Photo: Ronan Furuta | Unsplash
Guest Author: Maria Grigolia
Maria Grigolia is studying Political Science and Law at the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU) in Munich. Her interests include comparative political science, and public international law, with a focus on climate change. In this article, she explores examples of non-traditional political engagement, such as digital activism in Hong Kong and the Fridays for Future protest movement in Western European democracies, to examine their impact on the evolving political landscape of political participation in democracies.
Active participation in politics is a cornerstone of a functioning democratic system.[1] Yet, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the number of voters participating in general elections in Western democracies has been declining significantly since the 1990s, from an average of 76% in the 1990s to 68% in the 2010s.[2] The persistent decline in voter turnout in Western democracies has led the traditional literature to suggest that there has been a growing disengagement from politics in recent decades that could threaten the vitality of democratic systems.[3] However, the disconnect between states and citizens needs to be further understood in this context, rather than simply described as disengagement. Focusing on young people’s apathy towards voting, their preference for non-traditional, non-institutional political activities needs to be taken into account.[4] This essay explores why youth political participation has diversified and how the emergence of unconventional forms of political participation may not signal a democratic crisis. Rather, it may be an answer to the question of how young people believe their views can be better heard in politics. Two examples of non-traditional political engagement are outlined: digital activism in Hong Kong and the Fridays for Future initiative in Western liberal democracies. It also analyses the reasons for the rise of these forms of participation and the extent to which they have influenced policy.
Diversification of Political Participation Among Youth
Despite the decline in traditional participation, there is a diversification of political participation among young people.[5] Non-traditional participation is defined by its non-institutional, non-electoral nature.[6] Evidence suggests that young adults in particular prefer non-institutionalised forms of participation, including different forms of activism, to institutionalised form.[7] Social media, in particular, has transformed traditional forms of mobilisation by enabling small acts of participation, allowing individuals to receive and disseminate information and build their position within information networks, and reducing the cost and effort required to participate in protests.[8] This, in turn, has led to an increase in spontaneous and large-scale demonstrations, for which the Fridays for Future movements will be further considered.
Case Studies: Hong Kong Protests and the Fridays for Future Movement
In 2019, the Hong Kong government’s proposed legislation sparked protests among young people that were ignored, leading to an anti-government movement that manifested in various forms of political activism. One of this was online expression through posting and sharing information in support of the movement.[9] The reason why online participation was useful during the anti-bill protests was because in flawed democracies such as Hong Kong, online forms of participation serve to access political influence there, as there are fewer opportunities for the public to access it through only institutionalised forms of participation.[10]
The literature suggests why the use of digital media by younger audiences during the protests was indeed useful. Young people in Hong Kong are more likely than other age groups to participate in protests and share their political views on social media platforms due to growing dissatisfaction with the government.[11] Additionally, political activism among young people is increasing as they become more aware of political principles and rights, and are increasingly willing to challenge political leadership and conventional social and political norms. Thus, the potential of digital use to mobilise online activists to support the social movement against the bill was particularly useful among young people in 2019, as they were able to express their positions against the government’s actions.[12]
“As young people feel excluded from current environmental policies, they turn to other forms of political engagement as they understand themselves to be ignored by the authorities and express low political trust in politicians and political parties in general.“
Another form of unconventional participation manifested itself in the Friday for the Future movement, led by young people across western Europe. Since 2018, the climate justice movement has received a great deal of attention due to its mobilisation capacity, media coverage and global reach.[13] This is because participants in this climate justice movement rely mostly on peer networks and social media, rather than formal environmental organisations, and have the potential that other social movement organisations do not, namely the mobilising effect of young people to cultivate long-term activism and engagement.[14] As young people feel excluded from current environmental policies, they turn to other forms of political engagement as they understand themselves to be ignored by the authorities and express low political trust in politicians and political parties in general.[15]
In fact, the Friday for Future protests enabled young people to become politically engaged by protesting on an issue of particular concern to them. Individuals who participated in the protests perceived their participation as successful (ibid.). In particular, confidence in collective action and in the ability of one’s own group to bring about change through participation in climate strikes plays an important role, as can be seen in these protests in Germany. Even during the Covid-19 pandemic, the movement showed determination and adapted in a unique way to an unpredictable global situation. By launching a digital strike in April 2020, which allowed online participation every Friday, individuals, especially those from areas affected by the pandemic, were able to participate in the movement without being physically present.[16] Social media was used to share photos with hashtags such as #ClimateStrikeOnline, campaigns were also launched against climate-damaging brands, and online platforms such as Actionnetwork.org provided training for new participants to exchange support globally.[17] The coexistence of online digital techniques and the Fridays for Future movement thus demonstrates the power of unconventional forms of participation, even in extraordinary times such as the pandemic, and their mobilising effect in innovative ways that cannot be demonstrated by the mechanisms of institutionalised, conventional forms of political participation such as voting.
