International youth at the 2008 Conference of Youth in Poznan.
Something incredible is happening here in Poznan. Delegations of young people from countries and organizations around the world have come together, uniting to form an International Youth Delegation. While the world remains fragmented on the issue of climate change, the world’s youth – in many ways, at least – have come together.
Days before the United Nations Climate Change Conference officially convened, hundreds of young people met for the Conference of Youth, an event designed to formulate a shared vision of international youth, to organize a number of provocative actions throughout the conference, and to coordinate messaging, communication, policy, and strategy amongst the many youth delegations participating.
Now, in the final days of the Poznan conference, it is clear that international youth have made significant progress. We have a common messaging platform, have organized dozens of actions and media events, developed working relationships between youth delegations, are assisting understaffed government delegations, and have developed productive policy working groups. We even have a logo!
The weight of such progress, however, has brought the International Youth Delegation to a critical moment. To manage the multifaceted and diverse nature of the delegation, issues with governance and structure are continually arising.
Structure. It either kills you or lets you fly.
Reflecting on the past week, I am reminded of William Golding’s classic novel, Lord of the Flies. After crash landing on a deserted island, Golding’s boys quickly get to work, establishing as many rules and bureaucratic procedures as possible to mimic the social structures they’d grown up with. In many ways, international youth have done the very same thing. Reflecting the massive bureaucracy that is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and in many ways the organizational models of the more dominant youth delegations (Australia, Canada, Europe), the International Youth Delegation has adopted a basic structure to regiment the process of advancing a collective youth voice during the negotiations.
Where Golding concerns himself with degeneration, I’m concerned with stagnation. Are young people building a governing structure that suffocates the very vitality and functionality of a youth delegation? Are we building a structure that leads to the same fragmentation seen in the negotiation rooms?
Pass the conch shell, please.
The governing structure adopted by the International Youth Delegation, complete with flow charts and multi-page guidance documents, is built on an unstable foundation. When we arrived in Poznan for the Conference of Youth, everyone had already been involved in online working groups covering policy, networking, actions, communications, and governance. Never was the question asked: what is the purpose of an International Youth Delegation? More specifically, is the Delegation intended to speak for all youth at all times, or should it act as a vehicle to share resources and help all youth delegations reach their potential and goals?
As we make decisions on common policy stances or programs, this unanswered question causes tension and frustration. Perhaps more seriously, the bureaucratic structure of the Delegation tends to dampen the spirit of how international youth engage at this conference. Because the process must honor the desires and concerns of all youth delegates in all decisions, the Delegation acts cautiously and conservatively. We have added red tape to everything. With our own futures at stake, this is no time for caution. We need to be loud.
Personally, I advocate for limiting the scope of International Youth Delegation jurisdiction. The structure must provide the means for delegations to act boldly. The Delegation can act most effectively by encouraging action, not standing in the way. Here’s an example.
Over the past week, youth delegates have been building relationships with understaffed small government delegations, mostly from the developing world. By doing small, but essential tasks on behalf of such small delegations, young people are helping the delegations engage more effectively in the negotiations. Recently, a proposal was raised within the International Youth Delegation to limit this program to countries meeting a base ethical standard (we will not assist governments engaged in genocide, etc.). The proposal was met with impassioned support and opposition, the issue being where to draw such a line. The debate raised two main questions: Who is the International Youth Delegation to make such a judgment? Why do we need an overarching structure to make a decision when each delegation would make individually – and more strategically?
As young people at this conference, not fully recognized in the process, we need to take advantage of our youthful energy and unique position. We bring a life and urgency to the issue that is sorely missing in the plenary halls and side events. If anything, an International Youth Delegation should be animated and passionate. The governing structure, however, has worked to create an atmosphere of drab uniformity. Where is the youthfullness in the International Youth Delegation?
Still, despite these concerns, youth from around the world are indeed taking a large step in the right direction. The goal is bold and necessary – building a global youth climate movement – and if we weather this period of growth and transition, I have no doubt that we can play a powerful role in Copenhagen and beyond.
Jeff Gustafson is the director of the D.C. Youth Environmental Alliance and a SustainUS delegate to the 2008 United Nations Climate Change Conference.
