\"STUDY ON YOUTH SOCIAL AND POLITICAL ACTIVITIES IN LATVIA\"
FINAL REPORT
The Client:
Ministry for Children and Family Affairs of the Republic of Latvia
The Research Conductor:
Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Ltd
RIGA, 2007

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
TABLE INDEX
Table 1. Awareness of Young People about the Youth Policy (YP) of Latvia.............................................................26
Table 2. Knowledge of Young People of Youth Policy of Latvia – Answers to the Question “What Do You know
about Youth Policy of Latvia?”....................................................................................................................................27
Table 3. The Main Issues to be Solved by the Latvian Government in the Youth Field.............................................56
Table 4. Values...........................................................................................................................................................58
Table 5. Dimensions of Values...................................................................................................................................59
Table 6. Most Important Aspects for Job...................................................................................................................64
Table 7. Trusting in Institutions...................................................................................................................................68
Table 8. Health............................................................................................................................................................70
Table 9. Availability of Information on Possibilities to Participate...............................................................................75
Table10. Value of Participation and Opportunities to Influence.................................................................................82
Table 11. Evaluation of NGOs and Social Organisations...........................................................................................84
Table 12. Participation in School/ High school Activities............................................................................................85
Table 13. Reasons for Dissatisfaction with Opportunities of Spending Free Time.....................................................89
Table 14. Opportunities for Spending Free Time Desired by Young people..............................................................89
Table 15. Favourite Ways of Spending Free Time – TOP7........................................................................................91
Table 16. Places for Spending Free Time – TOP7.....................................................................................................93
Table 17. Participation in Interest Groups...................................................................................................................94
Table 18. Informal Interest, Friends Groups and Interest, Hobby Groups, where Young People Participate............95
Table 19. Youth Participation in Cultural and Entertainment Events..........................................................................96
Table 20. Attendance of Entertainment Events..........................................................................................................97
Table 21. Social and Political Collaboration................................................................................................................98
Table 22. Evaluation of Voluntary Work......................................................................................................................99
Table 23. Participation in Political Activities..............................................................................................................101
Table 24. Trust in Institutions vs Participation in Social and Political Activities........................................................102
Table 25. In Youth Opinion, Reasons that Motivate to Participate in Social, Public and Political Activities.............124
Table 26. In Youth Opinion, Reasons that Demotivate to Participate in Social, Public and Political Activities........125
3

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
FIGURE INDEX
Figure 1. Awareness of Youth Policy (YP) of Latvia...................................................................................................25
Figure 2. Youth Opinion on Main Latvian Government Issues to be Solved in Youth Field.......................................54
Figure 3a. Values........................................................................................................................................................57
Figure 3b. Dimension of Values.................................................................................................................................58
Figure 4. Valuation of Job, Career..............................................................................................................................63
Figure 5. Most Important Aspects for Job...................................................................................................................64
Figure 6. Why it is Necessary to Work?......................................................................................................................64
Figure 7. Mobility.........................................................................................................................................................65
Figure 8. Trusting in Institutions..................................................................................................................................68
Figure 9. Youth in Riga and in Regions......................................................................................................................69
Figure 10. Health........................................................................................................................................................69
Figure 11. SUMMARY of activities..............................................................................................................................73
Figure 12. Available Information About Possibility to Participate in............................................................................74
Figure 13. Information Source For Possibilities of Spending Free Time....................................................................75
Figure 14. Follow Information About...........................................................................................................................76
Figure 15. Opportunities.............................................................................................................................................78
Figure 16. Participation Value and Influence Chances...............................................................................................81
Figure 17. Role of Politics in Youth Life......................................................................................................................83
Figure 18. Valuation of NGO and Social Organisations.............................................................................................83
Figure 19. Particiaption in School/ High School Activities..........................................................................................85
Figure 20a. Free Time at Working Days.....................................................................................................................88
Figure 20b. Free Time at Weekends..........................................................................................................................88
Figure 21. Satisfaction With Possibilities of Spending Free Time Outside School/ High School................................88
Figure 22. Favourite Forms of Spending Free Time...................................................................................................90
Figure 23. Spending Free Time..................................................................................................................................91
Figure 24. Places for Spending Free Time.................................................................................................................92
Figure 25. Participation in Intereset Groups...............................................................................................................94
Figure 26. Attendance of Entertaining Events............................................................................................................96
Figure 27. Participation in Social and Public Activities...............................................................................................98
Figure 28. Valuation of Voluntary Work......................................................................................................................99
Figure 29. Participation in Political Activities.............................................................................................................100
Figure 30. Youth Activity Segments..........................................................................................................................105
Figure 31. Socio-Demographic Description..............................................................................................................113
Figure 32. Description of Free Time Activities..........................................................................................................114
Figure 33. Description of School/ High School Activities..........................................................................................115
Figure 34. Description of Interest Group Activities....................................................................................................116
Figure 35. Description of Cultural and Entertainment Activities................................................................................117
Figure 36. Description of Social and Public Activities...............................................................................................118
Figure 37. Description of Political Activities..............................................................................................................119
Figure 38. Description of Interests............................................................................................................................120
Figure 39. Description of Information Availability About Participation Possibilities...................................................120
Figure 40. Description of Trusting in Institutions.......................................................................................................121
Figure 41. Description of Opportunities....................................................................................................................122
Figure 42. In Youth Opinion, Reasons that Motivate to Participate in Social, Public and Political Activities............123
Figure 43. In Youth Opinion, Reasons that Demotivate to Participate in Social, Public and Political Activities.......124
4

