %) (Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Affairs, 2003a). That young women smoke more than young men is claimed to be a myth (Op. cit., 2003a). Data from Statistics Norway indicate small sex differences in the number of daily smokers during the last 30 years. According to their survey from 2002, 29 % of the women and 26 % of the men smoked daily (Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Affairs, 2003b). In sum, these studies indicate gender similarity in the number of daily smokers. Moreover, the reported levels of smoking are pretty similar. The survey from the National Council on Tobacco and Health shows an almost identical prevalence as we find among junior high school students. The level of daily smokers reported by Statistics Norway is somewhat higher than the level among the high school students. This is probably due to an older age group in the first study (age 16-24 years). As regards use of snuff, the sex difference is more substantial. About one in ten boys and one in hundred girls used snuff occasionally (cf. table 13). A similar gender-ratio appeared among those who use snuff daily. Surveys from the National Council on Tobacco and Health and Statistics Norway also indicate that very few women use snuff. Statistics Norway reports that 9 % of the boys from 16 to 24 years used snuff daily (Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Affairs, 2003b), and the National Council on Tobacco and Health reports that 3 % of the boys at junior high schools use snuff daily (Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Affairs, 2003a).

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 19 A large proportion of those who both smoke and use snuff daily seem to start doing so during adolescence. This is indicated by the findings showing that use of tobacco is far more common among students at high schools than at junior high schools (cf. table 13). While one in four of the oldest student smoked daily, this was the case for one in ten of the youngest. Moreover, 5 % of the oldest and 3 % of the youngest teen-agers used snuff daily. Occasional use of tobacco varied little with age. According to the ”Young in Norway”-studies the proportion of daily smokers has been stable from 1992 (18 %; Storvoll et al., 2003) to 2002 (17 %). This is also the case when girls and boys are studied separately. In 1992 the prevalence was 19 and 17 % respectively (Storvoll et al., 2003), and in 2002 19 and 16 %. As well Statistics Norway reports that the proportion of daily smokers among young people (16–24-year olds) has been stable the last decade (Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Affairs, 2003b). The surveys conducted by the National Council on Tobacco and Health indicate that the number of junior high school students who smoke daily has decreased since 1975. However, there was a small increase from 1995 to 2000 (Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Affairs, 2003a). On the other hand the proportion of young men (16-24-year olds) who used snuff in- creased considerably from 1985 to 2002 according to Statistics Norway (Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Affairs, 2003b). The National Council on Tobacco and Health also reports an increase in the number of boys using snuff the last decade (Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Affairs, 2003a). According to these findings, the concerns about young people of today can not be due to an increased number of daily smokers. However, one should be aware of the increased number of young boys who use snuff.

10 Alcohol The young peoples’ experience with alcohol was measured by asking whether they ever had been drinking alcohol and whether they had been drunk. Those who answered affirmatively were asked how old they were the first time this happened. Seven in ten had tried drinking alcohol (cf. table 14). In comparison, Norwegian Institute for Alcohol and Drug Research (SIRUS) (2002) finds that eight in ten 15– 20-years olds had tried drinking alcohol. That the prevalence reported by SIRUS is somewhat higher than the one found in our study is probably due to an older sample in their study. Six in ten participants in ”Young in Norway 2002” had been drunk. The mean age for the first time the adolescents both tried alcohol and became intoxicated was about 14 years. This is in accordance with SIRUS’s findings which indicate that the alcohol debut is around 14,5 years of age (Skretting, 2003).

20 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – Table 14: Experience with alcohol, by sex and school type.

All Sex School type Junior High Boys Girls high school school Ever been drinking alcohol Proportion who asked yes (percentages) 72 72 73 58 88 Age the first time (mean (standard 13,6 (3,5) 13,5 (4,3) 13,8 (2,7) - - deviation)) Ever been drunk Proportion who asked yes (percentages) 63 62 63 43 83 Age the first time (mean (standard 14,3 (3,4) 14,2 (4,3) 14,3 (2,3) - - deviation))

According to table 14 similar proportions of girls and boys had both tasted alcohol and been drunk. Nor does SIRUS (2002) report any sex differences as regards the number that had ever tasted alcohol. Moreover, table 14 indicates that the age of the first experience with both alcohol and alcohol intoxication is similar for girls and boys. As expected, a larger proportion of older teen-agers (88 %) than younger teen-agers (58 %) had ever tasted alcohol. Moreover, about twice as many of the oldest students had been drunk. In other words, a large proportion starts both to drink alcohol and become intoxicated during adolescence. Moreover, the participants in “Young in Norway” were asked how often they had been drinking alcohol during the last year (the last twelve months). Two in three had been drinking alcohol last year (cf. table 15). Almost one in five had consumed alcohol once a week. Only 3 % had been drinking more than once a week.

