Profiles of Citizenship Orientations Among Youth

Prior studies revealed that low levels of youth political activity are not necessarily indicative of complete disengagement from societal affairs but could be accompanied by interest and latent involvement stemming from a standby or monitorial attitude. However, no prior study has investigated patterns of citizenship orientations including both manifest and latent engagement defined by one’s position towards institutional politics, according to different forms of participation. A questionnaire was filled out by 1,732 late adolescents and young adults in Italy (15–30 years old, M = 19.73, 60.7% female). Cluster analysis identified six profiles of citizenship orientations across different types of participatory activities (political, activist, political online and civic): active trustful, active distrustful, standby trustful, standby distrustful, unengaged trustful and unengaged distrustful. The results showed that each level of engagement—active, standby and unengaged—could be further differentiated between trustful and distrustful based on their attitude towards institutions and the electoral process.

Critical global citizenship

This introductory paper to our first issue provides reflection on the concept of critical global citizenship at both theoretical and practical levels. We maintain that ‘citizenship’, irrespective of its level of articulation (i.e. national, international, global, etc.) remains an issue that reflects a status, a feeling and practices that are intrinsically interlinked. As a legal status, formal citizenship allows individuals to form a sense of belonging within a political community and, therefore, empowers them to act and perform their citizenship within the spatial domains of the nation-state. Critical global citizenship, asks these same individuals not so much to neglect these notions of belonging and practice to a particular locale, but to extend such affinities beyond the territorial boundaries of their formal national membership and to think critically and ethically about their local, national and global relationship with those who are different from themselves. Making a case for a critical global citizenship, however, also requires acknowledging material inequalities that affect the most vulnerable (i.e. migrants, asylum seekers, those experiencing poverty, etc.) and which mean that efforts to cultivate global citizenship orientations to address social injustice are not enacted on an even playing field. As such, a critical global citizenship approach espouses a performative citizenship that is at once democratic and ethical, as well as being aimed at achieving social peace and sustainable justice, but which is also affected by material conditions of inequality that require political solutions and commitment from individuals, states, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and civil society organisations.1 1 This article is based on F. Mansouri (2014), ‘The Global Citizenship Project: From Words to Action’, published by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. © UNESCO, Paris

Adolescents’ Patterns of Citizenship Orientations and Correlated Contextual Variables: Results From a Two-Wave Study in Five European Countries

Studies on youth participation tend to characterize youth as either active and trustful or as passive and alienated. This cross-national and longitudinal study examines patterns of citizenship orientations characterized by both manifest and latent involvement differentiated by one’s position toward institutional politics (trustful or distrustful) among 1,914 adolescents from five European countries (53.5% female; Mage = 16.27). Demographic and proximal contextual correlates associated with different orientations at a 1-year interval were also assessed. Latent profile analysis identified four groups of citizenship orientations among adolescents: engaged trustful, engaged distrustful, unengaged trustful, and unengaged distrustful. Differences of membership likelihood were found for background characteristics (gender and family income), school characteristics (track, democratic climate, student participation, and its perceived quality), family, and peer norms of participation.

Critical global citizenship: contextualising citizenship and globalisation

This introductory paper to our first issue provides reflection on the concept of critical global citizenship at both theoretical and practical levels. We maintain that ‘citizenship’, irrespective of its level of articulation (i.e. national, international, global, etc.) remains an issue that reflects a status, a feeling and practices that are intrinsically interlinked. As a legal status, formal citizenship allows individuals to form a sense of belonging within a political community and, therefore, empowers them to act and perform their citizenship within the spatial domains of the nation-state. Critical global citizenship, asks these same individuals not so much to neglect these notions of belonging and practice to a particular locale, but to extend such affinities beyond the territorial boundaries of their formal national membership and to think critically and ethically about their local, national and global relationship with those who are different from themselves. Making a case for a critical global citizenship, however, also requires acknowledging material inequalities that affect the most vulnerable (i.e. migrants, asylum seekers, those experiencing poverty, etc.) and which mean that efforts to cultivate global citizenship orientations to address social injustice are not enacted on an even playing field. As such, a critical global citizenship approach espouses a performative citizenship that is at once democratic and ethical, as well as being aimed at achieving social peace and sustainable justice, but which is also affected by material conditions of inequality that require political solutions and commitment from individuals, states, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and civil society organisations.