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
ABBREVIATIONS
APSYCTD Association of Pupils Self-government and Youth Clubs of Talsi District
CCYO Consultative Commission for Youth Organisations
CYC Children and youth centre
E Expert
EU European Union
FGD Focus group discussion
MCFA Ministry for Children and Youth Affairs
MES Ministry of Education and Science
MW Ministry of Welfare
NGO non-governmental organisation
NYCL National Youth Council of Latvia
PA Public administration
PO Public organisation
SA State agency
SUL Student Union of Latvia
SW social worker
SYIC State Youth Initiative Centre
YAC Youth affairs coordinator
YIC Youth initiative centre
YP Youth policy
YC Youth club
YO Youth organisation
YW Youth worker
DEFINITIONS
Youth workers Persons that work with youth.
Youth affairs experts Studied target group representatives – representatives of youth organisations, municipality employee that
(sometimes - experts) work with youth, social workers that work with youth etc.
Youth affairs coordinator Persons that plan and coordinate work with youth in particular municipality.
Youth Persons in age group between 15 to 25 years.
Youth with special needs Youth that have movement and mental disorder. Within the study this term is used to separate these
young people among young people of social risk group.
Youth of social risk group Regulation No 32 of the Cabinet of Ministers (January 11, 2005, Riga (prot. No 3 20§) states that all
young people 15-25 years old are a socially less protected group, yet within this study young people of a
social risk group are considered unemployed, or with alcohol, drug, psychotropic, tocsin substances,
gambling or with computer addiction problems, or abused young people, waifs and strays, law breakers,
disable young people.
ABBREVIATIONS IN QUOTES
When there are quotes from in-depth interviews, focus group or expert discussions used in the report, for marking identity of the target group
following abbreviations are used:
CYC Children and youth centres
FGD active Focus group discussion with active young people
FGD pasive Focus group discussion with passive young people
YW Youth workers
YAC Youth affairs coordinators
YO Youth organisations
NGO Non-governmental organisations
SW Social workers
PO Public organisations (ministries, local governments)
5

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
INTRODUCTION
The general objective of “Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia” was to investigate
participation forms of young people in social and political life by finding out what are the possibilities,
obstacles or motivators for youth to participate.
In order to achieve these results and obtain the information needed for preparing an action programme,
following aims for the research were raised: (1) to study situation of youth policy making and its
implementation in Latvia; (2) to identify problems and factors that influence youth policy making and its
implementation; (3) to draw guidelines and perspectives for the development of youth policy.
In order to achieve the above mentioned aims, the following tasks for the research were raised:
1. To study current situation, problems and challenges in the area of youth policy and within its
thematic direction in Latvia (education, training, employment and welfare, health, social protection,
free time, culture, youth and justice, participation, decreasing social exclusion, integration, civil
society, information for youth, minorities, equal opportunities, with special emphasis on non-formal
education and voluntary work of youth).
2. To study entities of youth policy and their role, responsibility in youth policy making and
implementation.
3. To study social-political activity of young people as entity of youth policy in Latvia summarising the
types of actual youth activity, showing regional comparison of activity types, main differences, as
well as proportional division of identified activity types.
4. To study obstacles (legislative, administrative, financial, motivating, information etc) and
circumstances that influence the work of youth policy entities; clarify how identified obstacles and
circumstances influence youth activities.
5. To propose recommendations how to decrease and prevent identified obstacles, as well as improve
the conditions.
6. To study vertical and horizontal cooperation and partnership mechanisms between entities of youth
policy, ascertain youth participation mechanisms and partnership models that are implemented in
the state and local government institutions.
7. To propose recommendations for improvement of cooperation and partnership models between
entities of youth policy.
8. To study best practices in work with youth, especially in areas of youth voluntary work and non-
formal education, participation, free time, and securing availability of information.
9. To raise actual aspects of youth policy in 2007, as well as overall recommendations for developing
youth policy within competence of every entity of youth policy.
The scientific aim of the research was to obtain credible data, based on scientific research methods and
information that would allow quantitative and qualitative analysis of the situation, and would give a rise for
recommendations on youth policy planning and implementation.
The research was conducted by Gints Klāsons (a head of the research working group, an executive of the
quantitative section of the research), Laura Sūna (an expert on study on youth target group, an executive
of the qualitative section of the research), Evija Rudzīte (an expert on youth politicy, an executive of
elaboration of recommendations), Anna Selecka (a moderator of experts in-depth interviews and focus
group discussions), Anita Zaļeniece (a field work coordinator).
Translation of the report in English – Anna Pavlina.
6

