YPS Lexicon: Language for a New Era

It is the intentional design and adaptation of environments, communication, systems, services, and processes to ensure all people, regardless of physical, cognitive, sensory, or socioeconomic status, are able to use these or can participate fully and equally. It goes beyond physical infrastructure (like ramps or elevators) to include digital accessibility (compatible with screen readers), linguistic accessibility (braille, sign language, jargon-free or translated content), and financial accessibility (removing cost barriers to participation). True accessibility is proactively identifying and dismantling barriers, including communicational, institutional, and attitudinal.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?
Accessibility is the logistics of inclusion. Without a proactive commitment to accessibility, the YPS agenda risks becoming an elite-led movement that only engages urban, English-speaking, and able-bodied youth. For the YPS agenda, accessibility means:

• Decentralizing Power: Moving peace consultations from expensive hotels in capital cities to rural areas or digital platforms that require low bandwidth.

• Language Justice: Translating policy documents (like National Action Plans) into local languages and youth-friendly formats (infographics, audio, or video).

• Neurodiversity & Disability Inclusion: Ensuring peacebuilding workshops and consultations are designed for different learning styles and are physically accessible to youth with disabilities, who are often the most impacted by conflict.

• Safety as Accessibility: Recognizing that for many young peacebuilders, a space is only accessible if it is safe from state surveillance or community backlash.

Related terms: Inclusivity; Intersectionality.

Resources

• Global Network of Women Peacebuilders & Peace Direct. (2025). Beyond the margins: Centering disability-inclusion in the architecture of peace — A global toolkit for advancing persons with disabilities in peacebuilding. Peacemakers Network. https://www.peacemakersnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Global-Disability-Toolkit.pdf 

• United Nations. (2019). United Nations disability inclusion strategy. https://www.un.org/en/content/disabilitystrategy/ 

• United Nations. (2023). Peacebuilding and the inclusion of persons with disabilities: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities (A/78/174). https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/thematic-reports/a78174-peacebuilding-and-inclusion-persons-disabilities-report-special 

It refers to the obligation of individuals, organisations, and institutions to account for their activities, accept responsibility, and disclose information about the results of their activities in a transparent manner. 

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

In the context of the Youth, Peace and Security (YPS) agenda, accountability is crucial as it ensures that decision-makers, security institutions, and all stakeholders are answerable for upholding the rights, participation, and protection of youth in peace and security processes. Without strong accountability mechanisms, young people may be excluded and marginalised, or face abuses, undermining peace and security efforts. 

Resources

• DCAF – Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance. (2024). The youth, peace and security agenda and security sector governance and reform (SSR Backgrounder Series). DCAF.

Activism is the intentional action of individuals or groups to bring about social, political, economic, or environmental change. It often involves challenging the status quo and established power structures to address injustices or advocate for human rights. While sometimes perceived by authorities as "troublemaking" or "disruptive," activism in its positive form is a creative and innovative expression of civic agency—the belief that people have the power to positively transform their societies. 

What does Activism mean for the YPS Agenda?

In the context of Youth, Peace and Security (YPS), activism is the pulse of the agenda, transforming young people from passive beneficiaries into equal and essential partners for peace. The UN Security Council Resolutions recognize young people’s political agency for peace, and their activism is the heartbeat of the agenda.

• A Strategy for Prevention: Youth activism is recognized as the most effective antidote to the Violence of Exclusion. By providing non-violent pathways for expressing grievances and demanding accountability, activism prevents the frustration that can lead to radicalization or violence.

• Reclaiming the "Troublemaker" Label: The YPS agenda seeks to shift the narrative from viewing youth as a "threat to be contained" to recognizing their disruptive potential as a constructive force. Peaceful protest and dissent are framed not as delinquency, but as vital tools for building a more just and democratic society.

• Fueling Participation at Scale: Activism allows youth to engage across all three layers of peace processes: In the Room (advocacy for seats), Around the Room (consultations), and Outside the Room (mass mobilization and digital storytelling).

• The Foundation of Agency: YPS initiatives demonstrate that when young people are supported in their activism, it builds the skills, confidence, and trust necessary for them to lead community reconciliation and social change.

• A Call for Protection: Because activists are often targeted by repressive governments or extremist groups, the Protection pillar of YPS specifically mandates safeguarding young people's fundamental rights to organize, assemble, and express themselves without fear of reprisal.

It is a pervasive form of discrimination, prejudice, or unconscious bias based on age, where assumptions and harmful stereotypes (for example, youth are "inexperienced" or elders are "irrelevant") are used to categorize and divide people. This process creates and reinforces power imbalances (often through seniority norms) that lead to harm, disadvantage, injustice, alienation across generations, and an erosion of solidarity.

Ageism can manifest in different ways, including:

• Institutionalized Ageism: Embedded in formal rules, laws (for example, age-based restrictions on candidacy), and policies (for example, rigid age limits on funding or leadership positions).

• Interpersonal Ageism: Explicit or implicit bias, prejudice, and microaggressions in interactions between individuals.

• Internalized Ageism: Individuals accepting and applying ageist stereotypes to themselves or their own age group.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

In the YPS context, ageism is a root cause of resistance to youth inclusion and co-leadership. It reinforces power imbalances by privileging older individuals in key decision-making spaces (such as peace processes and governance structures), thereby limiting youth access to influence, resources, recognition, and protection in peace and security work. The YPS agenda actively seeks to challenge and transform this imbalance by confronting age-based biases and creating space for youth co-leadership and positive agency.

Resources

• Global Coalition on Youth, Peace and Security. (2022). Implementing the youth, peace and security agenda at country-level: A guide for public officials. Office of the UN Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. https://cnxus.org/resource/implementing-yps-agenda-at-country-level-guide-for-public-officials/ 

The capacity of young people to act autonomously, make informed choices, and exercise influence to shape their own lives and effect change within their communities and society.

This capacity includes the freedom to initiate actions, engage, or disengage from processes. Youth agency is exercised with an emerging awareness of the structural barriers, societal norms, stereotypes (for example, youth lack knowledge), power imbalances (for example, ageism), and protection risks (for example, in shrinking civic spaces) that may limit their decisions. Fostering and valuing youth agency requires the creation of enabling environments that provide necessary knowledge, address structural exclusions, and recognize young people as capable and equal partners.

Scholars like Philippe Ariès highlighted that notions of childhood and adolescence change historically and socially, opening space for recognizing youth as capable of action rather than mere dependents. Brazilian pedagogue Paulo Freire argued that learners, including youth, should be empowered to question and transform the social conditions affecting them, making youth agency central to education and social change.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

Understanding and recognizing youth agency is a prerequisite for the implementation of the YPS agenda, particularly underpinning youth-adults collaborations. Fostering youth agency requires intentionally creating enabling environments where young people are recognized as capable partners, having their own autonomy.

Related terms: Youth empowerment

Resources

•  DeJaeghere, J. G., McCleary, K. S., & Josić, J. (2016). Conceptualizing youth agency. In J. DeJaeghere, J. Josić, & K. McCleary (Eds.), Education and youth agency: Advancing responsible adolescent development (pp. 1–24). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33344-1_1

• United Nations System Staff College. (n.d.). Youth, Peace and Security primer. YPS Primer (ENG) ; YPS Primer (FR)

A coalition is an alliance of organisations, groups, or individuals joined together for collective action toward shared objectives. Coalitions navigate unique challenges such as balancing power dynamics, maintaining trust, and ensuring equitable participation, especially when governmental actors are involved. By bringing together diverse groups, coalitions work across dividing lines and contribute to reconciling differing viewpoints. 

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

Youth-led and youth-inclusive multistakeholder coalitions are vital to amplify youth voices, coordinate advocacy, and facilitate collaborative partnerships between youth stakeholders, governments, and donors on peace and security policies.  

Facilitation is key to navigating unique challenges such as balancing power dynamics, maintaining trust, and ensuring equitable participation when governmental actors are involved. Despite that, coalitions often struggle to secure funding from donors, investing in them should be prioritized given their impact on systemic change. Special attention should be given to youth-led organisations, which often have limited capacities to engage in coalitions as they are rarely funded as such, increasing the power imbalances in participation in these spaces.

Resources

• United Nations Population Fund (2022). My Body, My Life, My World Operational Guidance. Module 6 Youth, Peace and Security. https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/resource-pdf/UNFPA-MBMLMW-MOD6_EN.pdf 

• United Network of Young Peacebuilders and Search for Common Ground (2020) “Translating youth, peace & security policy into practice: A guide to building coalitions.” https://documents.sfcg.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Translating_Youth_Peace_and_Security_Policy_into_Practice_December_2020.pdf

Co-creation, in the context of the Youth, Peace, and Security (YPS) agenda, is a collaborative and power-sharing process where young people are recognized as expert partners in building peace. It involves them working jointly and equitably with other stakeholders—such as community leaders, policymakers, and organizations—through every stage of an initiative, from initial problem analysis and design to implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. This approach moves beyond simple consultation, where youth are merely asked for their opinion, to a model of joint ownership, shared decision-making, and mutual respect.

Resources: 

• Global Coalition on Youth, Peace and Security. (n.d.). YPS advisors handbook. Office of the UN Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. https://fba.se/media/kdyjwuvs/yps-advisers-handbook-english.pdf

• Wikberg Nilsson, Å. (2024). Young 2.0: advancing an inclusive framework for co-creating futures with youth. CoDesign, 20(2), 313–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2024.2358967 

It is a collaborative governance model aiming to address systemic power imbalances where youth and non-youth jointly design, implement, and evaluate policies, programs, or spaces related to young people’s lives. In co-management processes, youth are vested with authority and have genuine influence over decision-making.

The concept of co-management in the youth sector emerged especially in Europe, through organizations like the Council of Europe’s Youth Department´s work. Since the 1970s, it has used a co-management system to govern youth policy, where representatives of governments and youth organizations make decisions together. A second example is that of South Africa, where the National Youth Development Agency (NYDA) includes youth representatives in its governance structure alongside government officials. The Agency supports youth-adult partnerships at the community level, where young people co-manage development funds, entrepreneurship programs, and local youth centers.

Co-management can take different forms, but following the principle: “nothing about youth without youth", decisions that affect young people must be made with them, not for them.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

This principle and practice should be central in any effort to implement the YPS agenda, as it institutionalizes meaningful and consequential youth participation in peace and security decision-making spaces. 

Related terms: Youth participation.

Resources 

• Council of Europe. (n.d.). The Council of Europe's co-management system in the youth sector. https://www.coe.int/en/web/youth/co-management

• Global Coalition on Youth, Peace and Security. (2022). Implementing the youth, peace and security agenda at country-level: A guide for public officials. Office of the UN Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. https://cnxus.org/resource/implementing-yps-agenda-at-country-level-guide-for-public-officials/

• National Youth Development Agency. (n.d.). National Youth Development Agency — South Africa. https://www.nyda.gov.za/

It is an approach to youth policy that seeks to coordinate efforts across governmental policy areas to address the various needs of youth, recognizing that youth issues intersect with peace and security, education, employment, health, and social inclusion. It also refers to ensuring communication and collaboration between youth representatives and relevant policymakers across sectors or ministries. 

Organizations like the UN (Youth2030 Strategy), Major Group for Children and Youth, and the Council of Europe emphasize youth participation and multisectoral coordination, while the African Union Continental Framework on YPS included coordination under the Partnership pillar of UNSCR 2250 to ensure cross-sector coordination and whole of government and whole of society coordination as essential conditions.

Related terms: Policy coherence

Resources

• Council of Europe. (n.d.). Cross-sectoral approach to youth policy. https://www.coe.int/en/web/youth/cross-sectoral-youth-policy 

• Global Coalition on Youth, Peace and Security. (2022). Implementing the youth, peace and security agenda at country-level: A guide for public officials. Office of the UN Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. https://unoy.org/downloads/yps-guide-for-public-officials/ 

• Nico M. (2014), Life is cross-sectoral. Why wouldn’t youth policy be? Overview of existing information on cross-sectoral youth policy in Europe, Youth Partnership, Strasbourg.