One reason for the dissatisfaction with the Hong Kong government is the perception in society that politicians are not in favour of political reform towards democracy.[18] The government’s push for the Bill, as being discussed as an example in this essay, sparked a social movement that was supported by a significant number of young people, particularly through online participation. Social media platforms are highly accessible due to their wide availability and user-friendly design. They allow marginalised groups, including low-income groups and those from rural areas, to connect, share experiences and access otherwise unavailable resources.[19] The Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019, proposed to allow the transfer of criminal fugitives from Hong Kong to other jurisdictions, including mainland China, Taiwan and Macau, which was a significant change from existing laws that prohibited such extraditions to mainland China.[20] The bill sparked mass protests in Hong Kong from June 2019, as many feared it would undermine the independence of the region’s judiciary and could be used to target political dissidents.[21] Furthermore, in flawed democracies such as Hong Kong, political events and the media are relevant to young people’s decision to join opposition parties. This in turn serves as a motivational channel to engage in democratic political competition, implying a more positive outcome for democratic development through unconventional political participation.[22] Indeed, this example shows that unconventional youth-led participation, such as the Fridays for Future movement, challenges the norm by operating outside conventional legal frameworks or in direct opposition to laws, highlighting the importance of conflict in democratic participation. Unlike traditional methods that seek consensus, these movements advocate for democratic deliberation through horizontal relationships, creating more inclusive and accessible spaces for youth engagement. By promoting dialogue and democratic values by creating spaces without institutionalising them, they contribute to the expansion of democracy beyond formal institutions, highlighting the dynamic interplay between conflict and democratic growth.[23] Thus, unconventional participation can be seen as a broadening effect on political participation that even supports democratic development. However, this essay is limited in that it does not analyse the radicalising effect that protests, for example, can have on democracies.
Inclusivity- Still a Challenge in Unconventional Participation?
The factor of inclusivity is elaborated in terms of the gender and educational background of participants, with a further critique of the racial issue in the Friday for Future movements in Western democracies. During the anti-government protests, the majority of participants had some form of tertiary education.[24] Therefore, with limited institutionalised forms of political participation, online forms of political participation were a means of including the expression of young, educated people. Among the students surveyed, voting was indeed the most commonly reported activity, at 62.7%, but non-institutionalised forms were more common, with 66% reporting participation in online political activism and 53% in offline activism that did not include voting, such as donating or signing a petition.[25] Furthermore, female students in particular were found to be more likely to participate in online political discussions or express political opinions.[26] In this example, Gen Z’s use of social media as a gateway to political content, coupled with female students’ increased likelihood to engage in online political discussions, highlights the role of the digital platform in facilitating political participation. Online and offline engagement are equally influential in supporting political movements, although the latter is more influenced by prior similar activity.[27] This dynamic suggests that social media can serve as an entry point for young people, including those previously disengaged from politics, to engage in meaningful political action, as evidenced by the increase in student participation in offline protests against government policies.
Climate change is often perceived in Western democracies as a post-materialist demand, which is particularly important to younger audiences as seen at the rising wave of climate justice movements. The climate justice movement in particular shows that protesters in Europe are between 14 and 19 years old, with a particularly high proportion of young women.[28] The effectiveness of addressing the global climate crisis through individual actions has been widely questioned in the literature.[29] As climate strikes vary across the world, intersectionality plays an important role in these forms of global protest, and furthermore, the protest is characterised by a high proportion of female participants. Although the movement is led by young women leaders, there are critical voices within the environmental activist community calling for greater inclusivity and diversity. Education systems can still lead to inequalities in political participation. Moreover, when mainstream political participation is characterised by large inequalities, it creates vulnerabilities that can be exploited by populist and extremist groups, and thus threaten the foundation of democracy.[30] Furthermore, criticism regarding the underrepresentation of people of colour, since these movements have been as predominantly “white and educated”, highlights ongoing concerns over inclusivity.[31]
“Climate change is often perceived in Western democracies as a post-materialist demand, which is particularly important to younger audiences as seen at the rising wave of climate justice movements.“
Young people are increasingly involved in unconventional political activities. Across Europe, this includes both traditional activities like voting and modern methods such as participating in global youth movements and online campaigns.[32] However, activist Tonny Nowshin, who works with the climate change organisation 350.org in Berlin, points out that diversity within the climate movement often goes unnoticed or is underrepresented in mainstream media coverage. Nowshin highlights a persistent problem: there may be discussions about diversity, but these efforts rarely lead to substantial change. In the online magazine the activist argues for a more strategic approach to inclusivity, emphasising the need to acknowledge the problem of underrepresentation. Specifically, there is a call for the movement to better include non-academic voices and more people of colour, indicating that while the climate justice movement has made significant evolutions, there remains room for improvement in truly reflecting global diversity within its ranks.