Table 15: Frequency of alcohol consumption last year, by sex and school type. Percentages.

All Sex School type Boys Girls Junior high school High school Have not been drinking 30 31 28 45 14 1-4 times 22 21 22 28 15 5-10 times 14 14 15 12 17 About once a month 15 14 17 7 24 About once a week 16 17 16 6 27 More than once a week 3 4 2 1 4

Table 15 indicates few sex differences in the frequency of adolescents’ alcohol consumption. However, twice as many boys (4 %) as girls (2 %) had been drinking alcohol more than once a week. The alcohol consumption varied considerably according to age. Older teen-agers had more often consumed alcohol at least once a month (55 % versus 14 %). On the other hand, the youngest students more often answered that they had not been drinking alcohol or had been drinking from one to four times last year (73 % versus 29 %).

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 21 Finally, the participants in ”Young in Norway” were asked how often they had been intoxicated by alcohol during the last twelve months. This pertained to more than half of the students (cf. table 16). About one in five had been drunk be- tween ten and fifty times. Only a few (6 %) had been drunk more than fifty times.

Table 16: Frequency of alcohol intoxication last year, by sex and school type. Percentages.

All Sex School type Boys Girls Junior high school High school Never 44 44 44 64 23 1 time 8 8 8 9 6 2-5 times 14 13 15 12 17 6-10 times 11 10 12 7 15 10-50 times 17 18 17 6 29 More than 50 times 6 8 5 3 10

The frequency of alcohol intoxication is, according to table 16, almost similar among girls and boys. However, a larger proportion of the boys (8 %) than of the girls (5 %) had been drunk more than fifty times the last year. A considerable larger amount of older than of younger students had been drunk (77 % versus 36 %). This difference was most explicit as regards frequent alcohol intoxication, i.e. to be intoxicated at least six times a year (54 % versus 15 %). The frequency of young people’s alcohol intoxication increased from 1992 to 2002. According to the “Young in Norway”-studies the proportion who had been intoxicated between ten and fifty times last year increased from 12 % to 17 %. Moreover, twice as many of the participants in 2002 than in 1992 had been drunk more than fifty times (6 % versus 3 %).10 The increase in the amount that had been drunk more than ten times last year was similar for girls and boys. In 1992 the prevalence was 18 % among boys and 14 % among girls (Storvoll et al., 2003), and in 2002 it was respectively 26 % versus 22 %. The surveys conducted by SIRUS also indicate an increase in young people’s alcohol consumption during this period (Skretting, 2003). However, the proportion who had tasted alcohol was similar in 1992 and 2002 (SIRUS, 2002).

11 Antisocial behaviour Involvement in antisocial behaviour was measured using 24 questions, ranging from behaviours that are most likely not problematic when low in frequency to behaviours that are serious even when infrequent. Subjects reported the frequency of their involvement in these behaviours during the previous 12 months. Based on earlier analyses of the dimensionality of antisocial behaviour in ”Young in Norway

10 The data from 1992 were published by Ketil Skogen and Lars Wichstrøm (1995).

22 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – 1992”, such behaviour was divided into the three sub-dimensions: ”theft and vandalism ”, ”school opposition” and ”drift” (Pedersen og Wichstrøm, 1995; Storvoll et al., 2002). The first dimension includes different kinds of stealing and violence against objects, whereas the second includes school related conduct problems. The last dimension reflects avoidance of arenas under adult control. In addition, we have added two sub-dimensions labelled ”violence” and ”illegal drugs”. The first reflects both violent threats and violent behaviour. The last is composed of use of illegal drugs, solvents and medicine to become intoxicated.

Table 17: Involvement in antisocial behaviour last year, by sex and school type. Percentages.