Deliberative Technology is a specialized class of digital tools and algorithmic systems (often leveraging Artificial Intelligence and computational democracy) specifically designed to facilitate constructive, large-scale discussion, decision-making, and public consultation in complex or highly polarized environments. These digital platforms enable participants to anonymously/semi-anonymously contribute in their own words, respond to others’ perspectives, and generate visible patterns of convergence, divergence, and priority across the participating group.

Deliberative technologies represent a fundamental departure from conventional digital consultation tools (fixed, top-down surveys or consensus voting) in their treatment of participant voice and disagreement. This shift from passive respondent to active contributor allows for a more encouraging environment for youth to engage in the discourse. These platforms enable generating consensus-based signals that reflect deeper resonance and collective prioritization among those engaged. Key features include bridging algorithms that incentivize and identify common ground across diverse groups, allowing participants to listen at scale and break down stereotypes. The technology synthesizes public input to generate more representative and nuanced policy outcomes, thereby strengthening democratic resilience.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

Deliberative Technology significantly advances the YPS agenda, particularly by addressing the need for digital safety and structural barriers of polarization and power imbalances that prevent meaningful youth participation. It supports three principles of the YPS agenda:

• Participation: These tools/platforms create digital public squares where youth can engage at scale, overcoming geographic and structural barriers that limit access to traditional peace processes. These reinforce youth agency—the belief that they can make a positive difference in society. They transform youth from passive recipients of decisions into active contributors and co-creators.

• Protection: Delib-tech addresses the urgent need for safe digital spaces for civic participation. Deliberative platforms are designed as pro-social environments that utilise pseudonymity/anonymity, digital privacy, and moderation to shield activists/advocates/minorities from retaliation. By creating a protected ecosystem where youth from all diversities can debate sensitive policy issues, delib-tech ensures that young people’s digital agency does not come at the cost of their physical or psychological safety.

• Prevention: By identifying and incentivizing common ground, Deliberative Technology acts as an antidote to digital polarization—a major driver of conflict and instability. It helps strengthen social cohesion by enabling youth to manage differences constructively online.

Deliberative Technology provides a crucial digital mechanism for capturing data necessary to monitor and evaluate YPS National Action Plans (NAPs). Yet, deliberative technology is not a substitute for relational and political processes but more as a complement. 

Resources

• Council on Tech and Social Cohesion. (n.d.). Blueprint for prosocial tech design governance. https://techandsocialcohesion.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Blueprint-on-Prosocial-Tech-Design-Governance-May-2025.pdf 

• Introductory course on deliberative tech and AI [Free online course]. (n.d.). https://sites.google.com/sfcg.org/analyticsforpeacebuilders/deliberative-technology?authuser=0&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=64a90b9d-686a-454c-94b8-e6e1fa807618 

• Toda Peace Institute. (2024). Deliberative technology: Designing AI and computational democracy for peacebuilding in highly-polarized contexts (Report No. 201). Toda Peace Institute. https://toda.org/policy-briefs-and-resources/policy-briefs/report-201-full-text.html 

• Toda Peace Institute. (2025). The new fragility: Peacebuilding meets digital democracy (Global Outlook). Toda Peace Institute. https://toda.org/global-outlook/2025/the-new-fragility-peacebuilding-meets-digital-democracy.html 

• Upadhyay, M. (2026). Beyond symbolic participation: Deliberative technology for youth-inclusive policy development and governance. YPS Monitor. https://www.ypsmonitor.com/research 

It is defined as the broader nexus and strategic intersection between the field of peacebuilding and digital technologies. It is the intentional application of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and digital tools, including social media, AI, data analytics, and mobile platforms, to achieve peacebuilding goals.

This strategic nexus operates through three main interfaces:

1. Enabling Work: Utilizing "normal" digital tools (for example, email, Zoom) for communication, coordination, and network building.

2. Developing Tools (PeaceTech): Creating specific technology with the explicit goal of analyzing conflict, facilitating dialogue, protecting civilians, or other peacebuilding objectives.

3. Responding to Threats: Applying peacebuilding expertise and processes to counter new digital threats, such as state-sponsored disinformation, algorithmic extremism, and hate speech that undermine democracy and social cohesion.

Ultimately, Digital Peacebuilding contributes to democratic deliberation, violence prevention, social cohesion, civic engagement, and improved human security.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

Digital peacebuilding is crucial to operationalizing the Youth, Peace and Security (YPS) agenda because it offers scale and accessibility, enabling youth to overcome physical barriers and directly engage in peace and security efforts. It supports all five pillars of the YPS agenda:

• Participation: Provides youth with platforms for meaningful engagement (for example, Digital Inclusion in Peace Processes and Facilitating Intergroup Digital Dialogue). It allows youth voices and data to inform international decision-making at a scale impossible with analog methods.

• Protection: Directly addresses digital security threats faced by young peacebuilders, such as surveillance, doxing, and online harassment. It includes implementing tools for Digital Civilian Protection and Digital Public Safety.

• Prevention: Supports youth-led initiatives for Digital Early Warning of Violence and Dangerous Speech and facilitates Digital Responses to Violent Extremism and Terror by countering harmful narratives and disinformation.

• Partnerships: Fosters collaboration and resource mobilization between youth, peacebuilding NGOs (like Build Up, Search for Common Ground, and PeaceTech Lab), and the tech industry through initiatives like hackathons and PeaceTech startups.

• Disengagement and Reintegration: Provides essential tools for Digital Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) and remote community assessments, helping to track the success and impact of reintegration programs and maintain contact with remote populations.

Resources

• Toda Peace Institute. (2020). Digital peacebuilding: How technology can build peace and transform conflict (Policy Brief No. 93). Toda Peace Institute. https://toda.org/assets/files/resources/policy-briefs/t-pb-93_lisa-schirch.pdf 

• United Nations Office of the Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. (2021). If I disappear: Global report on protecting young activists. United Nations. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4014684?ln=en&v=pdf 

• United Nations Population Fund & UN Peacebuilding Support Office. (2018). The missing peace: Independent progress study on youth, peace and security. UNFPA & UN PBSO. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3846611?v=pdf 

It is a fundamental ethical principle and an approach that encourages conflict sensitivity in any kind of intervention, especially in peacebuilding ones. It requires awareness of, and active efforts to avoid, the negative consequences that interventions may inadvertently create. 

The Do No Harm (DNH) approach originated in the 1990s from the work of Mary B. Anderson and the organization now known as CDA Collaborative Learning Projects (formerly the Collaborative for Development Action). It resulted from the realisation that aid was sometimes unintentionally fuelling conflict. 

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

In the YPS context, this includes mitigating risks, preventing unintended harm to young people and their communities, and strengthening their capacities for resilience. It also means ensuring that efforts to engage and support young people do not unintentionally reinforce the very dynamics that marginalize, endanger, or stigmatize them. 

A “Do no harm” approach should guide any initiative, including a youth lens to conflict analysis, and in connection to protection measures. 

Resources

• Subgroup on Youth Participation in Peacebuilding of the UN Interagency Network on Youth Development. (2014). Guiding principles on young people's participation in peacebuilding. United Nations. https://www.undp.org/publications/guiding-principles-young-peoples-participation-peacebuilding 

• UNICEF, Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict, & Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation. (2022). Financing for young people in peacebuilding: An overview. UNICEF. https://www.unaoc.org/resource/financing-for-young-people-in-peacebuilding-an-overview/ 

• United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. (2021). Youth, peace and security: A programming handbook. United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/sites/www.un.org.peacebuilding/files/documents/yps_programming_handbook.pdf 

The assumption that members of a particular group share a core, uniform identity. 

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

In a YPS context, it is the harmful practice of viewing a young person as representing the perspectives and experiences of all young people, despite the heterogeneity of the youth demographic.

Related terms: ageism

Resources

• United Network of Young Peacebuilders. (2024). Guide on inclusive youth consultations. UNOY Peacebuilders. https://unoy.org/downloads/guide-on-inclusive-consultations/ 

A process often externally driven, by which young people are equipped with the information, skills, resources, funding, decision-making power, and opportunities to take an active and influential role in their personal growth and the development of their communities. It is grounded in strengthening their self-awareness (Power Within), ability to take collective action (Power With), and capacity to initiate change (Power To).

Critique & Context (YPS): While widely used, the term "Youth Empowerment" is increasingly critiqued for its inherent deficit-based framing and colonial legacies. It incorrectly implies that young people do not already possess the knowledge and agency for changemaking, suggesting a third party must transfer or bestow power upon them. This creates a power hierarchy (one side holds power, one receives it) that belittles youth agency and reinforces the stereotype of young people as passive recipients rather than equally capable stakeholders. For these reasons, many organizations prefer the term Youth Support.

Key Resources (for Contextual Understanding):

• United Nations Population Fund. (n.d.). Adolescent and youth empowerment program. UNFPA. https://www.google.com/search?q=https://www.unfpa.org/adolescent-and-youth-empowerment 

• World Bank. (n.d.). The power of three: Youth, power, and agency. World Bank. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/youth-engagement/power-three-youth-power-and-agency 

Youth Support (Preferred Term in YPS)

A process and relational approach focused on intentionally mitigating structural, social, cultural, economic, and political barriers that constrain young people’s ability to realize their full potential and exercise their existing power meaningfully. It involves providing the necessary information, skills, resources, funding, decision-making power, and opportunities that enable young people to take an active and influential role in their personal growth and the development of their communities.

Context & Rationale (YPS): Youth Support replaces the problematic "empowerment" term by affirming that young people already possess inherent agency and power. The goal of external actors is therefore not to give power, but to support the youth's use of their Power Within (self-belief, skills, agency), their Power With (ability to take collective action), and their Power To (capacity to initiate change) by removing the external obstacles that limit their action. Support is understood as both internal (fostering self-belief) and external (providing supportive environments, resources, and recognition).

Key Resources (for Rationale and Application):

• Altiok, A., & Grizelj, I. (2019). We are here: An integrated approach to youth-inclusive peace processes. United Network of Young Peacebuilders, UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs, & Search for Common Ground. https://unoy.org/downloads/we-are-here-an-integrated-approach-to-youth-inclusive-peace-processes/ 

• Search Institute. (n.d.). Developmental assets framework. https://www.search-institute.org/our-research/development-assets/developmental-assets-framework/ 

• Subgroup on Youth Participation in Peacebuilding of the UN Interagency Network on Youth Development. (2014). Guiding principles on young people's participation in peacebuilding. United Nations. https://documents.sfcg.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Guiding-Principles_EN.pdf 

• United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. (2021). Youth, peace and security: A programming handbook. United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/sites/www.un.org.peacebuilding/files/documents/yps_programming_handbook.pdf 

• Search for Common Ground & Mercy Corps. (2021). Youth, peace and security resource guide. Mercy Corps. https://www.mercycorps.org/sites/default/files/2021-02/youth-peace-and-security-resource-guide.pdf 

Heterogeneity in the YPS context describes the recognition that young people are a diverse group, encompassing a wide range of identities, backgrounds, perspectives, and experiences. This approach acknowledges and values the differences among youth, understanding that their roles, needs, and contributions to peace and security are shaped by intersecting factors, including but not limited to age, gender, socioeconomic background, ethnicity, and context, etc.

Evolution of the Terms in the YPS Space

• Early Approaches (Homogeneity): Historically, youth in peacebuilding and security discourse were often viewed through a homogeneous lens. Early policy and programming tended to treat youth as a "problem group"—either as potential perpetrators of violence (mostly young men) or as passive victims (mostly young women)—without accounting for the diversity within youth populations. This risk-based or deficit-oriented framing was reflected in security and development policies that focused on youth as a threat to stability, rather than as stakeholders in peace processes.