While unconventional forms of political participation have indeed mobilised more diverse groups, including minorities and women, they are not exempt from criticism. Nevertheless, despite their imperfections, these alternative forms of engagement provide a more accessible platform for those who have been historically marginalised or less active in traditional political arenas.
The essay highlights the crucial shift in the landscape of youth political participation, moving beyond traditional forms of electoral voting to non-traditional forms of engagement, such as digital activism in Hong Kong and global climate justice movements like Fridays for Future. The decline of conventional voting is contrasted with the rise of online platforms and social networks as tools for mobilising around critical issues such as political reform and environmental policy, signalling a broader, more inclusive understanding of democratic engagement that prioritises direct action and community involvement. At the same time, unconventional forms of political engagement highlight the capacity of young people to significantly influence political discourse and achieve outcomes that may remain elusive through traditional voting alone. Examples from Hong Kong and the global Fridays for Future movement illustrate the empowering effect of such participation, enabling young people to voice their concerns and exert political influence in new and effective ways. However, the essay also recognises the challenge of improving inclusivity, as demonstrated by the climate justice movement, which is criticised by the activist who argues for the need for better representation of minority groups. Furthermore, the potential risks of non-traditional forms of participation, such as issues of radicalisation that may affect the broader democratic framework, are not discussed in this essay. Despite this consideration, this essay challenges the conventional idea that associates the declining voter turnout with declining youth interest in politics or a democratic crisis. Instead, it presents a broader view of the future of democracy, one that is characterised by the diverse and active participation of young people, driven by their desire to effect change and engage with political issues on a more meaningful level.
References:
[1] Almond, G.A. (Gabriel A. and Verba, S. (1989) The civic culture : political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Newbury Park, Calif. ; Sage.
[2] OECD (2019), “Declining voter turnout in OECD countries: Change in average voting rates per decade in OECD countries, 1990s and 2010s”, in Trends Shaping Education 2019, OECD Publishing, Paris.
[3] Macedo, S. (2005) Democracy at risk: how political choices undermine citizen participation and what we can do about it. Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution Press.
[4] Reichert, F. (2021) “Collective Protest and Expressive Action Among University Students in Hong Kong: Associations Between Offline and Online Forms of Political Participation,” Frontiers in political science.
[5] McCaffrie, B., & Akram, S. (2014). Crisis of Democracy?: Recognizing the Democratic Potential of Alternative Forms of Political Participation. Democratic Theory (Brooklyn (New York, N.Y.)), 1(2), 47–55.
[6] Lavizzari, A., Boldt, G., Bárta, O., European Union & European Commission, 2021. Meaningful Youth Political Participation in Europe: Concepts, Patterns and Policy Implications. Council of Europe.
[7] Kittilson, M.C. (2009) “Is Voting for Young People? By Martin P. Wattenberg. (Pearson Longman, 2008.) The Good Citizen: How a Younger Generation is Reshaping American Politics . By Russell J. Dalton (CQ Press, 2008.),” The Journal of politics, 71(2), pp. 753–754.
[8] Margetts, H., John, P., Hale, S., & Yasseri, T. (2015). Political Turbulence: How Social Media Shape Collective Action (1st ed.). Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400873555
[9] Lee, F.L.F. et al. (2019) “Hong Kong’s Summer of Uprising: From Anti-Extradition to Anti-Authoritarian Protests,” China review (Hong Kong, China: 1991), 19(4), pp. 1–32.
[10] Skoric, M.M., Zhu, Q. and Pang, N. (2016) “Social media, political expression, and participation in Confucian Asia,” Chinese journal of communication, 9(4), pp. 331–347.