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
SUMMARY
Main Results of the Research
Information level about youth policy in Latvia
• 7% of youth sample acknowledge that they are very well informed about youth policy in Latvia,
35% of respondents can’t say something in particular, but have read or heard something. 25%
just know that there is a youth policy in Latvia and 26% have not even heard about youth policy in
Latvia.
• Information level as well as quality of information is low. Main associations regarding youth policy
is linked with young people involving in active policy, parties and student boards.
• NGO representatives as well as members of youth organization acknowledge that they are well
informed about youth policy, but they are not satisfied with passive feedback from the government
that makes them feel that they are not heard on governmental level. Main complains is about lack
of single official source of information. At the moment information is fragmented and placed in
many information channels that make it difficult to proceed.
Process of youth’s policy development and implementation
• All target groups of this research named the same problem of youth policy in Latvia - lack of legal
regulation i.e. the fact that no law on youth has been established.
• Activities of the Ministry for Children and Family Affairs (MCFA) are positively valued by the target
group. Experts believe it is due to the fact that there are so many young people employed at the
MCFA who are aware of youth problems themselves. Another positive fact is that youth as a
separate social group is finally pointed out with their specific characteristics and needs.
• The process of youth policy development is negatively valued mainly because youth opinion is
not sufficiently taken into account. There is no system how youth opinion could be gathered on
the regular bases and integrated into documents of youth policy and programmes of action.
• Another experts’ admonishment was devoted to the fact that any activities are targeted mainly to
the active audience of youth which is ready to get involved. But activities that would be targeted to
passive audience are missing.
• Regarding implementation process the MCFA do not communicate equally well with all youth
policy entities and the flow of information is sometimes insufficient. Research shows that
representatives of different target groups quite often are not well informed about activities
regarding youth policy. Also experts acknowledge that they are informed in general level, but
information on particular actions they happen to know only post factum. Therefore one can say
that there is lack of strategic communication in youth policy.
Topical problems in work with youth and youth policy implementation
• Main problems in the field pointed out by different target groups are following: legal aspects and
regulations of youth affairs (the Youth Act; legal status of youth specialists and its inclusion into
professions classifier); development and implementation of co-operation processes among
institutions (in local and national level as well as among NGOs); ease of bureaucratic processes
for youth initiatives and youth employment (voluntary work, summer work, competitive education),
youth’s opinion research and its consideration.
7

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
• Social risk groups should be identified as a separate field of action. The main issues within it are:
limited possibilities for spending quality leisure time; limited availability of financial support for
their projects; lack of human resources working with this social risk group, ineffective activities
considering addictive substances, difficulties to integrate among other youth and in society in
general.
Co-operation experience of youth policy’ entities
• Currently co-operation of different entities is mainly drawn to some particular projects, to gain
particular goals, but not in a long term, as there are no models of strategic collaboration yet
developed and implemented. Consequently, each entity of youth policy makes its own
programme (also because there are no legal regulations that would define co-operation model on
a national level for different entities of youth politic).
• By experts point of view co-operation is delayed by lack of common information system. Each
entity informs its audience individually and information is not followed up and summarized. The
MCFA initiative to establish common internet portal is evaluated very positively.
• Experts consider cooperation and actions among governmental institutions to be uncoordinated.
They also think that there is lack of cooperation among ministries i.e. each ministry is responsible
of specific field (e.g. the Ministry of Education and Science, the MCFA – work with youth etc.), but
these parties don’t cooperate efficiently to solve the issue regarding youth.
• Also cooperation between different youth organizations (NGOs) is named as problematic. Usually
it is short term cooperation and not well developed. It has been observed that youth organizations
are not able to keep sustainable partnership to gain “big aim”. They keep on working on their
specific field.
• There are few advisory boards named as successful role model of cooperation. Representatives
of different youth policy areas are invited to take part at the round table discussions and solve
many youth topics. Such boards are more successful in places where local municipality is in
charge of its establishment as well as coordination process (city of Talsi is named as success
story).
• Another problem is quality of youth collaboration. Governmental institutions involve young people
only „for show”, but not in the very decision making. That has negative consequences on young
people’s motivation to get involved in social processes on local as well as national level.
• Respondents mention some local action programmes (e.g. in Liepaja, Talsi and Cesis) as
successful in defining concrete actions for municipality regarding youth issues.
Main issues to be solved in youth sector
• NGO and youth coordinators point out following issues: establishment of legal regulations, ability
of institutions to start real (not just superficial) cooperation with target group, improvement of
performance, defining amount and procedure of financing, improvement of cooperation between
institutions, development and implementation of single information system.
• Young people point at: quality of free time spending, improvements of educational system
(student’s load, professional teachers, quality of education etc.), preventive activities regarding
addictive substances, employment issues of youth.
8