• Paradigm Shift (Recognizing Heterogeneity): The adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2250 (2015) marked a turning point, formally recognizing youth as partners in peace and security and calling for their meaningful participation at all levels. Subsequent resolutions (UNSCR 2419, 2535) and policy documents have increasingly emphasized the heterogeneity of youth, urging stakeholders to engage young people from diverse backgrounds and to address barriers to their participation.

• Academic literature and field research have further reinforced this shift, highlighting the varied experiences of youth in conflict and post-conflict settings. Case studies demonstrate that youth are affected differently by conflict based on gender, socioeconomic status, geographic location, and other factors. The YPS agenda now recognizes that effective peacebuilding requires intersectional, youth-centered, and context-specific approaches.

• While the YPS Agenda has evolved to recognize the diversity of youth experiences and avoid framing young people as a homogeneous group, implicit (and sometimes explicit) assumptions of youth uniformity and limited representativeness still persist across policy and practice.

Critique of Homogeneity: Treating youth as a homogeneous group in the YPS agenda carries significant risks:

• Marginalization of Subgroups: Homogeneous approaches can marginalize or exclude youth who do not fit dominant narratives, such as young women, ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+ youth, or those with disabilities.

• Ineffective Interventions: Programs designed for a "generic" youth population may fail to address the specific needs and capacities of different youth groups, leading to ineffective or even harmful outcomes.

• Reinforcement of Stereotypes: Viewing youth as a single category can reinforce stereotypes (e.g., youth as "victims" or "perpetrators"), limiting their agency and the recognition of their diverse roles as peacebuilders, leaders, and innovators.

• Missed Opportunities for Peacebuilding: Ignoring youth diversity means missing out on the unique perspectives, skills, and solutions that different youth bring to peace and security efforts.

• Perpetuation of Inequality: Homogeneous approaches can perpetuate existing power imbalances and inequalities within youth populations and between youth and other groups.

The field is therefore moving toward more inclusive, participatory, intergenerational, and intersectional models that recognize and harness the heterogeneity of youth for more effective and sustainable peacebuilding.

Resources

• Altiok, A., Kearsley, L. (2021). Journal of Youth, Peace & Security (Issue 1). UNOY Peacebuilders. https://unoy.org/downloads/journal-of-youth-peace-security/

• Kern, L. (2025). Youth participation in peacebuilding through an intersectional lens: Cohort 3 of the 2025 Peacebuilding Fund Thematic Review on Youth, Peace and Security [Research brief]. United Nations University Centre for Policy Research. https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/sites/www.un.org.peacebuilding/files/documents/thematic_review_cohort_3_brief_web.pdf

• African Union Peace and Security Department. (2020). A study on the roles and contributions of youth to peace and security in Africa. Peace and Security Council of the African Union. https://www.peaceau.org/uploads/a-study-on-the-roles-and-contributions-of-youth-to-peace-and-security-in-africa-17-sept-2020.pdf

• Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO), Centre on Gender, Peace and Security. (2020). PRIO's youth & peacebuilding research. https://gps.prio.org/news/1235

• United States Institute of Peace. (2023). Youth-centered peacebuilding framework: Rethinking youth inclusion through a youth-powered approach (ISBN 978-1-60127-913-2). USIP Press. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385740570_Youth-Centered_Peacebuilding_Framework

• Unfried, K., & Kis-Katos, K. (2023). The heterogeneous effects of conflict on education: A spatial analysis in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Peace Research, 60(6), 968–984. https://doi.org/10.1177/00223433221099557

• Chandra, A., Lara-Cinisomo, S., Jaycox, L. H., Tanielian, T., Burns, R. M., Ruder, T., & Han, B. (2016). The impact of armed conflict on adolescent transitions: A systematic review of quantitative research on age of sexual debut, first marriage and first birth in young women under the age of 20 years. BMC Public Health, 16, 225. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-2868-5

• Frounfelker, R. L., Islam, N., Falcone, J., Farrar, J., Ra, C., Antonaccio, C., Enelamah, N., & Betancourt, T. S. (2019). Living through war: Mental health of children and youth in conflict-affected areas. International Review of the Red Cross, 101(911), 481–506. https://international-review.icrc.org/articles/living-through-war-mental-health-children-and-youth-conflict-affected-areas

The "Idle Hands" Theory in peacebuilding and development contexts posits that unemployment and lack of productive activities among young people directly correlate with their propensity to engage in violence and conflict. The theory suggests that providing employment opportunities, vocational training, or other forms of economic engagement will inherently reduce youth participation in violent activities by keeping them occupied and giving them economic incentives to avoid conflict. 

Critique and the Evolution and Roots in Youth Bulge Theory

The "Idle Hands" Theory emerged as a policy response to demographic concerns identified in Youth Bulge Theory, which suggests that societies with a high proportion of young people (typically defined as 16-25 or 16-30 years old) face increased risks of political instability and violence. Youth bulge theory asserts that African societies whose share of youth is above 20% of the total population are more likely to experience violent conflict, as younger populations face serious socio-economic challenges that make them more susceptible to engaging in violence. This phenomenon is also portrayed in common proverbs such as ”Idle hands/minds are the devil's workshop”. 

The "Idle Hands" Theory evolved as a seemingly logical extension of this demographic analysis, proposing that if unemployment and lack of opportunities drive youth toward violence, then providing employment and keeping young people occupied would naturally reduce conflict participation.

Looking forward

However, this represents a widely debunked theory that peacebuilding programs should focus on providing employment to young people to prevent them from engaging in violence. This transactional approach oversimplifies the complex motivations for youth participation in conflict and fails to address core grievances that include socio-cultural, political, economic, digital, gendered, mental health and psychosocial, physical, and legal factors.

The theory's reductionist framework ignores the multidimensional nature of conflict drivers and treats youth as passive actors whose behavior can be simply redirected through economic incentives, rather than addressing the deeper structural inequalities and grievances that actually motivate participation in violence. In YPS contexts, when designing YPS programming or national strategies, policies, and plans, it becomes critical to understand these concepts. 

Resources: 

• Beehner, L. (2007). The effects of "youth bulge" on civil conflicts. Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/effects-youth-bulge-civil-conflicts

• Yingi, E. (2023). Youth bulge as a peacebuilding opportunity for Africa: The case of Zimbabwe's youth empowerment programmes. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 60(1), 442–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/00219096231173392

The idea that diverse groups across a broad spectrum of society should have a say in processes that affect them, with a specific focus on marginalised groups. This value is increasingly recognised in international policies and legal frameworks. While participation and representation are key aspects of inclusion, efforts to ensure respect for human rights and strengthen the capacity of marginalized communities may be as important for meaningful inclusion as inviting them to the table.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?
Inclusivity is a core operating principle of the Youth, Peace and Security (YPS) agenda, moving the focus from treating youth as a monolith to recognizing their diverse intersectional identities.

• Beyond Tokenism: Meaningful inclusion in the YPS context means moving away from "tick-the-box" exercises or inviting youth as an "add-on" to existing structures. It demands a paradigm shift toward partnering with young people from the outset of any peace or policy process.

• Recognizing Diversity: A YPS approach to inclusivity recognizes that "youth" is not a homogenous category. It intentionally creates space for young women, youth with disabilities, LGBTQIA+ youth, displaced populations, and those in remote or rural areas to ensure their unique security needs and perspectives shape the agenda.

• Addressing the "Violence of Exclusion": Inclusivity is the direct antidote to the Violence of Exclusion. By institutionalizing youth participation in formal governance and peace negotiations, inclusivity helps rebuild the reciprocal trust between young people and the state, which is vital for preventing conflict recurrence.

• Legitimacy and Sustainability: Research indicates that the inclusion of diverse civil society actors, particularly youth and women, significantly increases the legitimacy and long-term sustainability of peace agreements.

Related terms: Heterogenous; Intersectionality; Gender-transformative approach

Resources

• Global Coalition on Youth, Peace, and Security (2022) “Implementing the Youth, Peace and Security Agenda at Country-level: A Guide for Public Officials”. New York: Office of the UN Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth.

• Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation (2021) “Realising Inclusivity: The role of the United Nations in promoting inclusion at the country level”.

• UNFPA-UN/PBSO: The Missing Peace: Independent Progress Study on Youth, Peace and Security (2018) (Chapter 3 explicitly addresses the violence of exclusion and the imperative of inclusion). https://www.youth4peace.info/system/files/2018-10/youth-web-english.pdf

• UNOY, DPPA, SFCG: We Are Here: An integrated approach to youth-inclusive peace processes (2019) (Provides a framework for inclusive engagement across three layers). https://www.youth4peace.info/node/405

• Office of the Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth: If I Disappear: Global Report on Protecting Young People in Civic Space (2021) (Discusses the intersectional barriers to inclusion for marginalized youth groups). https://www.un.org/youthenvoy/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/If-I-Disappear_Global-Report-on-Protecting-Young-People-in-Civic-Space.pdf 

Innovative approaches to peacebuilding are youth co-led, context-sensitive strategies that move beyond traditional top-down models to address root causes of conflict in creative, adaptive, and sustainable ways. They prioritize local ownership, political agency, and the unique knowledge and capacity of young people as change-makers.

Innovation in this context is defined not just by the use of new technology, but by methods that shift the core process and narrative, such as:

• Participatory Methodologies: Engaging youth as analysts and co-designers through action research, design thinking, and co-creation methods.

• Creative Expression: Using digital activism, social media campaigns, visual arts, sports, and humor to challenge stereotypes and channel frustrations constructively.

• Holistic Inclusion: Applying intersectional approaches that intentionally include marginalized groups (LGBTQI+ activists, former child soldiers) previously excluded from peace efforts.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

Innovative approaches are essential to the successful operationalization of the YPS Agenda because they directly confront the structural barriers (like ageism and exclusion) that limit youth's impact. Innovative approaches advance following four pillars of the YPS agenda:

• Participation: They create youth-friendly, safe, and inclusive mechanisms—such as digital civic platforms, advisory councils, and youth quotas—to enable meaningful, youth-led engagement in social and political processes.

• Prevention: By focusing on socio-economic opportunity, quality education, and inclusive development, they address root causes of conflict (such as unemployment and marginalization) that can fuel violence. Methods like participatory action research enable youth to identify and analyze these risks themselves.

• Partnerships: They shift the narrative from viewing youth as a “threat to contain” to “allies for good,” fostering genuine collaboration, shared knowledge (“Power With”), and intergenerational trust between youth leaders, policymakers, and local actors.

• Protection: They integrate community-based protection mechanisms (such as hotlines and digital violence mapping) into youth-led projects to counter stigmatization and safeguard youth peacebuilders.

Resources 

• Interpeace. (n.d.). Youth-centred approaches to peacebuilding. Interpeace. https://www.interpeace.org/youth-peace-and-security/

• United Nations Institute for Training and Research. (n.d.). Youth-led peace and reconciliation in Colombia: A transformational approach. UNITAR. https://unitar.org/youth-led-peace-and-reconciliation-colombia-transformational-approach

• United States Institute of Peace. (2023). Youth-centered peacebuilding framework. USIP. https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/2023-05/youth-centered-peacebuilding-framework.pdf

It is a two- or multiway communication method grounded in active listening and mutual learning practices between members of different generations, which is meaningful for all parties. The overarching objective of an intergenerational dialogue includes seeking mutual understanding of generational perspectives and differences, breaking stereotypes and discrimination structures based on age, building trust and empathy across generations, and bridging potential gaps and inequalities between generations. Intergenerational dialogue can also aim to explore solutions to jointly experienced challenges, problems, and/or conflicts and, if feasible and desirable, result in the identification or agreement of (collective) action that benefits both older and younger generations respectively

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

Dialogue, in YPS, is a process through which one humanizes the other, builds trust, and creates the conditions for intergenerational partnerships that lead to collaborative action. In the context of YPS, intergenerational dialogue is not limited to exchanges between youth and older adults; it also includes dialogue between older youth and younger youth (adolescents). This acknowledges diversity within the youth cohort and the importance of fostering understanding, mentorship, collaboration, and shared leadership across age groups. Such youth-to-youth dialogue is a recognized approach in YPS programming and creates a cascade of knowledge, leadership development, and mutual empowerment.