All Sex School type Junior High Boys Girls high school school Refrained from paying on the bus etc. 35 38 31 32 37 Played truant 54 51 57 35 73 Stayed out at night without consent 26 26 26 16 36 Involved in some kind of “drift” 66 65 68 51 82 Sever quarrel with a teacher 26 29 24 28 25 Sent out of class 25 33 17 30 19 Cursed at a teacher 46 54 38 48 43 Summoned to the principal 16 23 8 21 10 Involved in some kind of “school 56 65 48 60 53 opposition” Stolen from the family 21 21 21 24 17 Stolen less than NOK 500 12 16 9 13 11 Minor vandalism 14 21 6 15 12 Stolen car or motorcycle 3 5 1 3 3 Stolen more than NOK 1000 4 7 1 4 5 Major vandalism 7 13 2 8 7 Burglary 3 6 1 4 3 Involved in some kind of “theft and 33 39 27 36 30 vandalism” Hit or treated to hit someone 23 32 14 22 23 Fought with a weapon (e.g. knife) 4 6 1 4 3 Hit or kicked someone 37 43 31 45 29 Scratched or pulled someone’s hair 31 18 43 39 22 Violent threats 25 35 15 26 24 Involved in some kind of “violence” 54 56 51 62 45 Used solvents 6 7 4 5 6 Used cannabis 11 14 9 6 17 Used hard drugs (cocaine, LSD, heroin, etc.) 4 5 3 3 6 Used tablets (medicines) to get intoxicated 5 5 5 4 6 Used some kinds of “illegal drugs” 15 17 13 10 20 Been in contact with the police 11 16 6 9 12

Two in three had been involved in at least one of the antisocial behaviours cate- gorised as “drift” during the last year (cf. table 17). Truancy was the most common

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 23 kind of ”drift” (54 %). Moreover, about half of the adolescents had been involved in ”school opposition”. Here, cursing at a teacher was reported most frequently (46 %). Half of the adolescents also reported ”violence”. The most common kind of ”violence” was to hit or kick someone (37 %) or to scratch or pull someone’s hair (31 %). Only a few (4 %) had been involved in more serious kinds of violence like fighting with a weapon. The prevalence of ”theft and vandalism” was smaller. This was reported by one in three. The most common kind of such antisocial behaviour was theft from someone in the family (21 %). Only a few (3-4 %) replayed that they had been involved in serious theft as stealing a car or motorcycle, burglary, and theft of something worth more than NOK 1000. ”Illegal drugs” had the lowest prevalence (15 %). It was most common to use cannabis (11 %). Only a few (4 %) had used hard drugs as cocaine, LSD, ecstasy, amfetamin or heroin. One in ten had been in contact with the police during the last year due to illegal behaviour. ”Drift” was as common among girls as among boys (cf. table 17). Nor were there sex differences in the prevalence of ”violence”. However, the picture is somewhat different if we look at the different kinds of violence which are included in this category. About twice as many girls as boys had scratched or pulled someone’s hair. On the other hand twice as many boys had threatened to hit or hit someone and threatened to hurt someone. The male preponderance was even more pronounced as regards fighting with a weapon. This was reported by 6 % of the boys and 1 % of the girls. Moreover, slightly more boys than girls used “illegal drugs”. The prevalence of ”school opposition” was also higher for boys (65 %) than for girls (48 %). In addition, ”theft and vandalism” was more common among boys (39 %) than among girls (27 %). This male preponderance was most pronoun- ced as regards the most serious kinds of theft and vandalism. These were reported more than five times as often among boys than among girls. Moreover, considerably more boys (16 %) than girls (6 %) had been in contact with the police because of illegal behaviour. The revealed male preponderance in antisocial behaviour, and especially in the most serious kinds of deviance, is in accordance with the findings presented in publications from ”Young in Norway 1992” (see for example Pedersen and Wichstrøm, 1995; Storvoll og Wichstrøm, 2002; Storvoll et al., 2003; Wichstrøm, 1994). Similar sex differences are also found in other Norwegian studies (see for example Bakken, 1998; Bendixen and Olweus, 1999) and in registered criminality (Falck, 2002; Storvoll, 1997). Moreover, this male preponderance is well docu- mented in the international literature (see for example Loeber et al., 2000; Rutter et al., 1998). The distribution of ”theft and vandalism” vary little according to age (cf. table 17). Also the prevalence of ”school opposition” is similar among younger and older teen-agers. However, if we look at the different items which measure “school opposition”, it was more common for younger than older student to be summoned to the principal and sent out of class. ”Violence” seems to be more common among younger (62 %) than older teen-agers (45 %). This difference reflects that young