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Youth collaboration
• Approximately one third of youth are not willing to get involved in activities and should be
considered to be passive; 15% are ready to involve in different social activities, 16% - only in
school and extracurricular activities, 19% - in political activities, but 17% are ready to get involved
in any activities as well as in school, social and political events and other projects.
• Overall youth is well informed about extracurricular activities at the school as well as in you NGO.
But more than a half of respondents acknowledge that they have no information how to get
involved in work of local municipality, NGO, religious and political organizations.
• Majority of young people follow the information about their school (68%), but about other fields
they are less interested e.g. governmental work (44%), local municipality work (38%), social
events and NGO activities (38%), EU activities and topicality – only 32%.
• Young people have most pessimistic views on possibility to influence decision making and to
collaborate (only 20% are sure that they have good possibilities). They also believe that there is
no chance to get involved in political organizations (27%). Most optimistic they are about
possibility to succeed in life (76% believe they have good possibilities), to implement their
interests (73%) and choose vocation they like (71%). Thus we may conclude that young people
are more positive about their own performance than about possibilities to collaborate with
institutions, participate in organizations and influence decision making process.
• 23% of young people do net participate in extracurricular activities at schools. 39% take part in
educational competitions, 30% have organized cultural events, but 18% took part in sport
activities. Less than 15% of youth has been involved in other activities.
• Young people are rather positive about leisure time activities (80% are satisfied with it). Those
who are not satisfied with extracurricular activities point at lack of spare time and variety of
possibilities. 11% of youth sample has 6 spare hours per day, 40% has 3 to 6 spare hours per
day, but on weekends 70% of youth has 6 spare hours.
• Favourite leisure time activities are: spending spare time with friends (48%) and doing sports
(35%). Young people spend quite a lot of time at TV (74% acknowledge that they watch TV in
their spare time, although only 8% like it).
• Regarding participation in interest education, 26% of youth are not involved in any extracurricular
activities. 35% take part in sports teams, 18% - dancing courses, 15% - choir, 11% in music
groups and 10% in theatre activities.
• Majority of youth sample take part in entertainment and cultural events, most of them have visited
cinema (66%) and theatre (62%). Other events such as exhibitions, concerts, clubs, sports events
and hiking are quite popular way of spending leisure time.
• More than every forth (28%) have not taken part in any social activity. 36% have taken part in
joint work (environmental activities), but 21% says they have done voluntary work. 20%
acknowledge that they have taken part in activities to support youth interests. Other social
activities are less popular among the target group (such as helping old people, handicap children,
wildlife protection and others).
9

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
• Youth participation in political activities is quite poor – overall 37% of respondents have never
taken part in any political activity, but 35% have discussed policy with friends and family
members. Active form of youth participation in policy such as membership in political parties,
organizations, and demonstrations, as well as voting is not popular among target group.
Factors that stimulate youth activity
• Young people name following factors that could stimulate their involvement and collaboration in
social and political activities: dissatisfaction with current situation (20%), positive experience
(18%) and interesting way of spending free time (17%). Barriers for collaboration are: lack of
interest (36%), lack of information (27%), lack of time (20%) as well as laziness (13%).
• According to experts factor that could facilitate participation are: interesting projects, attractive
ideas, prospective benefits (both emotional and financial), possibilities to spend quality spare
time, influence of friends and family members. Barriers are: lack of interest, lack of information,
personal traits (laziness, shyness), family and other adult’s influence, constrains of bureaucracy.
Main Conclusions of the Research
• In general activity of young people can be valued positively – more than a half regularly engage
themselves in social, cultural, political and in other spare time activities. Though segmentation of
youth activities done within the research shows that overall 1/3 of young people might be
characterized as passive. It can’t be affirmed that it is their choice – as socio-demographic data
show that passive young people more frequently are secondary school pupils, as well as those
who live outside Riga, that rather acknowledges lack of their opportunities.
• Understandably young people prefer pleasure and entertainment (including cultural) activities,
while social and political activities are less popular. However this might not be regarded as
negative trend, especially because socio-demographics data show that social value of
participation increases by the age i.e. 15-16 year old young people are more engaged in
entertaining activities while 17-25 year old more often take part in activities to help somebody, to
improve environment etc.
• These and other differences among age groups studied in the research imply that youth is not a
homogeneous age group (15-25 years old) and youth policy should deal with smaller age sub-
groups i.e. learn its specific interest, problems and needs in order to develop more effective
action plans. Good example is Estonian Youth Work Strategy , which deals with youth as 1
heterogeneous target group dividing it according to specific needs and interests in following age
groups: 7-11, 12-17 and 18-26.
• In international comparison, for example among EU states, in terms of youth activity Latvia fall
behind the Old European countries, that means that overall young people in Latvia are less
involved in different social, cultural and political activities. Still it must be stressed out, that
situation in Latvia is quite similar to other new EU member states, therefore we may not regard
situation in youth participation negatively. Apart from the range of participation, more important is
the extent to which young people take opportunities that are available to them. Research data
show that Latvian youngsters use their opportunities widely (only ¼ of youth population haven’t
taken part in any activities during last 2 years) what let us to conclude that overall activity would
1
„Estonian Youth Work Strategy 2006-2013.” The Ministry of Education and Research of Estonia. Tartu, 2006.
10