In brief, “Intra-generational dialogue” refers to dialogue within the same generational cohort.  In the YPS context, this includes:

• Dialogue among young people (for example, older youth with younger youth) which builds solidarity, mutual understanding, and collective agency within the youth generation;

• Dialogue among older generations, which can include discussions about their responsibilities to younger generations, the transfer of knowledge, and the shaping of intergenerational relationships.

Both inter- and intra-generational dialogues are essential and complementary. Inter-generational dialogue bridges age-based divides and supports shared vision, while intra-generational dialogue strengthens unity, leadership, and agency within a generation, ensuring that all voices are prepared and empowered to participate meaningfully in broader societal dialogues.

Resources

• Council of Europe. (n.d.). Intergenerational dialogue. Council of Europe. https://pjp-eu.coe.int/en/web/youth-partnership/intergenerational-dialogue#:~:text=as%20opportunities%2C%20there%20must,all%20groups%20can%20benefit

• International Center for Research on Women. (2023). The intergenerational approach to development: Bridging the generation gap. ICRW. https://www.icrw.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/The-Intergenerational-Approach-to-Development-Bridging-the-Generation-Gap.pdf#:~:text=ICRW%20conducted%20a%20literature,relationships%20in%20fostering%20healthy

• Interpeace. (2025). Intergenerational dialogue: A critical approach to foster reconciliation and resilience. Interpeace. https://www.interpeace.org/2025/06/intergenerational-dialogue-a-critical-approach-to-foster-reconciliation-and-resilience/#:~:text=Intergenerational%20dialogue%20has%20been,and%20fostering%20a%20shared

• Leslie. (2025). Beyond the age divide: How intergenerational dialogue transforms communities. Medium. https://medium.com/perspective-matters/beyond-the-age-divide-how-intergenerational-dialogue-transforms-communities-18ea1e4c3120

• Swedish Dialogue Institute for the Middle East and North Africa & Folke Bernadotte Academy. (2023). Connecting generations: A guidance note on inclusive intergenerational dialogue. Swedish Dialogue Institute & Folke Bernadotte Academy. https://www.swedenabroad.se/globalassets/ambassader/dialogue-institute/documents/guidance-note-on-intergenerational-dialogue.pdf#:~:text=Intergenerational%20dialogue%2C%20as%20defined,in%20active%20listening%20and

• Young Americas Business Trust & Organization of American States. (n.d.). Guide to organize youth dialogues. YABT & OAS. https://yabt.net/download/Guide_organize_Youth_Dialogues.pdf#:~:text=These%20Dialogues%20and%20other,interest%20to%20youth%20and

Intergenerational Partnerships and Action are collaborative relationships between individuals or groups from different age cohorts, especially youth and older generations, who work together as equal partners to co-design, implement, and evaluate concrete initiatives addressing peace, security, and social challenges. These partnerships are distinctly action-oriented, moving beyond dialogue to shared decision-making and joint responsibility for tangible outcomes. While intergenerational dialogue is a foundational component that facilitates mutual understanding and the exchange of perspectives, true partnership is marked by collective action and measurable impact.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

Importantly, in the YPS context, intergenerational partnerships are critical for overcoming intergenerational distrust—a common barrier rooted in stereotypes, power imbalances, and historical divisions. By engaging in collaborative action, participants not only address shared challenges but also build mutual respect, empathy, and trust across generations. Effective intergenerational partnerships intentionally address and seek to redress power imbalances, ensuring all generations have equitable influence, leadership opportunities, and access to resources throughout the process.

Resources

• Restless Development. (2021). Intergenerational collaboration: Addressing power and building trust. Restless Development.

• United Network of Young Peacebuilders. (n.d.). Intergenerational partnerships for youth, peace and security: Guidelines and promising practices. UNOY Peacebuilders. https://unoy.org/intergenerational-partnerships/

An analytical and programmatic framework that systematically considers how multiple and overlapping social identities and characteristics - including but not limited to age, gender, race, class, ability, and sexual orientation - interact to create experiences of power, privilege, and/or oppression. An intersectional approach examines how different forms of discrimination or systems of power intersect. 

Background: The concept comes from Kimberlé Crenshaw, a Black feminist legal scholar, who coined the term intersectionality in 1989. She used it to explain how Black women often face overlapping forms of discrimination — for example, sexism and racism — that cannot be fully understood by looking at either one alone.

Looking forward: An intersectional approach is relevant for the YPS agenda as it helps understand and address overlapping systemic barriers that both create and perpetuate privilege and oppression for youth. When designing public policies and related programming, it is necessary to consider the multiple kinds of marginalisation experienced by young people and adapt approaches accordingly. The “If I Disappear" Report identifies eight types of barriers and threats based on a global survey: Socio-Cultural, Political, Economic and Financial, Legal, Digital, Gendered, Mental Health and Psychosocial, and Physical. Taking an intersectional approach, then, it is critical to analyse how power dynamics associated with age, class, ethnicity, religion, legal status, gender, sexuality, and ability (mental and physical) intersect with one another, and consider how political affiliation and/or digital connectivity may further exacerbate experiences of privilege or oppression. 

Resources:

• Council of Europe. (2021). Applying intersectionality in the youth field: In search of a cooperative approach among youth organisations and other stakeholders (Concept note). Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/cm-intersectionality-concept-note-2021/1680a18956

• SALTO-YOUTH. (n.d.). Toolkit on intersectional mainstreaming: A resource for organizations, volunteers and allies. https://www.salto-youth.net/tools/toolbox/tool/toolkit-on-intersectional-mainstreaming-a-resource-for-organizations-volunteers-and-allies.2900

• Sallah, M., Ogunnusi, M., & Kennedy, R. (2018). Intersectionality and resistance in youth work: Young people, peace and global "development" in a racialized world. In P. Alldred, F. Cullen, K. Edwards, & D. Fusco (Eds.), Intersectionality and resistance in youth work: Young people, peace and global "development" in a racialized world (pp. 140–153). SAGE.

• United Nations Office of the Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. (2021). If I disappear: Global report on protecting young people in civic space. United Nations.

• United Network of Young Peacebuilders. (2024). Wellbeing-peacebuilding intersectionality [Advocacy brief]. UNOY Peacebuilders. https://unoy.org/downloads/wellbeing-peacebuilding-intersectionality-advocacy-brief/

It refers to the killing of young people, often by adults, and can describe either individual acts or broader social and political patterns that lead to the systematic destruction of youth. 

Background: This term was coined by José Manuel Valenzuela Arce, researcher at Colegio de la Frontera Norte (COLEF) México to conceptualize these deaths as a crime with state responsibility. In recent years, this concept has helped map systematic violence against Latin American youth as well as resistance strategies for the defense of the lives of young people. 

Looking forward: Actions to address the root causes of juvenicide, such as cultural misperceptions and systems of exclusion and cultures of violence, together with memory and justice, should be central to the YPS agenda. 

Resources:

• Bonvillani, A. (2022). Juvenicidio: Un concepto parido por el dolor — Reflexiones desde una revisión bibliográfica. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, Niñez y Juventud, 20(3), 417–442. https://revistaumanizales.cinde.org.co/rlcsnj/index.php/Revista-Latinoamericana/article/view/5548

• United Nations Office of the Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. (2021). If I disappear: Global report on protecting young people in civic space. United Nations. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4014684?v=pdf

• Valenzuela Arce, J. M. (Coord.). (2019). Juvenicidio: Violencia y vulnerabilidad en América Latina. NED Ediciones / El Colegio de la Frontera Norte. https://nedediciones.com/wp-content/uploads/H-Juvenicidio.pdf

Localisation is the process of adapting a global or national framework, such as the YPS agenda, to a specific national, sub-national, or local context. It involves taking into consideration the local environment, including cultural practices, existing policy frameworks, and specific needs of the community, to ensure that implementation efforts are relevant and effective. 

Localisation is fundamental to the YPS agenda because it ensures that global principles and resolutions, such as UNSCR 2250, are translated into tangible and context-specific actions on the ground. It empowers local youth actors and communities to take ownership of peacebuilding efforts, building on their own capacities and addressing their unique challenges. For YPS, localization means shifting power, resources, and decision-making to young peacebuilders at the grassroots level within their own communities. 

Resources: 

• Altiok, A., & Grizelj, I. (2019). We are here: An integrated approach to youth-inclusive peace processes. United Network of Young Peacebuilders, UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs, & Search for Common Ground. https://www.youth4peace.info/book-page/global-policy-paper-we-are-here-integrated-approach-youth-inclusive-peace-processes

• Global Coalition on Youth, Peace and Security. (2022). Implementing the youth, peace and security agenda at country-level: A guide for public officials. Office of the UN Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. https://unoy.org/downloads/yps-guide-for-public-officials/

An inclusive, intentional, and mutually respectful partnership between youth and non-youth actors, where power is shared, and young people’s ideas, perspectives, skills, and strengths are actively sought and integrated into all stages of decision-making. It moves beyond symbolic or tokenistic representation by ensuring that youth contributions are valued, resourced, and have tangible influence on outcomes. 

The nature of young people's participation depends on their level of knowledge, agency, and ability to influence decisions or processes. Thus, the intentional and empowered involvement aspect requires access to information and resources, preparation, protection, accountability, and follow-up, so that youth can collaborate from a place of informed agency and in a safe and welcoming environment.

In the YPS context, MYP challenges age-based power imbalances by positioning youth not as passive beneficiaries but as co-creators of peace and security. MYP must be gender-sensitive and responsive to diverse identities and lived experiences, ensuring that all youth, including those most marginalized, can shape peacebuilding processes meaningfully.

Resources: 

• United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. (2021). Youth, peace and security: A programming handbook. United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/sites/www.un.org.peacebuilding/files/documents/yps_programming_handbook.pdf

• United Nations System Staff College. (n.d.). Youth, peace and security primer. https://www.unssc.org/courses/youth-peace-and-security-primer-1

Meaningful Youth Engagement (MYE) is a deliberate, inclusive, sustained, and rights-based process through which stakeholders and institutions proactively create and maintain the enabling environments necessary for young people to contribute their knowledge, perspectives, and solutions to decision-making.

While often used interchangeably with Meaningful Youth Participation (MYP), engagement is the broader concept, encompassing the ongoing interaction and relationship-building required to establish the conditions for participation. MYP emphasizes the active state of youth doing, deciding, and influencing, whereas MYE is the systemic responsibility of non-youth stakeholders to establish the conditions—such as a formal institutional mandate, earmarked resourcing, and designated accessible spaces—for that participation to occur.

MYE must adhere to the following core principles to ensure its integrity and impact:

• Rights-Based and Safe: Ensuring young people are informed of their rights and protected from threats or reprisals, including establishing measures like referral systems.

• Transparent and Accessible: Providing timely, clear, and age-appropriate information, and ensuring processes are accessible to all diverse groups of young people (e.g., those with disabilities).

• Voluntary: Ensuring young people are not coerced into action and have the right to cease involvement at any stage.

• Reciprocal Accountability: Stakeholders must transparently report on how youth inputs were used, while young people are accountable for consulting with wider youth constituencies.

• Diversity and Inclusion: Ensuring non-discrimination and actively seeking the inclusion of diverse voices across all identity characteristics (including race, gender, disability, and migrant status).

• Youth as Partners: Recognizing and treating young people as equal partners whose engagement is valued, facilitated, and supported.

Resource:

• Youth Matters. (n.d.). Positive youth development (PYD) framework. http://youthmattersfy.org/positive-youth-development-pyd-framework.html

Mental health refers to a person’s emotional, psychological, and social well-being, encompassing how they handle stress, build relationships, and contribute to their communities. It is shaped by the environments in which young people live — including family, peers, school, online spaces, culture, and broader social and political conditions — and it improves when young people feel safe, included, valued, and supported.