[11] Lam, W.-M. (2017) “Changing Political Activism: Before and After the Umbrella Movement,” in Hong Kong 20 Years after the Handover. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 73–102.
[12] Reichert, F. (2021) “Collective Protest and Expressive Action Among University Students in Hong Kong: Associations Between Offline and Online Forms of Political Participation,” Frontiers in political science.
[13] Lavizzari, A., Boldt, G., Bárta, O., European Union & European Commission, 2021. Meaningful Youth Political Participation in Europe: Concepts, Patterns and Policy Implications. Council of Europe.
[14] Lavizzari, A., Boldt, G., Bárta, O., European Union & European Commission, 2021. Meaningful Youth Political Participation in Europe: Concepts, Patterns and Policy Implications. Council of Europe.
[15] Cologna, V., Hoogendoorn, G., & Brick, C. (2021). To strike or not to strike? An investigation of the determinants of strike participation at the Fridays for Future climate strikes in Switzerland. PLoS One, 16(10), e0257296.
[16] Lavizzari, A., Boldt, G., Bárta, O., European Union & European Commission, 2021. Meaningful Youth Political Participation in Europe: Concepts, Patterns and Policy Implications. Council of Europe.
[17] Lavizzari, A., Boldt, G., Bárta, O., European Union & European Commission, 2021. Meaningful Youth Political Participation in Europe: Concepts, Patterns and Policy Implications. Council of Europe.
[18] Lam-Knott, S. (2019) “Responding to Hong Kong’s political crisis: moralist activism amongst youth,” Inter-Asia cultural studies, 20(3), pp. 377–396.
[19] Pérez-Escolar, M., & Canet, F. (2023). Research on vulnerable people and digital inclusion: toward a consolidated taxonomical framework. Universal Access in the Information Society, 22(3), 1059–1072. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-022-00867-x
[20] Shek, D.T.L. (2020) Protests in Hong Kong (2019-2020): a Perspective Based on Quality of Life and Well-Being. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 15(3), pp.619-635..
[21] Shek, D.T.L. (2020) Protests in Hong Kong (2019-2020): a Perspective Based on Quality of Life and Well-Being. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 15(3), pp.619-635.
[22] Ng, H.Y. (2016) “What Drives Young People Into Opposition Parties Under Hybrid Regimes? A Comparison of Hong Kong and Singapore,” Asian politics & policy, 8(3), pp. 436–455.
[23] Lavizzari, A., Boldt, G., Bárta, O., European Union & European Commission, 2021. Meaningful Youth Political Participation in Europe: Concepts, Patterns and Policy Implications. Council of Europe.
[24] Lee, F.L.F. et al. (2019) “Hong Kong’s Summer of Uprising: From Anti-Extradition to Anti-Authoritarian Protests,” China review (Hong Kong, China: 1991), 19(4), pp. 1–32.
[25] Reichert, F. (2021) “Collective Protest and Expressive Action Among University Students in Hong Kong: Associations Between Offline and Online Forms of Political Participation,” Frontiers in political science.
[26] Reichert, F. (2021) “Collective Protest and Expressive Action Among University Students in Hong Kong: Associations Between Offline and Online Forms of Political Participation,” Frontiers in political science.
[27] Reichert, F. (2021) “Collective Protest and Expressive Action Among University Students in Hong Kong: Associations Between Offline and Online Forms of Political Participation,” Frontiers in political science.
[28] Lavizzari, A., Boldt, G., Bárta, O., European Union & European Commission, 2021. Meaningful Youth Political Participation in Europe: Concepts, Patterns and Policy Implications. Council of Europe.
[29] Bamberg, S., Rees, J., & Seebauer, S. (2015). Collective climate action: Determinants of participation intention in community-based pro-environmental initiatives. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 43, 155–165.
[30] Janmaat, J.G. and Hoskins, B. (2021) “The Changing Impact of Family Background on Political Engagement During Adolescence and Early Adulthood,” Social forces, 101(1), pp. 227–253.
[31] Anon. (2020) ‘Diversität beim Klimaprotest: Zu jung, zu weiß, zu akademisch’(Diversity at the climate protest: Too young, too white, too academic), taz.de. Available at: https://taz.de/Diversitaet-beim-Klimaprotest/!5645995/ Accessed: 02/03/2024.
[32] Lavizzari, A., Boldt, G., Bárta, O., European Union & European Commission, 2021. Meaningful Youth Political Participation in Europe: Concepts, Patterns and Policy Implications. Council of Europe.