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
be stimulated by widening the choice of opportunities rather than by trying to attract more young
people to existing activities (that don’t always meet their interests and aspirations).
• Analyzing experience of youth policy implementation, there are several issues that should be
considered:
o First of all, legal regulations of youth issues (both conceptually within the Youth Act and
in particular norms and requirements). All target groups that were included in the
research point that lack of legal regulations prevents any development.
o As second obstacle should be mentioned lack of mutual cooperation mechanisms among
policy entities – only few municipalities has developed particular models how youth policy
entities communicate and coordinate activities among them, while on regional and
national level such mechanism are no developed. That makes difficult to solve various
problems and what is more important, take preventive measures.
o And third obstacle in policy implementation is mutual communication among policy
entities – all target groups admit that in youth policy implementation youth opinion should
be considered as much as possible, however in reality different signs show that youth
involvement is just formal. Serious communication failure is that quite often different
policy entities are ill informed about the overall situation in youth policy as well as about
other entities’ activities and opinions.
Thus it could be concluded that it is very important to, first of all, make in order legal regulations of
youth policy, secondly, develop and implement effective mutual cooperation model (including
young poeple as partners), and thirdly, develop and maintain effective and understandable
communication model that would ensure informative and communicative (feedback) function.
• Analyzing some cooperation models among youth policy entities, it was found that one of major
problems in day-to-day work is the ability to perceive young people as resource not as problem.
In many places, especially on municipalities’ level young people are perceived as problem group
and less there has been work done with youth as resource; emphasizing such aspects as drug-
addiction, alcoholism, roaming but not making programs to develop young people as valuable
social group. In this aspect it is important to recognize that young people are not just policy
entities but partners both in policy making and implementation, and to shift work with youth to
cooperation with youth.
• Alarming are data about the issues that young people themselves put as topical, that should be
solved by the government. Prevailing here is, of course, interest on wider recreation and
entertainment opportunities, still significant amount of young people bring forward different social
problems – usage of addictive substances, violence among young people, and welfare of families,
problems with education quality and availability and health care availability. This shows that
young people are very worried about social problems and they are not safe about their future –
both in terms of education, carrier and relationships. Reasons for uncertainty are education
expensiveness and quality (issues on study load, qualification of teachers, and issue on study
language), perceived difficulties to find well-paid and interesting job as well as alcoholism and
drug addiction, that young people face among their equals in age and in families.
• One of major research objectives was to identify barriers and encouraging factors for youth
activity and collaboration. Among various such factors, the most important is access to
opportunities namely – the wider the opportunities (both at school and outside it), the potentially
more active is the youngster. It is well noticeable among young people that live in towns
(especially in Riga), whose range of activities is much wider than of those living in countryside,
starting from entertainment and ending with political activities. Of course we can’t deny impact of
other factors like attitude in family, positive or negative influence from friends, teachers’ ability to
11

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
rouse interest, as well as personality traits of young people; however possibilities to choose
interesting spare time activities significantly increase the overall activity among young people.
• Research authors consider analysis of youth activity in wider context as a very important issue,
namely, youth aspirations and opportunities to collaborate can’t be seen apart from overall social-
economic situation of the country, because youth readiness to participate is influenced by family
welfare, study process, uncertainty about the future. Bringing forward the most significant youth
policy issues, you must, from one side, focus on particular feasible steps (such as, adaption of the
Youth Act, development and implementation of different youth initiative events etc.), but from the
other side, focus on overall social-economic issues in national level (welfare, health care,
education etc.). Thus carrying out only particular to youth oriented activities, but not securing
youth-friendly social-economic environment, valuable involvement of youth as partners in youth
policy implementation is impossible. Thereby youth policy is not only specific issue of youth
sphere, but also should be integrated in welfare, health, internal affair and other policies.
12

