What Are the Enablers of Meaningful Youth Engagement in Urban Planning Processes In
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
What are the Enablers of Meaningful Youth Engagement in Urban Planning Processes in Christchurch? GEOG 692 Dissertation University of Canterbury Department of Geography Kaitlyn Stringer Abstract An issue facing city builders that is no longer conceptual, but rather, procedural is how to engage youth meaningfully in urban planning processes. This has been expressed anecdotally by youth who participate in civic engagement events targeted at them, but feel as if their views haven’t been genuinely taken into account. To truly improve the outcomes that occur as a result of youth engagement initiatives there is a need for more empirical research in the youth engagement literature regarding the circumstances that enable and disable meaningful youth engagement. Thus, the purpose of this research was to move beyond anecdotal evidence towards a more genuine analysis of youth’s experiences in a youth engagement initiative in Christchurch. This initiative saw young people directly participate in, and make decisions regarding the fit-out of youth space in Christchurch’s city centre, a co-creation approach to stakeholder engagement thought to bring about more meaningful outcomes than that of traditional consultation methods. To achieve the research aim, which was to uncover the enablers of meaningful youth engagement in urban planning processes in Christchurch, this research comprised semi-structured interviews with the project stakeholders, a focus group with the working group youth, plus two other focus groups with disengaged youth. Together, with a literature review on the enablers of meaningful youth engagement, these findings were synthesized into a set of recommendations for meaningful youth engagement. The resulting set of recommendations were consistent with the literature and reaffirmed the requirement of shared-decision making with adults as a foundation for meaningful youth engagement. In practice, these set of recommendations provide a tried and true framework for meaningful youth engagement in urban planning processes in Christchurch and will be useful for the second phase of the youth space project that was studied. In general, more needs to be done to convince youth that their voices are important, and to create opportunities for a wider range of youth to participate. Moreover, given that youth engagement initiatives vary greatly in their size and nature, there is a need for more formal evaluation mechanisms in the field of youth engagement to increase the legitimacy of these recommendations. Formative evaluations will also be more useful in optimizing youth’s participation in youth engagement initiatives, as monitoring youth’s experiences throughout the project would ensure the process remained on track with its overarching purpose, and youth were found to be more likely to provide feedback during, rather than following the conclusion of an initiative. 2 Acknowledgements I would like to give thanks to everyone who has advised, assisted and supported me throughout this research project. It would not have been possible without your valuable input. I would like to give special thanks to my supervisor from the University of Canterbury, Simon Kingham, who was a constant source of guidance, insight and expertise throughout this project. I would also like to thank my community partners, Deborah Sim, Ryan Reynolds and the rest of Gap Filler team for the opportunity to be a part of the youth space project. This opened up a lot of doors for me, and helped guide and grow my research. With that in mind I would like to say a huge thank you to Hamish Keown and Penny Prescott from the Canterbury Youth Workers Collective and Kate Burgess from the Christchurch Youth Council for warmly welcoming me into this project and the youth sector more broadly. They were under no obligation to do this; however, I believe it was their time, insight, and support that they gave so willingly that enabled my project to have meaning in the real world. Something I am both proud, and grateful to have achieved. Finally, I would like to thank all the young people who took part in my research. Their insight and analysis has formed the foundation of this research, and I am exceptionally grateful for their time. 3 Table of Contents List of Figures ........................................................................................................................... 5 List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ 6 Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................... 7 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 8 1.1 Christchurch Context ................................................................................................................. 8 1.2 Background & Purpose of Research ....................................................................................... 10 1.3 Significance of Research .......................................................................................................... 12 1.4 Research Aims & Objectives ................................................................................................... 13 Literature Review .................................................................................................................. 14 2.1 Youth in Cities .......................................................................................................................... 14 2.2 Youth Development .................................................................................................................. 18 2.3 Tokenism in Youth Engagement ............................................................................................. 19 2.4 Enablers of Meaningful Youth Engagement .......................................................................... 22 2.5 The Need for Evaluation .......................................................................................................... 26 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 28 3.1 Regional Context & Map ......................................................................................................... 28 3.2 Research Paradigm ................................................................................................................... 29 3.3 Semi-Structured Interviews ..................................................................................................... 33 3.4 Focus Group 1: Working Group Youth ................................................................................. 33 3.5 Focus Group 2 & 3: Disengaged Youth .................................................................................. 36 3.6 Ethics ......................................................................................................................................... 38 Results ..................................................................................................................................... 40 4.1 Semi-Structured Interview Results ......................................................................................... 40 4.2 Focus Group 1 & Survey Results ............................................................................................ 48 4.3 Focus Group 2 & 3 Results ...................................................................................................... 55 Discussion................................................................................................................................ 59 Limitations .............................................................................................................................. 67 Further Research ................................................................................................................... 68 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 69 References ............................................................................................................................... 70 Appendices .............................................................................................................................. 77 Appendix 1: Hart’s (1992) Ladder of Participation .................................................................... 77 Appendix 2: Focus Group 1 Run Sheet ........................................................................................ 78 Appendix 3: Youth Space Project Survey .................................................................................... 79 Appendix 4: Facebook post ............................................................................................................ 82 Appendix 5: Focus Group 2 & 3 Questions .................................................................................. 83 Appendix 6: Semi-structured Interview Questions ..................................................................... 85 Appendix 7: HEC Approval Letter ............................................................................................... 86 Appendix 8: Information Sheet for Research Participants ........................................................ 87 Appendix 9: Consent form for Interviewees ...............................................................................