Research has shown that participation has a positive impact on young people's mental health (Donoholes-Bales, et al, 2025). However, engagement can also have a negative impact in the context of violent or polarised contexts. This is why mental health is foundational to youth engagement in peacebuilding processes. Challenges like trauma, anxiety, or depression can limit young people’s ability to participate in peacebuilding or address conflicts constructively. A key component of the YPS agenda is ensuring that youth have access to mental health support. By prioritizing mental health support and incorporating mindfulness practices, initiatives can strengthen youth agency; reduce violence by addressing root causes like trauma or emotional reactivity; and promote inclusive peace by fostering empathy and collaboration across identities or conflicts.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

Adequate and tailored approaches to age and cognitive/emotional development are key in the context of youth and peace work. The YPS agenda encourages youth participation, yet this should be done in safe and inclusive spaces. For young adults, a focus on agency, leadership, coping strategies, and community engagement is key.

• Relevance and Role in Advancing the YPS Agenda: Mental Health and Psychosocial Support (MHPSS) is foundational to the success of the YPS Agenda because well-being is a necessary precondition for meaningful civic engagement and peace leadership.

• Prerequisite for Agency and Leadership: MHPSS is not merely an "add-on" or a treatment for trauma; it is explicitly framed as a prerequisite for genuine civic engagement and the foundation of agency. Safety is the "bridge" that allows youth confidence to translate into leadership and action. The ultimate result of prioritizing MHPSS is that: "When youth feel included, they feel safe. When youth feel safe, they trust. When they trust, they speak. When they speak, they lead".

• Addressing Root Causes: By prioritizing MHPSS, YPS initiatives strengthen youth agency and reduce violence by addressing root causes like chronic stress, trauma, and emotional reactivity that stem from the Violence of Exclusion.

• Advancing Protection: The integration of MHPSS and Safeguarding standards (through measures like safety ambassadors and positive parenting sessions) ensures that spaces for youth engagement are both physically and psychologically safe, which is a core demand of the YPS Protection pillar.

• Programmatic Focus: For young adults (adolescents 15-18 years), MHPSS models focus on building skills, confidence, and leadership, helping them to cope with stress and mediate local disputes, ensuring their activism continues beyond funding cycles.

Resources

• Council of Europe. (2023). Guide on trauma-informed youth work [English translation]. Council of Europe. https://www.coe.int/en/web/kyiv/-/guide-on-trauma-informed-youth-work-is-translated-in-the-english-language

• Donohoe-Bales, A., et al. (2025). [Article on participation and youth mental health]. Child and Adolescent Mental Health. https://acamh.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/camh.70027

• International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. (2014). Psychosocial support for youth in post-conflict situations: A trainer's handbook. IFRC. https://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/pdf/1679_rcy_youth_manual_t2.pdf

• Miir, U. (n.d.). The intersection of well-being and peacebuilding: An advocacy brief. https://unoy.org/downloads/wellbeing-peacebuilding-intersectionality-advocacy-brief/

• World Health Organization. (n.d.). Mental health [Fact sheet]. WHO. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-strengthening-our-response

A policy document in which a government articulates priorities and actions that it will adopt to support the implementation of international, regional, or national obligations and commitments with regard to a given policy area or topic. As such, it is a key strategic planning documents developed by a State, ideally through a participatory process, to articulate specific priorities, objectives, and concrete actions to implement a particular international, regional, or national obligation and commitment, related to policy area or topic or agenda (such as YPS), at the country level. An ideal NAP also outlines specific financing strategies, implementation timelines and ensures policy coherence and accountability mechanisms and indicators to monitor progress, ensuring that commitments move beyond planning into measurable implementation and impact.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

YPS National Action Plans (NAPs) translate the global commitment into national, provincial or local actions and detail actions to engage youth in peacebuilding efforts, prioritise their inclusion in decision-making processes, and promote collaborative partnerships between youth stakeholders, governments, and other actors. In some contexts, countries develop YPS strategies and in others, they develop a NAP, Roadmap or National Programme. Either way, these are joint national commitments to make young people feel seen, heard and valued and strengthen trust and collaboration between young people, civil society and the State to have collective impact on the lives of people.

Related terms: Policy coherence; Peace Impact Framework

Resources

• Global Coalition on Youth, Peace and Security. (2022). Implementing the youth, peace and security agenda at country-level: A guide for public officials. Office of the UN Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. https://unoy.org/downloads/yps-guide-for-public-officials/

• Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (n.d.). About — National action plans on business and human rights. OHCHR. https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/wg-business/national-action-plans-business-and-human-rights

Participatory Action Research (PAR) is a collaborative research method where youth/community and researchers co-design and implement research projects, and analyze the information to generate knowledge and solutions. 

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

PAR empowers youth to define priorities, drive evidence-based action, and ensure their perspectives shape peace and security programs. It is usually a learning and action activity including iterative cycles of data collection - analysis - learning - new actions -

Related terms: Youth-led Research

Resources

• Search for Common Ground. (2017). Listening & learning toolkit. Search for Common Ground. https://documents.sfcg.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Youth-Research_Listening-Learning-Toolkit_dr-1-1-1.pdf

• United States Institute of Peace. (2018). Participatory action research for advancing youth-led peacebuilding in Kenya. USIP. https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/2018-10/pw142-participatory-action-research-for-advancing-youth-led-peacebuilding-in-kenya-v2.pdf

• YPS Monitor. (n.d.). About participatory action research. https://www.ypsmonitor.com/

A funding approach that shares the decision-making power with those most affected by the issues being addressed, ensuring they play a direct and meaningful role in determining how resources are allocated.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

In the context of the YPS agenda, this means including youth and youth-led organisations in shaping funding priorities, select grantees, and influencing strategies, rather than being passive recipients.

Recognising that youth rarely have a say in funding decisions, this approach shifts power to young leaders, promoting equity, accountability, and inclusivity. By embedding youth perspectives into resource allocation, Participatory Grant Making strengthens trust between donors and youth stakeholders and ensures that investments reflect real needs and lived experiences.

Resources

• Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict. (n.d.). For youth and by youth: Re-imagining financing for peacebuilding. GPPAC. https://gppac.net/files/2021-12/For%20Youth%20and%20By%20Youth%20Re-Imagining%20Financing%20For%20Peacebuilding.pdf

The long-term process of transforming conflicts and strengthening sustainable peace by addressing the root causes of violence, and promoting justice, dialogue, and cooperation (positive peace). It equips individuals, especially youth, with conflict management and transformation skills, opportunities, and supportive environments to address conflicts non-violently and build resilient, equitable, and thriving communities.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

Peacebuilding is the core mandate through which the Youth, Peace and Security (YPS) agenda is realized, serving to implement the resolutions and foster intergenerational trust.

• Inclusivity and Agency: Peacebuilding strategies must explicitly be youth-inclusive, moving beyond paying "lip service" to incorporating youth and civil society actors. This ensures young people are recognized as agents of peace and are at the center of building peaceful and resilient societies.

• Prevention of violent conflict: By focusing on prevention and addressing root causes (such as socioeconomic exclusion, denial of human rights, and poor governance) YPS-aligned peacebuilding directly tackles the Violence of Exclusion that drives young people towards violence.

• Three Pillars Alignment: YPS initiatives, such as Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration (DDR) and Security Sector Reform (SSR), are integrated peacebuilding activities that, when youth-sensitive, strengthen accountable institutions, social cohesion, and the rule of law.

Related terms: Peace process

Resources

• Berents, H., Bolten, C., & McEvoy-Levy, S. (Eds.). (2024). Youth and sustainable peacebuilding. https://kroc.nd.edu/research/books/youth-and-sustainable-peacebuilding-2024/

• Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (n.d.). Human rights, peacebuilding and sustaining peace. OHCHR. https://www.ohchr.org/en/prevention-and-early-warning/human-rights-peacebuilding-and-sustaining-peace

• Özerdem, A., & Podder, S. (2015). Youth in conflict and peacebuilding: Mobilization, reintegration and reconciliation. Palgrave Macmillan. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1057/9781137314536

• United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. (2021). Youth, peace and security: A programming handbook. United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/sites/www.un.org.peacebuilding/files/documents/yps_programming_handbook.pdf

• United Nations General Assembly & Security Council. (2016). Resolutions on peacebuilding and sustaining peace (A/RES/70/262 & S/RES/2282). United Nations. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/827390?ln=en

• United Nations Population Fund & UN Peacebuilding Support Office. (2018). The missing peace: Independent progress study on youth, peace and security. UNFPA & UN PBSO. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3846611?v=pdf

Peace processes are structured efforts aimed at ending violent conflict through negotiation, dialogue, and formal agreements between conflicting parties. These processes typically involve political elites, armed groups, and mediators, and focus on achieving ceasefires, political settlements, and transitional arrangements. They are often time-bound and concentrated on resolving immediate hostilities and establishing a framework for peace, such as through peace accords or transitional governance. The emphasis is on conflict resolution and reaching consensus among key stakeholders to stop violence and begin a transition toward stability.

In contrast, peacebuilding processes are broader, long-term efforts that seek to address the root causes of conflict and create the conditions for sustainable peace. Peacebuilding involves a wide range of actors and focuses on reconciliation, social cohesion, institutional reform, economic recovery, and the promotion of justice and human rights. While peace processes may mark the beginning of peace, peacebuilding ensures that peace is nurtured and maintained by transforming relationships, systems, and structures that contributed to conflict in the first place.

Rather than a singular definition, understanding a peace process is best achieved by comparing it with the broader concept of peacebuilding, focusing on the differences in scope, actors, and youth engagement.

A. Peace Processes

• Peace Processes Goal: Peace processes’ goal is negative peace. To stop direct fighting and establish a framework for stability (for example, ceasefires, political settlements).

• Peace Processes Scope & Focus: Its scope is narrow, formal, and time-bound. Focused on high-level negotiations to resolve immediate hostilities and military issues (power-sharing, DDR, SSR).

• Peace Processes Key Actors: It’s elite-driven, primarily involves political elites, armed groups, and mediators.

• UNSCR 2419 recognizes the role of youth in such formal peace processes and mediation efforts. The study has introduced a peacebuilding lens to this approach that is inclusive of 3 different interoperable rooms: outside the room, where youth mobilize and advocate through civic action; inside the room, where youth participate in dialogue and consultation spaces; and at the table, where youth have meaningful influence in decision-making and policy outcomes.

B. Peacebuilding

• Peacebuilding Goal: The goal of peacebuilding is positive peace. To address the root causes (the Violence of Exclusion) and create the non-violent structures for a just, equitable, and sustainable society.

• Peacebuilding Scope & Focus: Its scope is broad, structural, and long-term. Focuses on social cohesion, reconciliation, economic recovery, human rights, and changing damaging relationships.

• Peacebuilding Key Actors: It involves a wide range of actors from civil society, local communities, youth-led organizations, and multiple government ministries.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

Altiok and Grizelj (2019) document how youth understandings of peace processes is deeply political and personal and highlight three important aspects: 

• Youth engage in multiple ways: In the Room (formal delegations), Around the Room (consultative forums), and Outside the Room (mass mobilization and digital advocacy).

• Impact on the present and the future: Youth are often the majority population in conflict-affected states. Decisions made in the Peace Process Room—especially on issues like Security Sector Reform (SSR) and Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration (DDR)—will distinctly impact their present and future.

• Influence vs. Proximity: The influence of youth (Layer 3: outside the room, through social media activism and protest) may be more powerful in shaping the outcome and legitimacy of a peace deal than merely having a token seat (Layer 1: in the room).