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In order to get thorough insight, both quantitative and qualitative research methods were used.
Quantitative methods give us the notion how widespread are various aspects of the subject or - statistical
and numerical data about the target population. Qualitative methods in turn gave an in-depth
understanding of social and political activity among youth and highlighted the problems of youth policy
planning. Thus research results are both statistically (numerical) descriptive and analytical in subject
exploration.
During the research not only primary data (gathered within the study) were used, but also secondary data
(previous studies in the field, statistical summaries and documents) analysis was carried out, to get a
broader perspective on the problem i.e. how it relates to social, economic and legislative aspects. Besides
existing secondary data, also statistics about youth social and political activity, education, free time,
employment etc. were summarised from official data sources.
To investigate the subject in detail, following main target groups were identified:
1. Young people, 15 - 25 years old, residents of Latvia who are active members and/ or leaders of
youth non-governmental organisations (societies and foundations).
2. Young people, 15 - 25 years old, residents of Latvia who are not involved in youth non-
governmental organisations (societies and foundations) activities.
3. Young people, 15 - 25 years old, residents of Latvia who are not involved or cannot be involved in
youth activities for different reasons.
4. Chairmen of local governments and youth affair coordinators in the regions as well as leaders of
youth initiative centres supported by Ministry for Children and Family Affairs.
5. Officials from the state institutions who are involved in the youth policy making and implementation.
Following methods were used for studying particular target groups:
TARGET GROUP METHODS
Young people, 15 - 25 years old, residents of Latvia who are Individual in-depth interviews (with chairmen)
active members and/ or leaders of youth non-governmental Questionnaire (for members)
organisations (societies and foundations). Focus group discussion
Young people, 15 - 25 years old, residents of Latvia who are Questionnaire
not involved in youth non-governmental organisations Focus group discussion
(societies and foundations) activities
Individual in-depth interviews with social workers
Young people, 15 - 25 years old, residents of Latvia who are
Individual in-depth interviews with experts on social risk
not involved or cannot be involved in youth activities for
groups
different reasons.
Questionnaire
Chairmen of local governments and youth affair coordinators in
the regions as well as leaders of youth initiative centres Individual in-depth interviews
supported by Ministry for Children and Family Affairs
Officials from the state institutions who are involved in the Individual in-depth interviews
youth policy making and implementation
Sample size of the target groups were as follows:
- 651 respondents filled in the questionnaire forms;
- 38 respondents participated in the in-depth interviews;
- 4 focus group discussions - 2 in Riga and 2 in regions were conducted both with active and passive
young people.
Following set of tools were used to carry out the research:
1. Partly structured questionnaire forms for studying youth opinion.
2. Partly structured discussion guidelines for focus group moderating.
3. Partly structured interview guidelines for individual in-depth interviews.
13

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
The research was conducted in the following logical stages of the project:
1. Elaboration of the research plan and getting approval from Department of Youth Affairs of the
Ministry for Children and Family Affairs (the Client).
2. Elaboration of research tools and getting approval from the Client on:
a. Questionnaire form;
b. Guidelines for individual and expert in-depth interviews;
c. Guidelines for focus group discussions.
3. Desk research analysing secondary data.
4. Field work of the research, carrying out:
a. Survey;
b. In-depth interviews;
c. Focus group discussions;
d. Expert interviews.
5. Case study – identifying best practices in work with young people and carrying out an in-depth
analysis of the most successful cases.
6. Analysis of qualitative (materials from interviews and group discussion; documents) and quantitative
(statistical data processing of questionnaire results, tabbing) data.
7. Presentation of provisional results.
8. Working on final research report.
9. Presentation of draft report.
10. Final aligning of the report with Client; translation and submission.
14

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE YOUTH POLICY OF LATVIA
2.1. Youth as Target Group of the Youth Policy
The concept of youth policy originates in the post war period, when the state power was considered as
potentially destructive, and civil society had to undertake the role for limiting it. Youth was treated as a
part of society that has significant role in strengthening and implementing democratic values for the
participation of society in establishing the state. For a long period of time, work of youth was considered
as a significant tool for stimulating their interest in social and political participation that they could realize,
but during the last years it is used to socially reintegrate youth with limited opportunities 2.
There are different factors that influence youth activities: (a) segregation of society; (b) professional
qualification (c) representation of youth in decision making in institutions; (d) distrust in state institutions,
etc. At the same time, part of young people get more educated and they become more interested in
influencing intuitions and their decisions.
There are different approaches to the youth policy among different countries. In some countries it is paid a
lot of attention for establishing the versatile youth policy in different levels of public administration, but in
other countries youth is not treated as a separate group of society that needs specific attention (describing
that kind of approach Melvin Delgado uses a concept \"innocent negligence\" that means youth
development is left for drifting, however this approach is not enough to develop the state 3).
Most often youth is defined in terms of an age group, in Europe usually from 15 to 25 (in some countries
to 30) years. Society \"constructs\" youth as a specific group and defines its status using different kind of
norms – both visible (legally definitive), and covert (cultural, educational)4. Formally transition to adult
status happens within certain age limitations. Still from sociological point of view, transition to adult status
happens not only by influence of different norms, but it depends also from social factors, economic
system, education, professional background etc.
For quite some time scholars have used the term \"youth\" to denote a set of subjects who: a) are
concluding, or are about to conclude, their studies; b) are about to enter the labour market or have
recently started working for the first time; and c) still have to create their families. In these terms, youth is
a social category, which is typical for modern industrial societies. In fact, industrial societies have
conferred social visibility to individuals, aged between 15 and 25, who have achieved biological maturity
and virtually completed their socialisation process, but have yet to master all the abilities and skills
required to assume adult roles. 5.
In sociological literature youth is defined as a stage for socialisation when transition to adult status takes
place. Although there is a diversification of this transition stage when development stages are not defined
as they were for the previous generations, still youth is a decisive stage in people’s lives when essential
decisions are made that influence their further life and when significant social skills, competence and
professional qualification is obtained.
At the same time, nowadays tendencies of individualisation and self-independence characterise modern
youth. Adaptation of different subcultures and lifestyle values is important to young people. Wherewith
environment (cultural, style) of young people influence their choices, behaviour more often than traditional
referent groups – parents, family.
2
„European Youth Trends 1998: Report by the National Research Correspondents.” Strasbourg, Council of Europe.
3
Delgado, M. „New Frontiers for Youth Development in the Twenty First Century: Revitalising and Broadening Youth Development.” New
York, Columbia University Press, 2002.
4
„European Youth Trends 1998: Report by the National Research Correspondents.” Strasbourg, Council of Europe.
5
European Commission. „Study on the State of Young People and Youth Policy in Europe.” Instituto di Ricerca S.c.r.l., 2001.
15