24 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – students more often scratch or pull someone’s hair and hit or kick someone. On the other hand ”drift” was more prevalent among older (82 %) than younger teen-agers (51 %). This difference reflects that older students more often had played truant and been out one or more nights without consent. Moreover, use of ”illegal drugs” was more common among older (20 %) than younger teenagers (10 %). This finding reflects a higher prevalence of both cannabis and hard drugs among high school students. Finally, a larger part of the oldest (12 %) than the youngest teen- agers (9 %) had been in contact with the police due to illegal behaviour. The comparison of junior high schools and high school students only gives a rough picture of the age distribution of involvement in antisocial behaviour. It is well documented that such behaviour is more common in mid-adolescence than in other age groups (Moffitt, 1993; Smith, 1995). A similar picture was found in the data from ”Young in Norway 1992” (Pedersen og Wichstrøm, 1995; Storvoll og Wichstrøm, 2003). Since the distinction between younger and older teen-agers is drawn at the age group (around 16 years old) where the involvement in such behaviour is most frequent, much of the variation according to age is hidden in this presentation. Willy Pedersen and Lars Wichstrøms’ (1995) analyses of the 12-18- years olds who participated in the study in 1992 indicate that the sub-dimensions studied in this appendix have different age distributions. According to their findings ”school opposition” is most prevalent among 14-16-years olds, and ”theft and vandalism” among 16-years olds. ”Drift” continues to increase with age. Hilde Pape and Sturla Falck (2003) have used the “Young in Norway” studies to describe stability and changes in antisocial behaviour from 1992 to 2002. They find that the involvement in such behaviour has been relatively stable the last ten years. However, they report some small changes indicating a decrease in the prevalence of simple larceny and refraining to pay on bus etc. Moreover, it has been less common to hit or threat to hit someone. In contrast, there has been a considerable increase in use of illegal substances. Also the yearly surveys conducted by SIRUS indicate that the use of illegal drugs have increased in this period (Skretting, 2003). Moreover, the ”Young in Norway” studies indicate a little increase in vandalism. Pape and Falck (2003) primarily studied adolescents who had broken the law last year, i.e. fought with weapon, stolen a car or motorcycle, serious theft, burglary, and major vandalism. The proportion who had been involved in at least one of these behaviours increased slightly from 1992 (9 %) to 2002 (11 %). The same group differences (gender, age and ethnicity) were found in both surveys. The proportion that had been in contact with the police because of illegal behaviour was also stable. However, this proportion increased among those who had broken the law at least two times. This may indicate that the most antisocial adolescents of today are picked up by the police to a greater extent than formerly. Pape and Falck found that the sex difference in the probability of being picked up by the police was smaller in 2002 than in 1992. This seems to reflect that law-breaking girls are picked up by the police to a larger extent than before.

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 25 12 Exposure to violence Exposure to violence is measured by questions about violent threats as well as different kinds of violence. Almost one in five had been exposed to violent threats (cf. table 18). The proportion who had been victims of violence varied from one in four to one in twenty, depending on whether we talk about being hit without getting visible marks or receiving an injury requiring medical assistance.

Table 18: Exposure to violence last twelve months, by gender and school type. Percentages.

All Sex School type Junior High Boys Girls high school school Violent threats 16 19 13 15 17 Hit without leaving visible marks 23 29 18 23 23 Violence which resulted in visible marks or 12 16 9 11 14 injury, not requiring medical attention Injury requiring medical attention 5 6 3 5 4

Table 18 indicates that boys are somewhat more exposed to both violent threats and violent behaviour than girls. For instance, twice as many boys as girls had been exposed to an injury requiring medical assistance. Similar sex differences were reported in a study among young people from Oslo (Pape and Pedersen, 1997 og 1999). Also Statistics Norway reports that men are more exposed than women to violence resulting in injury (Stene, 2003). As regards violent threats, however, they found that women are more exposed than men. Younger and older participants in ”Young in Norway 2002” had similar experiences with both violent threats and violent behaviour. Moreover, the adolescents were asked: ”If you have been exposed to violence resulting in injury, who did it?”. According to table 19 it was most common to be hurt by one or more students at the same school (6 %) or unknown adolescents (6 %).

Table 19: Who perpetrated the violence, by sex and school type. Percentages.