Resources

• Altiok, A., & Grizelj, I. (2019). We are here: An integrated approach to youth-inclusive peace processes. United Network of Young Peacebuilders, UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs, & Search for Common Ground. https://unoy.org/downloads/we-are-here-an-integrated-approach-to-youth-inclusive-peace-processes/

• United Nations Population Fund & UN Peacebuilding Support Office. (2018). The missing peace: Independent progress study on youth, peace and security. UNFPA & UN PBSO. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3846611?v=pdf

• United Nations Security Council. (2018). Resolution 2419 [on youth, peace and security] (S/RES/2419). United Nations. https://docs.un.org/en/s/res/2419(2018)

A structured, data-driven methodology and practical toolkit designed to measure and track what truly matters for peace outcomes across diverse programs and sectors. Developed through consultation with over 180 organizations in 45 countries, its purpose is to build evidence and drive investment toward interventions that effectively contribute to healthy, safe, and just societies.

The PIF tracks and measures peace through two core components:

A. Five Vital Signs (Indicators)

These are essential, measurable elements of peace that programs can align to:

• Physical Violence: People's personal and direct experience with violence (for example, safety, conflict-related deaths).

• Personal Agency: The connection people have to their societies and whether they believe they have the power to positively change them.

• Polarization: The extent to which people trust each other and share a social contract, or conversely, fear that other groups pose a threat to their dignity. The opposite is Solidarity.

• Institutional Legitimacy: How institutions (government, media, traditional, or religious) maintain trust by being accountable and inclusive to the people they serve.

• Resource Investment: Whether a society has the resources to support peace or conflict long-term (for example, monetary value invested in peace priorities versus arms imports).

B. Three Essential Approaches to Evidence (Feedback Loops)

These define how peace is measured and understood:

• Lived Experience: Capturing what safety, security, and stability mean to people living in conflict, bringing accountability and rigor through qualitative, grassroots feedback.

• Aligned Measures: Using simple, actionable quantitative indicators that align with the five Vital Signs (for example, SDG indicators) to track peace systematically.

• Expert Observations: Documenting systematic observations and analyses by local practitioners who possess the contextual expertise to capture incremental and unexpected shifts in conflict dynamics.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

The PIF is highly relevant for the YPS Agenda as it provides a robust, evidence-based structure for shifting national strategies from focusing solely on outputs (activities completed) to measurable impact (changes achieved).

• Advancing YPS National Action Plans (NAPs): The PIF is being utilized as a model for monitoring and evaluating YPS NAPs because its multi-sectoral Vital Signs allow countries to track youth-specific outcomes (like Personal Agency and Polarization) across government, civil society, and development programs.

• Measuring Youth Agency and Trust: The PIF explicitly names Personal Agency and Polarization (Trust/Solidarity) as vital signs. This allows YPS programs to quantitatively and qualitatively demonstrate their success in empowering youth and building intergenerational trust—core requirements of the YPS resolutions.

• Data for Policy: By integrating the Lived Experience approach (a critical feedback loop), the PIF ensures that data used for policy and funding decisions (Resource Investment) is grounded in the reality and needs of youth peacebuilders, promoting greater accountability and responsive governance (Institutional Legitimacy).

Resources: 

• ConnexUs. (n.d.). Peace impact framework. ConnexUs. https://cnxus.org/peace-impact-framework/ 

Policy Advocacy is the strategic and deliberate process of influencing specific decisions, laws, policies, and regulations to achieve a desired social, political, or economic outcome. It involves an organized mix of activities—such as lobbying, media campaigns, grassroots mobilization, and evidence-based advising—to persuade and pressure those with decision-making power (the "target") to adopt and champion proposed reforms.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

Policy Advocacy is the primary tool used by young people to shift power dynamics and ensure the YPS agenda moves from normative commitment to operational reality.

• Amplifying Youth Agency: Advocacy is the key mechanism through which young people fulfill their right to Meaningful Participation, often acting as the "vanguard" for building a more inclusive polity. It transforms youth from passive recipients into political forces that influence the legislative and policy agenda.

• Connecting Layers and Digital Tools: Youth Policy Advocacy is characterized by innovation, heavily utilizing digital platforms and social media (Digital Peacebuilding) to mobilize communities (Layer 3: Outside the Room) and communicate directly with policymakers (Layers 1 & 2).

• Challenging Exclusion: Advocacy is essential for tackling the Violence of Exclusion by challenging structural barriers (for example, minimum age requirements), addressing human rights violations, and demanding that policies reflect the priorities of marginalized youth constituencies.

• Building Accountability: The success of advocacy is often measured by whether decision-makers take ownership of the youth's ideas. In the YPS space, advocacy is continuously required to hold elected officials accountable for the promises made in YPS resolutions and national action plans.

Related terms: Policy coherence; National Action Plans

Resources

• UNFPA: Policy Advocacy and Dialogue: Operational Guidance (Outlines UNFPA’s strategic approach to advocacy). https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/resource-pdf/UNFPA-MBMLMW-MOD9_EN.pdf

• UN United Nations: Youth, peace and security: a guide (Details the positive role of youth in advocacy) https://www.un.org/en/peace-and-security/youth-peace-and-security-guide

• Global Road Safety Partnership: Elements of a Policy Advocacy Campaign (Provides practical steps and strategies for civil society). https://www.grsproadsafety.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Elements-of-a-Policy-Advocacy-Campaign_Full-Version.pdf

A principle and key attribute of effective governance defined as the systematic promotion of mutually reinforcing policy actions across different government departments, agencies, and levels (local, national, regional, global). It aims to consistently reduce conflicts between policy objectives, proactively foster synergies, and align different instruments to achieve shared, overarching goals, such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This process involves breaking down institutional "silos" and ensuring that actions taken in one sector do not undermine positive outcomes in another.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

Policy coherence is essential for transforming the YPS agenda from a normative resolution into operational practice:

• Bridging Silos: YPS issues inherently cut across all operational pillars of a governance system—Development, Human Rights, Humanitarian Action, and Peace and Security. Policy coherence provides the structure to ensure youth peace work acts as the necessary "connective social tissue" to integrate these often-fragmented sectors.

• Integrated Implementation: It mandates that youth participation, economic inclusion, education, and security sector reform policies are not treated as separate youth issues but are integrated and aligned to collectively advance YPS goals.

• National Strategy & Impact: For YPS National Action Plans (NAPs), coherence is critical for demonstrating impact. It ensures that investments in a social sector (like education or employment) are designed to reinforce peacebuilding outcomes, rather than generating internal policy contradictions that could exacerbate conflict. It also mandates alignment with other inclusion agendas, such as the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda.

Related terms: National Action Plans

Resources

• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2018). Policy coherence for sustainable development. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/policy-coherence-for-sustainable-development-2018_9789264301061-en.html

• United Nations Environment Programme. (2026). Policy coherence. UNEP. https://www.unep.org/topics/environmental-law-and-governance/environmental-policy/policy-coherence

• United Nations Population Fund & UN Peacebuilding Support Office. (2018). The missing peace: Independent progress study on youth, peace and security. UNFPA & UN PBSO. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3846611?v=pdf

An approach that engages youth alongside their families, communities, and governments so that youth are empowered to reach their full potential. The 5 C's of PYD consist of Competence (academic, vocational, social skills), Confidence (self-efficacy), Connection (positive bonds with others), Character (integrity, moral commitment), and Caring (empathy, compassion).

Resource:

• YouthPower. (n.d.). Positive youth development. https://www.youthpower.org/pyd

Protection is one of the five pillars of the YPS agenda. It encompasses all activities dedicated to achieving and upholding the rights, safety, and well-being of young people, as articulated by international human rights law, international humanitarian law, and refugee law. Specifically, it aims to ensure the protection of young civilians' lives and human rights during and after conflict, and to investigate and prosecute those responsible for crimes perpetrated against them.

In practice, effective protection requires:

• Avoiding paternalistic approaches that sideline or overlook the agency and dignity of those being protected.

• Ensuring young people's sense of safety in offline and digital spaces—recognizing that the absence of direct threat doesn't equate to feeling safe, especially for youth who may experience secondary trauma or feel unwelcome in certain civic spaces. A sense of safety is a precondition for meaningful youth participation.

• In the context of civic space, ensuring that young people can safely exercise their human rights without risk of threats or reprisals, particularly their right to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly.

• Moving beyond a technocratic conceptualization of civil society to recognize that, in certain contexts and political landscapes, formal accreditation, registration, and status for civil society and grassroots organizations may not serve as a reliable indicator for legitimacy or participation. Amid shrinking civic space, such requirements risk excluding or endangering grassroots actors for whom seeking official status may be unsafe or even life-threatening.

• Protection responses guided by prior informed consent, confidentiality, and the principle of "do no harm," and considering the specific and diverse protection needs of various groups of young people (e.g., young women, marginalized youth, displaced youth).

Related Term: Safeguarding

Safeguarding refers to the organizational and institutional responsibility to take all reasonable steps to prevent harm from occurring as a result of staff, operations, and programs; and to respond appropriately when harm does occur. Amid the Digital Age and rapid technological advancements, safeguarding requires robust digital safeguards that extend beyond physical environments to online spaces while ensuring that technology-enabled interventions do not expose staff, individuals, and/or communities to new forms of harm. While related, protection is a broader concept that includes defending rights and establishing accountability, whereas safeguarding focuses on organizational duty of care to prevent program-related harm.

Resources:

• United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. (2021). Youth, peace and security: A programming handbook. United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/sites/www.un.org.peacebuilding/files/documents/yps_programming_handbook.pdf

• United Nations Office of the Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. (2021). If I disappear: Global report on protecting young people in civic space. United Nations. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4014684

• United Network of Young Peacebuilders. (n.d.). UNOY protection resource library. UNOY Peacebuilders. https://unoy.org/downloads/protection-resource-library/

The individual capacity to adapt to and recover from change or conflict, and the societal capacity to collectively and peacefully transform relationships to address factors that generate violence. It is seen as a key asset of young people, whose resourcefulness is a vital contribution to peace. In many contexts, resilience also means navigating the enduring effects of intergenerational trauma and systemic exclusion. Moreover, it extends beyond endurance to encompass the continued pursuit for peace and justice despite systemic barriers and structures designed to marginalize or silence.

Resources:

• United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. (2021). Youth, peace and security: A programming handbook. United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/sites/www.un.org.peacebuilding/files/documents/yps_programming_handbook.pdf

• United Nations Office of the Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. (2021). If I disappear: Global report on protecting young people in civic space. United Nations. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4014684

A practice that involves the superficial or symbolic participation of specific actors/stakeholders, without giving them a tangible role or influence in decision-making processes. It could also be a perfunctory effort to be inclusive, often by involving a small number of people from underrepresented groups to create an appearance of diversity without shifting actual power. In practice, it prioritizes the ‘image’ of inclusion, while denying those individuals a genuine influence over decision-making or the resources necessary to enact change.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

In the context of the YPS agenda, it gives the appearance of youth inclusivity but does not genuinely incorporate young people's voices or perspectives, often stemming from an underestimation of their capabilities. It represents a failure to move beyond ‘youth-friendly’ optics toward Meaningful Youth Participation. It undermines the core pillars of UNSCR 2250 by treating young peacebuilders as passive beneficiaries rather than essential partners, leading to shallow policies and a breakdown of trust between youth and institutional stakeholders. To fulfill the YPS mandate, engagement must shift from symbolic presence to shared authority and sustainable funding for youth-led initiatives.

Resources

• Canadian Coalition for Youth, Peace & Security. (n.d.). Beyond tokenism: A toolkit for genuine youth participation in civic spaces. CCYPS. https://www.canadayps.org/beyond-tokenism

• United Network of Young Peacebuilders. (n.d.). Checklist for meaningful youth engagement. UNOY Peacebuilders. https://unoy.org/downloads/mye-checklist/

• United Network of Young Peacebuilders. (n.d.). Guide on inclusive youth consultations. UNOY Peacebuilders. https://unoy.org/downloads/guide-on-inclusive-consultations/

The Violence of Exclusion is a foundational concept in the YPS Agenda, defined as a form of structural and psychological violence that is deeply rooted in the reciprocal mistrust and unresolved grievances between young people, their governments, and the wider social system.