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
That, of course, leaves an impact on the youth policy – in order to be effective it has to adjust to these
modern characteristics of young people’s environment. One of the biggest challenges is to give an
opportunity to young people for an individual development in the framework of official politics, instead of
trying to create personalities of young people according to set standards. In these circumstances formal
authorities should be an information source on the contrary to carrying out of repressive functions, as well
as encouraging continuous education of young people (and even next age group) instead of forcing
education according to the standardized methods. Thus happens the transition from perception of youth
as a passive target group that realizes certain politics to perception of youth as the one of a partner,
collaborator.
The Research about the state of youth in European countries6 summarizes three approaches about the
way sociologists analyse youth as a social group.
The authors of the first approach characterise young people as a lower class of society, because young
people have to face with many risks: failure in studies (inability to adopt to certain standards of the formal
education), unemployment, alcoholism, drug addiction, defects in mental health that puts them on the
lowest steps of the stairs of the hierarchy of the society. Taking into consideration these circumstances,
they are less competitive in the labour market and are more dependent of other people or the state.
Different authors indicate that more and more young people in Europe are excluded from the labour
market and other important fields of society.
The researchers of the second approach are of the opinion that individuals do not have a “common” way
of transition from a teenager to the adult life. The course of life of a human being becomes more individual
and fragmentary; transitions between the stages of life are not that drastic any more. If it was possible to
distinguish certain logic for the stages of youth life: graduation from school, beginning of a carrier,
establishment of relations, birth of the first child; nowadays these stages can be not only in different order,
but they can also be absent from the experience of youth. Besides the course of life is no longer a linear,
young people can work, study and take care of children at the same time; elder people, even adults can
become students7. Authors of this approach conclude that one cannot talk about young people as a
separate social group, because it has no common characteristics, excluding age, therefore youth group as
a separate can be used only as a category for statistics.
The research puts forward the third approach to the youth that brings an idea about a new stage in life
“after-teenager years” that can be characterised by several working places, longer period of time for
obtaining education, several places of residence and relations. Longer period of education increases
hopes of young people about their lives and creation of carrier, although these hopes are not justified in
reality, because it is noticed that the importance of the academic degree decreases, the labour marked
becomes more elastic and changes are continuing constantly, as well as the continuous high level of
unemployment. As a result young people cannot start actively their working agenda and they need time
before they can cope with the growing responsibility.
The approaches mentioned show that young people can be analysed in different ways, but one thing is
clear that the lifestyle and choices young people make are influenced by the state and the market.
Although modern state and industrial society limits autonomy of young people, at the same time they do
not disregard young people, because the existence of society, development of culture and culture
depends on the ability of young people to obtain new abilities in order to take upon the growing role 8. It
explains, why young people are paid so much attention from the society and the government by working
6
„European Youth Trends 1998: Report by the National Research Correspondents.” Strasbourg, Council of Europe.
7
Youth Forum Jeaunesse. „White Paper on Youth: More is needed.” Youth Opinion, Issue 1, January-February, 2002.
8
European Commission. „Study on the State of Young People and Youth Policy in Europe.” Instituto di Ricerca S.c.r.l., 2001.
16

