The Global Youth Participation Index (GYPI) represents the first ever attempt to systematically collect data on the participation of young people in economic, civic and political life. More specifically, the GYPI scores 140 countries on the extent to which they respect young people’s political rights, civil liberties and economic needs, and so enable them to fully participate in political, civic and economic life. In doing so, the GYPI provides young people and their allies with the data needed to advocate for the removal of barriers to youth participation.
The GYPI is composed of 41 variables divided into four key dimensions of youth participation, providing a nuanced picture of the opportunities and barriers to participation in areas that are of great importance to young people:
- Socio-Economic dimension, which covers the opportunities and barriers to young people securing an education and participating in the economy.
- Civic Space dimension, which assesses the extent to which young people can play an active role in social and political developments, both online and in person.
- Political Affairs dimension, which documents the extent of youth participation in legislatures, political parties and other political spaces.
- Elections dimension, which captures the opportunities and barriers to young people participating in elections and casting ballots.
These dimensions were identified through conversations with young people and experts on youth participation. Variables were drawn from pre-existing datasets and, when necessary, collected by 66 data contributors, including many under 30. The findings were then discussed with the GYPI Youth Panel, a group of nine young leaders from around the world with valuable insights on youth participation. A deep engagement with young people was therefore critical to the development of the GYPI from the start.
The scores for these dimensions and variables demonstrate that there is a long way to go when it comes to youth participation. The average overall GYPI score is just 61 out of 100. While the average scores for the Socio-Economic dimension tend to be higher at 76 out of 100, the figures for the Civic Space (62), Political Affairs (51) and Elections (54) dimensions are lower.
Crucially, low scores indicate significant barriers to youth participation, rather than apathy or disinterest, and highlight the limited opportunities to participate across a wide range of sectors and institutions.
What the GYPI tells us
There are significant variations in GYPI scores both between and within regions. European, North American and Australasian countries tend to perform better overall, in part due to higher levels of democracy. Many – but by no means all – sub-Saharan African states and those from the Middle East and North Africa region score less well. Asia features some of the greatest internal differences of any region, in part due to its size and the range of political systems it includes, from South Korea (76) through to Myanmar (41) and Afghanistan (14). There is also considerable variation within Latin America, though to a lesser extent.
Beneath these broader patterns, there are also some important similarities across regions. In almost all countries, young people struggle to be recognised as political representatives and leaders and are often excluded from the most powerful decision-making bodies. In the majority of countries, for example, young people remain significantly under-represented in the legislature. In 28 countries, there is no youth representation at all.
While authoritarian states tend to perform poorly on the GYPI, highlighting the challenges that the global spread of autocracy poses for youth participation, young people are also under-represented in decision-making bodies in several established democracies, such as Japan and the United States.
At the same time, some countries that are not usually counted among the world’s strongest democracies perform much better than might be predicted with regard to specific dimensions of the GYPI. Ecuador and Timor-Leste, for example, rank in the middle of the GYPI overall but are some of the best performers when it comes to youth participation in elections. This, in turn, points to changes that other countries can also make to improve their performance on the GYPI. The strong scores of Ecuador and Timor-Leste on the Elections dimension are the product of policies that enhance electoral accessibility such as automatic voter registration and voter education, and so demonstrate the potential for policy reforms to bring about significant change even in challenging contexts.
Conversely, high scores on the Socio-Economic dimension are not a guarantee of high scores on the overall GYPI. Czechia and Singapore, for example, both perform well on this dimension, but end up in the middle of the GYPI ranking due to the significant barriers to youth participation that exist regarding Elections and Civic Space (Singapore) and Political Affairs (Czechia).