This exclusion is indivisible from the young generation's political, social, cultural, and economic disempowerment. Governments incorrectly associate youth with the threat of violence, failing to recognise that the vast majority of young people are peaceful and reject the use of force.

Manifestations (Intersectional Barriers and Threats)

The violence of exclusion is not a single phenomenon, but a complex and cumulative system of intersecting threats that manifest across all spheres of youth civic engagement. Dismantling this violence requires addressing the full spectrum of these systemic human rights violations:

• Sociocultural: Ageism, prevalent stereotyping in media (for example, youth as "immature" or "delinquent"), and intergenerational hostility that undermines the credibility and legitimacy of youth voices.

• Political & Legal: Suppression of freedom of expression and peaceful assembly; ambiguous laws misused for surveillance; high age barriers to candidacy; and a severe lack of legal accountability for abuses.

• Economic: Financial instability and dependency on adults; retaliation via frozen bank accounts; lack of accessible funding for youth-led organizations; and blacklisting that limits long-term employment prospects.

• Digital: Online harassment, cyberbullying, surveillance, and censorship. The weakness of reporting mechanisms often prevents justice for these threats, which are closely related to offline physical risks.

• Gendered: Sexual harassment in the workplace; gender-based violence (SGBV); and online hostility intersecting with misogyny, all of which disproportionately target young women and sexual and gender minorities (SGMs).

• Physical: The severest forms of threat, including beatings, torture, arbitrary detention, excessive use of force by law enforcement (for example, tear gas, rubber bullets), and the targeted killing (juvenicide) of young activists.

• Mental Health & Psychosocial: The development of negative coping mechanisms, chronic stress, anxiety, and a pervasive sense of helplessness and isolation due to unaddressed trauma and the constant state of fear.

• Environmental: The denial of rights and exacerbation of conflict drivers stemming from crises like climate change, which young people view as an urgent survival concern that increases socio-economic tensions and inequality.

What does it mean for the YPS agenda?

The YPS Agenda's core purpose is to be the transformative vehicle that directly addresses the Violence of Exclusion, shifting from policy panic and reactive security responses to a comprehensive peace dividend:

• Core Strategy: Systematically addressing the violence of exclusion is the best means to prevent violence and conflict, fulfilling the core Prevention pillar of UNSCR 2250.

• Protection as Remedy: The Protection pillar focuses on establishing dedicated mechanisms, legal frameworks, and support systems to defend youth against the Physical, Political, and Legal manifestations of this violence.

• Participation as Empowerment: Meaningful Participation directly confronts Sociocultural and Political exclusion by guaranteeing young people's status as full rights-holders and indispensable decision-makers in all peace processes.

Resources

• Conciliation Resources. (n.d.). Youth, peace and security: Addressing the violence of exclusion [Accord article]. Conciliation Resources. https://www.c-r.org/accord/inclusion-peace-processes/youth-peace-and-security-addressing-violence-exclusion

• United Nations Office of the Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. (2021). If I disappear: Global report on protecting young people in civic space. United Nations. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4014684

• United Nations Population Fund & UN Peacebuilding Support Office. (2018). The missing peace: Independent progress study on youth, peace and security. UNFPA & UN PBSO. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3846611?v=pdf

Youth actors are all the relevant stakeholders in the youth field. They may be young or working with young people. This could be young leaders, representatives of youth-led and youth-focused groups/organizations/movements, members of youth-wings of political parties, young parliamentarians, youth parliamentarians, young public officials,  young researchers/academicians, young influencers and others working on youth issues.

Resources:

• Global Coalition on Youth, Peace and Security. (2022). Implementing the youth, peace and security agenda at country-level: A guide for public officials. Office of the UN Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. https://www.unssc.org/sites/default/files/node/resources/field_resource/2022-02/YPS-guide-for-public-officials-1.pdf

Youth assets are the experiences, resources, skills, expertise, competencies, and positive attributes that young people possess and can draw upon to achieve positive outcomes in their lives and communities. These assets encompass both internal strengths—such as resilience, leadership, and social-emotional skills—and external resources, including supportive relationships, opportunities for participation, and access to safe environments. Critically, youth assets also include social capital and networks: the web of relationships, trust, and connections that young people build within their families, peer groups, communities, and broader society. Social capital and networks provide young people with access to information, support, opportunities, and collective action, enabling them to thrive and contribute meaningfully to society. 

• Social capital refers to the resources and benefits gained from social relationships, including trust, norms of reciprocity, and group affiliations.

• Networks are the structured connections and relationships that link young people to peers, mentors, organizations, and institutions, facilitating both support (bonding capital) and access to new opportunities (bridging capital)

In YPS contexts, youth assets—including social capital and networks—are leveraged to:

• Foster participation and leadership: Ensuring that youth take part in decision-making, peace negotiations, and community dialogues.

• Build social cohesion and trust: Utilizing youth networks to bridge divides, foster dialogue, and prevent violence.

• Enhance resilience and prevention: Drawing on youth creativity, adaptability, and collective action to prevent conflict and support community recovery.

• Promote partnerships: Encouraging collaboration between youth, governments, civil society, and international organizations, with youth as co-creators and co-implementers of peacebuilding strategies 

Resources:

• Frontiers in Psychology. (2021). Developmental assets and positive youth development: Cross-national study. Frontiers in Psychology. https://www.search-institute.org/our-research/development-assets/

• Search Institute. (n.d.). Developmental assets framework. https://www.search-institute.org/our-research/development-assets/developmental-assets-framework/

• United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. (2021). Youth, peace and security: A programming handbook. United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. https://www.youth4peace.info/Handbook

• United Nations Population Fund & UN Peacebuilding Support Office. (2018). The missing peace: Independent progress study on youth, peace and security. UNFPA & UN PBSO. https://www.youth4peace.info/ProgressStudy

• Youth Matters. (n.d.). Positive youth development (PYD) framework. http://youthmattersfy.org/positive-youth-development-pyd-framework.html

In the YPS agenda, youth advocacy is the strategic process through which young people collectively influence decision-makers, policies, and public opinion at all levels to advance the goals of peace and security at local, national, regional, and international levels. It's the active work of championing the YPS agenda through multi-track diplomacy as well as other formal and informal channels by raising awareness, demanding accountability, and proposing youth-led solutions to prevent violence and build sustainable peace. This is an example in which the youth are active participants within their community and are given the space or create the space themselves to advocate for themselves. Youth advocacy can also be done by non-youth groups, in partnership with youth. 

Resources: 

• ConnexUs. (n.d.). Global YPS coalition. https://cnxus.org/resource/gcyps-globalcoalitiononyps/

• ConnexUs. (n.d.). YPS national action plan — Community of practice. https://cnxus.org/theme/ypsnapscop/

• UN Major Group for Children and Youth. (n.d.). About UN MGCY. https://www.unmgcy.org/about-5

• YPS Monitor. (n.d.). YPS monitor. https://www.ypsmonitor.com/

Youth leadership is the ability and opportunity of young people to envision, influence, inspire, organize, and drive positive change in their communities and beyond. It involves young people taking initiative, making decisions, mobilizing others, advocating for their rights and those of their communities, and leading actions that reflect their values, lived experiences, and aspirations.

In the YPS context, youth leadership is not limited to informal community-based leadership but also includes formal positions of authority that contribute to peacebuilding and inclusive development. Youth leadership can be expressed through advocacy, activism, innovation, peer support, organizing, and everyday acts of courage and care.

True youth leadership is enabled when young people are  supported through  access to resources, mentorship, safe spaces, and platforms, and when their leadership is recognized, respected, and supported by institutions and communities. It thrives in environments where tokenism is removed, power is shared, where it is protected from co-optation, and where youth are not only seen as future leaders but as leaders of today.

Resource: 

• Youth Matters. (n.d.). Positive youth development (PYD) framework. http://youthmattersfy.org/positive-youth-development-pyd-framework.html 

In the context of the YPS agenda, a youth-led initiative is a project, organization, or movement where young people are the primary drivers of change. It is an endeavor where youth hold the principal leadership, decision-making authority, and operational control. This moves beyond simple youth participation, where young people might be consulted or included in non-youth or traditionally-managed projects. In a truly youth-led initiative, young people themselves identify the peace and security challenges affecting their communities, design the vision and strategies to address them, mobilize resources, and lead the implementation and evaluation of their work.

A youth-led organization is an entity in which young people hold the majority of leadership roles and possess primary decision-making authority. These organizations are characterized by the meaningful participation, agency, and ownership of youth in governance, management, and program implementation. Youth-led organizations are typically initiated, designed, and operated by young people themselves, rather than by other non-youth actors  on behalf of youth. Their core purpose is to provide a platform for young people to collectively address issues, advocate for change, and implement solutions that impact their lives or the lives of others.

Key features include:

• Majority youth leadership: Most leadership and decision-making positions are held by individuals within the defined youth age range (commonly 15–24 or up to 29, depending on context).

• Youth-driven agenda: Young people set the vision, priorities, and strategies of the organization.

• Autonomy: The organization operates independently from other institutions or with minimal non-youth oversight, ensuring youth voices are central and driving decisionmaking.

• Meaningful engagement: Youth are actively and meaningfully involved at all levels, not just as token representatives.

• Initiative and ownership: The organization is founded and operated by youth, with activities conceived, planned, and executed by young people.

This distinguishes youth-led organizations from "youth-serving" organizations (where non-youth actors and individuals  lead and youth are beneficiaries) and "youth-organizing" (where youth may be mobilized but do not necessarily hold decision-making power). See below for more clarity. 

Within YPS, youth-led organizations:

• Serve as agents of peacebuilding and social cohesion, building trust across divided groups and opening channels for dialogue.

• Advocate for the inclusion of youth in peace negotiations and decision-making at all levels, ensuring that youth perspectives shape peace and security policies.

• Provide training, capacity building, and leadership development, empowering young people to participate meaningfully in peace processes and community development.

• Innovate and adapt to local contexts, often operating with limited resources and relying on volunteerism.

• Prevent violence and extremism through peer-to-peer approaches and community engagement.

• Influence policy and create opportunities for youth, contributing to more resilient and peaceful societies.

Despite their impact, youth-led organizations often face challenges such as limited funding, exclusion from formal processes, lack of formal or accredited status, and a wider lack of protection. Nevertheless, their grassroots engagement, innovative approaches, and commitment to peace make them indispensable partners in building more peaceful, just, and inclusive societies.

Resource: 

• UN Major Group for Children and Youth. (n.d.). Youth-led organizations: Definition and criteria. UN MGCY. https://www.unmgcy.org/youth-led-organizations

A programmatic approach that places young people in leadership roles throughout all stages of research, from design and data collection to analysis and results sharing. This approach is valuable for its ability to produce nuanced and contextually relevant information and also for its ability to empower young people and build relationships within affected communities.

Background: Youth-led research originates from broader youth participation movements of the late 20th century. Influenced by scholars like Roger Hart (Ladder of Youth Participation, 1992) and Harry Shier (Pathways to Participation, 2001), this movement emphasized that youth should be meaningfully involved in decisions affecting their lives — including in research and policy-making. 

Looking forward: Youth-led research can help shift the roles of youth in the community: from objects of study to subjects, from knowledge consumers to knowledge producers, from beneficiaries to partners; it can empower young people with new skills and knowledge;  and it can help improve understanding of community issues, and can lead to more relevant and effective programming. 