All Sex School type Boys Girls Junior high school High school Students at the same school 6 9 3 8 3 Unknown adolescents 6 9 3 4 7 Siblings 4 4 5 5 3 Others in the family 2 1 3 2 2 Girlfriends/boyfriends 2 1 2 1 3 One or more friends 2 4 1 2 3 One or more girls 1 1 2 1 1 One or more boys 5 7 3 5 5 Others 6 7 4 6 6

26 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – Boys who had been exposed to violence most often reported that the violence was conducted by one or more students at the same school or unknown adolescents (cf. table 19). Girls most often reported that the violence had been conducted by siblings. The answers indicate that boys more often than girls are exposed to violence by peers, whether they are friends or not. On the other hand girls seem to be more exposed to violence by someone in the family or a boyfriend. Moreover, there is a tendency indicating that boys are hurt by other boys, while girls are hurt by other girls. Younger teen-agers (8 %) had more often than older teen-agers (3 %) been exposed to violence by students at the same school. On the other hand, a larger proportion of the older (7 %) than the younger students (3 %) answered that they had been hurt by unknown adolescents. Whereas the youngest students (5 %) more often than the oldest (3 %) had been exposed to violence by siblings, older students more often had been hurt by a girlfriend or a boyfriend (3 % versus 1 %). Our findings indicate that younger adolescents more often than older adolescents are exposed to violence by students at the same school or siblings, whereas older students more often are hurt by unknown adolescents or a girlfriend/boyfriend. Such differences probably reflect that the oldest teen-agers have a larger radius of action than younger teen-agers, and thus have more contact with unknown adole- scents. Moreover, it is more common for the oldest students to have a girlfriend or a boyfriend. Questions about exposure to violence were not included in ”Young in Norway 1992”. Thus, it is not possible to analyse stability and change in this area. According to Statistics Norway the proportion of the adult population that had been exposed to violent threats or violent behaviour was stable from 1983 to 2001 (Stene, 2003). However, if we just consider the youngest participants in their sur- veys (16-24-years olds) there was a small increase in the level of exposure to violence in 1995 and 1997. In 2001 this level had decreased again. There was a similar increase in violent threats in 1997.

13 Final discussion In public debates about youth problems and risks are highlighted repeatedly, as well as statements proclaiming an ongoing, negative development. In this appendix we have presented some preliminary analyses of how young people of today spend their time. These show that today’s Norwegian youth seem to be in about the same situation as ten years ago. Young people have not left the political arena during the last decade. They are interested in specific causes. Many sign petitions and participate in other types of action-oriented activities, and many believe that media attention is important. However, they are more interested in specific causes than in the political system.

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 27 We must suppose that new technologies influence the way young people use their leisure time. Still we find similar patterns to those of a decade ago, with similar sex differences. Girls go to cafés, they shop and help out more at home. Boys are more often members of sports clubs, they use gambling machines more often, and work with cars. Almost all young people try out one or more types of organizations while they grow up, and organised leisure activities are still important. However, the organizations face great challenges where keeping their members is concerned. Fewer remain active today than ten and twenty years ago. It is worth noticing that like ten years ago, less than one in five teen-agers smoke daily. One of ten boys uses snuff. Except for an increase in the use of illegal substances, the prevalence of antisocial behaviour has remained relatively stable during the last decade as well. About half the young people had been involved in more trivial antisocial acts like absences from school without permission or swearing at a teacher. Less than one in twenty had been involved in more serious behaviours like fighting with weapons, serious theft and use of substances like ecstasy, heroin, etc. Boys are still more involved than girls, particularly in the most serious behaviours. In addition there had been an increase in the proportion who had been drunk often. Here, too, the boys dominated.

28 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus – References

Bakken, A. (1998). Ungdomstid i storbyen. NOVA-rapport 7/98. Oslo: Norsk institutt for forskning om oppvekst, velferd og aldring (NOVA). Bendixen, M. & Olweus, D. (1999). Measurement of antisocial behaviour in early adole- scence and adolescence: Psychometric properties and substantive findings. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 9, 323–354. Falck, S. (2002). Barne- og ungdomskriminalitet i Norge på nittitallet. Oslo: Det kriminali- tetsforebyggende råd. Frønes, I. (1996). Revolusjon uten opprør. Kjønn, generasjoner og sosial endring i Norge på 1980-tallet. Tidsskrift for samfunnsforskning, 1, 71-86. Grue, L. (1982). Den organiserte ungdommen: en empirisk analyse. Oslo: Institutt for samfunnsforskning. Heggen, K. (2002). Utkantjentene sin stille revolusjon. Tidsskrift for Ungdomsforskning, 2, 3-20. Lidén, H. & Ødegård, G. (2002). Ungt engasjement. Ungdoms samfunnsengasjement og lokalpolitiske deltakelse. NOVA-rapport 6/2002. Oslo: Norsk institutt for forskning om oppvekst, velferd og aldring (NOVA). Loeber, R., Burke, J. D., Lahey, B. B., Winters, A. & Zera, M. (2000). Oppositional defiant and conduct disorder: A review of the past 10 years, Part I. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 39, 1468–1484. Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behaviour: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674–701. Pape, H. & Falck, S. (2003). Ungdomskriminalitet – et fenomen i endring? Tidsskrift for Ungdomsforskning. I trykk. Pape, H. & Pedersen, W. (1997). Voldsofre i den generelle ungdomsbefolkningen. En longitudinell studie av risikofaktorer. Tidsskrift for den Norske Lægeforeningen, 23, 3347- 3351. Pape, H. & Pedersen, W. (1999). Dangerous victims of violence? Studies of Crime and Crime Prevention, 8, 88-106. Pedersen, W. & Wichstrøm, L. (1995). Patterns of delinquency in Norwegian adolescents. British Journal of Criminology, 35, 543–561. Rossow, I. (2003). Ungdommen nå til dags – tall fra “Ung i Norge 2002”. Tidsskrift for Ungdomsforskning, 1, 89–97. Rossow, I. & Bø, A. K. (2003). Metoderapport for datainnsamlingen til Ung i Norge 2002. Oslo: Norsk institutt for forskning om oppvekst, velferd og aldring (NOVA). Rutter, M., Giller, H. & Hagell, A. (1998). Antisocial behaviour by young people. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. SIRUS (2002). Rusmidler i Norge 2002. Oslo: Statens institutt for rusmiddelforskning (SIRUS).