Resources: 

• Kelly, C., Prelis, S., Lemon, A., Comba, R., Walsh, R., & Duncan, E. (2017). Supporting the design and implementation of youth-led research projects. Search for Common Ground. https://cnxus.org/resource/supporting-the-design-and-implementation-of-youth-led-research-projects/

• Ozer, E. J. (2016). Youth-led participatory action research: Developmental and equity perspectives. In S. S. Horn, M. D. Ruck, & L. S. Liben (Eds.), Equity and justice in developmental sciences: Theoretical and methodological issues (pp. 189–207). Oxford University Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-42633-007

• ConnexUs. Guidance on Youth-led Research. https://cnxus.org/resource/supporting-the-design-and-implementation-of-youth-led-research-projects/?swcfpc=1 

Youth-led funding refers to financial resources that are designed, governed, and distributed by young people or youth-led organizations. It shifts traditional power dynamics by placing decision-making authority directly in the hands of youth, enabling them to determine funding priorities, assess proposals, and allocate resources based on their lived experiences and community needs. Youth-led financing also calls for flexible, accessible, and accountable funding models that recognize and legitimize youth leadership. By simplifying eligibility, application, and reporting processes, it ensures that both formal and informal youth-led organizations—often excluded from traditional governance and financing structures—can access resources and sustain meaningful engagement.Youth-led funding is a crucial tool for empowering and enhancing the agency of young people, ensuring that they are not only recipients of funding but also drivers of resource distribution. 

Resources:

• UNICEF, Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict, & Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation. (2022). Financing for young people in peacebuilding: An overview. UNICEF. https://www.unaoc.org/wp-content/uploads/financing_for_young_people_in_peacebuilding.220217.final_.web_.pdf

"Youth-focused" funding is provided to initiatives that benefit or target young people while fostering broader tracking and accountability, but are not necessarily led by them. See the difference with "Youth-led" funding. 

Note: In the cases of dedicated financing for youth, resources are not necessarily earmarked to flow to youth-led conflict prevention and peacebuilding efforts. In the context of YPS, this  highlights the need for financing that directly supports their leadership and agency.

Resources:

• UNICEF, Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict, & Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation. (2022). Financing for young people in peacebuilding: An overview. UNICEF. https://www.unaoc.org/wp-content/uploads/financing_for_young_people_in_peacebuilding.220217.final_.web_.pdf

Youth Political Participation refers to the broad range of activities through which young people develop and express their opinions on the world and its governance, and actively engage in shaping the decisions that impact their lives. 

It is a fundamental human right that encompasses both formal and informal engagement. This includes traditional activities such as voting, running for office, and joining political parties, as well as civic engagement, activism, and using digital and offline platforms to promote peace, transparency, and accountability. 

For YPS, meaningful youth political participation goes beyond merely increasing numbers; it requires creating an enabling environment where young people have opportunities and capacities to influence decision-making at all levels, from local communities to global policy forums.

Resources: 

• United Nations Development Programme. (n.d.). Youth, peace and security: Fostering youth-inclusive political processes. UNDP. https://www.undp.org/publications/youth-peace-and-security-fostering-youth-inclusive-political-processes 

Formal mechanisms or policy measures that reserve a minimum number or percentage of positions for young people in decision-making bodies, political institutions, organizational structures, or governance processes. These quotas are designed to address age-based exclusion, promote intergenerational equity, and ensure that youth have guaranteed representation and influence in shaping policies and decisions.

Youth quotas can be legally mandated (legislated candidate quotas) or voluntary (political party quotas). These can be applied in various contexts, including parliaments, peace negotiations, advisory councils, local governance, working groups and expert groups, and organizational leadership structures (e.g., steering committees, executive boards, etc.). When implemented meaningfully, they serve as a tool to correct structural power imbalances and institutionalize youth participation. However, for youth quotas to be effective, they must be representative and accompanied by supportive measures such as institutional memory, capacity-building, mentorship, and safeguards against tokenism.

Resources:

• Global Coalition on Youth, Peace and Security. (2022). Implementing the youth, peace and security agenda at country-level: A guide for public officials. Office of the UN Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. https://www.unssc.org/sites/default/files/node/resources/field_resource/2022-02/YPS-guide-for-public-officials-1.pdf

It refers to the process of analyzing the implications for youth of any planned action, including legislation, policy or programs. It is a strategy for making young people’s concerns and experiences an integral dimension of design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policy and programs so that young people benefit equally and inequality is not perpetuated. Youth mainstreaming requires detailed socioeconomic and sociopolitical  analysis from a youth lens and highlights the importance of involving young people in that analysis and decision-making.

Background: The concept of mainstreaming originates from gender mainstreaming, which was established as a global strategy at the 1995 Beijing World Conference on Women. This approach was later adapted for other groups, including youth, persons with disabilities, and marginalized communities, as part of a shift toward inclusive governance and development. Youth2030 Strategy (2018) strengthened the idea of youth mainstreaming within the UN system, committing all UN agencies to consider youth priorities in their mandates and operations. It promotes a “whole-of-government” and “whole-of-society” approach, meaning all departments, not just youth ministries, share responsibility for youth empowerment.

Looking forward: Youth mainstreaming can help ensure that the YPS agenda is implemented systematically and sustainably across policy areas and all organisations work, rather than through isolated programs or symbolic youth projects. 

Resources: 

• Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. (n.d.). OSCE guidelines for youth mainstreaming. OSCE. https://www.osce.org/mission-to-serbia/487267

Youth-serving organizations are organizations whose primary mission is to provide services, support, or opportunities to young people. These organizations are designed to address the needs, interests, and development of youth through programs, mentorship, advocacy, and community engagement. Unlike youth-led organizations, youth-serving organizations may be managed by adults or a mix of adults and youth, but their focus is always on benefiting young people rather than being directed by them.

In YPS contexts, youth serving organizations can provide the necessary infrastructure, resources, mentorship, and safe environments that enable youth to participate meaningfully. They also play a key role in advocating for, and oftentimes with youth, for advancing young people’s leadership in peace and security processes. 

Resources:

• United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. (2021). Youth, peace and security: A programming handbook. United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/sites/www.un.org.peacebuilding/files/documents/yps_programming_handbook.pdf

Youth-Inclusive Programming is a type of intervention that ensures young people meaningfully participate and that their unique views, experiences, knowledge, and leadership are sought, considered, and actively integrated throughout all stages of the program cycle (analysis, design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation).

In this approach, young people are not merely observers or consultants; they are recognized as active actors, partners, and co-creators whose agency and innovation are valued in shaping program outcomes.

Related Concepts

• Youth-Consulted Programming: Programming in which young people’s views are sought through consultations, surveys, or feedback mechanisms, but where they are not consistently engaged in high-level decision-making or implementation processes. Key Characteristics: Limited youth ownership; informs design but restricts agency.

• Youth-Inclusive Programming: Programming that goes beyond consultation to ensure young people are actively involved as decision-makers, partners, and co-creators throughout the programme cycle. Key Characteristics: Recognizes youth as agents of change; values youth leadership and knowledge.

• Youth-Responsive Programming: The most comprehensive approach that integrates the rights, needs, and aspirations of young people into all stages of programming, while simultaneously ensuring their meaningful participation and agency in designing, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating initiatives. Key Characteristics: Combines youth-sensitive (addressing needs) and youth-inclusive (empowering partnership) approaches for holistic results.

Resources:

• United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. (2021). Youth, peace and security: A programming handbook. United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/sites/www.un.org.peacebuilding/files/documents/yps_programming_handbook.pdf

Youth-sensitive Approach/Youth Lens: The Youth-lens is an analytical framework used to examine social realities, interventions, and power structures by considering the diverse situations, needs, perspectives, and aspirations of young people, as well as the age-based norms and power dynamics affecting them. It draws on and compliments other intersectional frameworks such as gender analysis.

A Youth-sensitive Approach is the practical application of this framework in programming and analysis. It involves applying a specific age perspective to understand how young people experience life differently from other community members. Key components include:

1. Data Disaggregation: Systematically collecting and analyzing data based on age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and other identity markers.

2. Contextual Understanding: Acquiring knowledge from external research and, crucially, from listening to young people's own experiences and perceptions (as highlighted by the Youth-lens).

3. Informed Intervention: Ensuring that the unique needs and perspectives of diverse youth inform and are integrated throughout all stages of program analysis, design, and implementation.

Ultimately, the Youth-lens provides the knowledge necessary to ensure the Youth-sensitive Approach is effective and accurate, moving beyond surface-level inclusion to address structural inequalities rooted in age.

Resources:

• United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. (2021). Youth, peace and security: A programming handbook. United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/sites/www.un.org.peacebuilding/files/documents/yps_programming_handbook.pdf

A youth-sensitive conflict analysis is a foundational and evidence-based process that systematically applies a "youth lens" to understand a conflict's context, dynamics, factors, stakeholders, and opportunities for peace. This lens goes beyond simply viewing youth as a monolithic group impacted by violence; it investigates the specific challenges, needs, perspectives, and aspirations of diverse young people. Crucially, it examines the interlinkages between age and conflict, including age-based norms and power structures that shape young people's realities. It draws on and compliments other intersectional frameworks such as gendered conflict analysis.

Background: After UNSCR 2250 (2015) several agencies began developing youth-sensitive or youth-informed conflict analysis tools: a) UNFPA & PBSO (UN Peacebuilding Support Office) (2018): published “The Missing Peace: Independent Progress Study on Youth, Peace and Security”, which explicitly called for youth-sensitive conflict analysis for the first time as a foundation for effective YPS implementation, b) UNDP, Search for Common Ground, and International Alert produced operational guides that integrate youth analysis into conflict assessments and peacebuilding program design and c) UNDP’s Youth-Inclusive Conflict Analysis (YICA) Framework (launched around 2017–2018) formalized this approach, providing a methodology for analyzing conflict through the lens of youth agency, exclusion, and resilience.

Looking forward: By analyzing youth's complex roles as victims, perpetrators, and positive agents of change, this analysis serves as an essential prerequisite for designing relevant and effective Youth, Peace, and Security (YPS) programming.

Resources: 

• United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. (2021). Youth, peace and security: A programming handbook. United Nations & Folke Bernadotte Academy. https://www.un.org/peacebuilding/sites/www.un.org.peacebuilding/files/documents/yps_programming_handbook.pdf

• Global Coalition on Youth, Peace and Security. (2022). Implementing the youth, peace and security agenda at country-level: A guide for public officials. Office of the UN Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. https://www.unssc.org/sites/default/files/node/resources/field_resource/2022-02/YPS-guide-for-public-officials-1.pdf

Youth-sensitive budgeting (in YPS context) is the systematic analysis, allocation, and tracking of public and international funds to ensure that resources in conflict-affected and fragile settings advance the specific rights, needs, and priorities of diverse young people as part of the Youth, Peace and Security agenda. It requires the meaningful participation of young people from different backgrounds in all stages of the budget cycle – from assessment and planning to implementation, monitoring, and oversight – so that budget decisions reflect their perspectives and strengthen mutual accountability between the state and young citizens. Youth-sensitive budgeting uses disaggregated data (for example, by age, gender, location, and other intersecting identities) to identify differentiated needs among youth, incorporates dedicated YPS priorities or sub-lines into relevant sectoral and national budgets, and includes adequate financing for protection and safeguarding measures for young people engaged in peace and security processes. 

Resources:

• United Nations Development Programme. (n.d.). Youth, peace and security: Fostering youth-inclusive political processes. UNDP. https://www.undp.org/publications/youth-peace-and-security-fostering-youth-inclusive-political-processes

• United Network of Young Peacebuilders & UN Peacebuilding Support Office. (n.d.). Financing for young people in peacebuilding: An overview. https://www.unoy.org/downloads/financing-for-youth/

• UNICEF, Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict, & Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation. (2022). Financing for young people in peacebuilding: An overview. UNICEF. https://www.unaoc.org/wp-content/uploads/financing_for_young_people_in_peacebuilding.220217.final_.web_.pdf 

The intersectional relationship between youth, climate change, and peace and security. This concept acknowledges how climate impacts can exacerbate existing vulnerabilities and conflict risks, while also recognizing the vital roles young people play in driving integrated solutions.