– Use of leisure time, problem behaviour, and aspirations for the future – 29 Skogen, K. & Wichstrøm, L. (1995). Kriminalitet og klasse. Nordisk Tidsskrift for Krimi- nalvidenskab, 82, 32–47. Skretting, A. (2003). Ungdomsundersøkelsen 2003. www.sirus.no. Sletten, M. (2001). Ung i Tromsø. Om problematferd, fritid, framtid og samfunnsengasje- ment. NOVA rapport 12/2001. Oslo: Norsk institutt for forskning om oppvekst, velferd og aldring (NOVA). Sletten, M. (2003). Ungdomsundersøkelsen i Stavanger 2002. Hva gjør de? Hva vil de? NOVA rapport 4/2003. Oslo: Norsk institutt for forskning om oppvekst, velferd og aldring (NOVA). Smith, D. J. (1995). Youth crime and conduct disorders: Trends, patterns, and causal expla- nations. I: Rutter, M. & Smith, D. J. (red.) Psychosocial disorders in young people. Time trends and their causes. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 389–489. Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Affairs (2003a). Tall om tobakk 1973-2001. Oslo: Sosial- og helsedirektoratet. Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Affairs (2003b). Tobakksbruk i Norge 2002. www.tobakk.no. Stene, R. J. (2003). Vold og trusler i 20 år. Samfunnsspeilet, 1, 2-7. Storvoll, E. E. (1997). Barn og unge med alvorlige atferdsvansker. Hvem er de, og hvilken hjelp blir de tilbudt? NOVA–rapport 21/97. Oslo: Norsk institutt for forskning om oppvekst, velferd og aldring (NOVA). Storvoll, E. E. & Wichstrøm, L. (2002). Do the risk factors associated with conduct pro- blems in adolescents vary according to gender? Journal of Adolescence, 25, 183-202. Storvoll, E.E. & Wichstrøm, L. (2003). Sex differences in changes in and stability of conduct problems from early adolescence to early adulthood. Journal of Adolescence, 26, 413-429. Storvoll, E. E., Wichstrøm, L., Kolstad, A. & Pape, H. (2002). Structure of conduct problems in adolescence. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 43, 81-91. Storvoll, E. E., Wichstrøm, L. & Pape, H. (2003). Sex differences in the association between conduct problems and other problems among adolescents. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 3, 194-209. Wichstrøm, L. (1994). Mental helse blant ungdom i Norge. Oslo som særtilfelle? UNG- forsk Rapport 3/94. Oslo: UNGforsk. Ødegård, G. (2001). Ungdomstid i Fredrikstad. NOVA-rapport 3/01. Oslo: Norsk institutt for forskning om oppvekst, velferd og aldring (NOVA). Ødegård, G. (2003). Samfunnsengasjement blant dagens unge. Tidsskrift for Ungdoms- forskning. I trykk. Øia, T. (1994). Norske ungdomskulturer. Vallset: Opplandske bokforlag. Øia, T. (1995). Apolitisk ungdom? Sjølbergingsgenerasjonen og politiske verdier. Oslo: Cappelen akademisk forlag.

30 – Elisabet E. Storvoll og Geir Moshuus –