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
out specific youth programmes and by including young people as a separate target groups in other politics
(for example, in connection to social politics, welfare, etc).
In given aspect of the research youth target group is defined only in terms of the age groups – they are
residents of Latvia at the age between 15 and 25 years. In this case it is not necessary to define additional
conditions for identification of the youth groups, because one of the goals of the research is to find out
characteristics of today’s Latvian youth, their problems and challenges, therefore any additional
restrictions would narrow the target group and create inconveniences for its research.
2.2. History of the Development of the Youth Policy
Youth policy after regaining independence was affected by the Soviet Union’s political system of youth,
where political instruments were movements of pioneers and Komsomol. These were eliminated after the
independence, but in this time several youth social and political organizations were resumed (for example,
Latvian scouts’ and guides’ organisation that was succesful already in 90s when Latvia obtained
independence, chilldren and youth 4H Movement (“Mazpulki”), Latvian Youth Red Cross etc.).
International programmes, funds and private donors provided assistance to the establishment of these
organizations. Former Pioneer Houses that were associated with different interest groups were
transformed into centres for children and youth that maintained the emphasis on the education in the
fields of interests; and the events organised in centres were organised for children at the age until 18 for
their leisure time9.
The first attempt to formulate attitude towards young people in the form of the youth policy appeared in
the mid 90s. A Conference “Cooperation of the State, Local Governments and NGOs in Creation and
Realization of the Youth Policy” took place in September 1997 in Rezekne; the aim of this conference was
to coordinate cooperation between state and NGOs in the filed of youth and to bring together
representatives of the state sector and the members of the NGOs. Similar conferences took place in
Cesis in 1995 and in Liepaja in 199610.
The determined efforts to establish the youth policy in Latvia were noticed in the late 90s, when the
subjects involved started to understand that youth policy is not connected only with education in the field
of interests, but involved other important areas. The non-state sector had an important role to play in the
establishment of the youth policy.
The SYIC, the NYCL, the Student Union of Latvia (Latvijas Studentu apvienība) and the Latvian Youth
Association (Latvijas Jaunatnes asociācija) signed an agreement in 1998 that envisaged regular mutual
exchange of information and solving of the issues concerning the youth, as well as support to youth non-
governmental organizations and promotion of their development by organizing different congresses,
conference and seminars.
The first appeals to pay more attention to the youth policy and to put it in the agenda of the politics was
mentioned in the Public Council of Youth Affairs (Jaunatnes lietu sabiedriskā padome) that tried to
develop youth policy and was created by the Latvian Youth Association (Latvijas Jaunatnes asociācija),
the Student Union of Latvia (Latvijas Studentu apvienība) and the NYCL. One of the proposals of this
Council was to establish a post of a State minister for Youth Affairs, whose main duties would be to work
out standard regulations for implementation of the youth policy, to establish the structure of
9
Kiopa, A. “Development of Youth Policy after Regaining Independence in Latvia and in Baltic States”, master work in political science, Riga,
2002.
10
BNS, 11.09.1997.
17

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
implementation of the regulations and to take political responsibility about determined and effective
creation of the youth policy.
The necessity to create a determined youth policy was mentioned in the Latvian youth congresses. In the
First Congress (in April, 1999) the main emphasis was put on the youth policy, in the Second Congress (in
May, 2001) general issues that are connected to youth or important issues for the society were more
important: information of the youth, possibilities for the development of youth organizations, crime, health,
integration of society, education.
In 2002 the NYCL takes on itself leading role in working out and advancing of the Latvian Youth Act by
establishing a Coordination Council (Koordinācijas padome) (which includes secretariats of special
assignments and line ministries, the Latvian Association of Local and Regional governments and biggest
NGOs) and the so-called “Shadow cabinet” (that secures participation of young people in the working out
of the Youth Act). In later years the NYCL has organised comprehensive public debates, discussions in
working groups about the emerging Youth Act in order to harmonise points of views and needs of different
target groups.
In March 2003 the NYCL adopted 11 national youth political indicators worked out by the EP11, which help
to evaluate the development of the youth policy in the countries.
During this period of time the institution responsible for the implementation of the youth policy is the
Ministry of Education and Science, but in December, 2003 Congress of the member organizations of the
NYCL approved a Youth Act Position Document, which defines the necessity to divide the functions of the
Ministry of Education and Science in the advancing the youth policy. Shortly afterwards – in the second
half of year 2004 with the decree of the Cabinet of Ministers certain functions of the Ministry of Education
and Science were passed to the MCFA, following the transfer of the field of the youth policy to be under
the management of this Ministry.
In 2005 an active work has been done in the working out and advancing of the Youth Act in the meeting of
the State Secretaries that, however, did not bring any success. In 2006 the NYCL submitted Youth Act to
the Parliament. At the moment, when the research was done, the project of the Youth Act was submitted
to the Human Rights and Social Affairs Commission of the Parliament that has made some corrections;
after that the draft act was submitted to the Parliament for the second reading.
2.3. Institutional and Legal Framework of the Youth Policy
Creation and coordination of the youth policy was in the competence of the Ministry of Education and
Science that traditionally was responsible for the youth affairs until 2004. After regaining independence
the Ministry had a separate department for youth affairs that was removed by the minister Juris Celmiņš
and a Unit of Youth Interests Education was established that was later called Youth Affairs Unit. In 2002
this unit was eliminated and for 2 years the Ministry of Education and Science did not have specialists on
the youth affairs; all the issues that were connected to youth policy or youth work were transferred under
the supervision of the SYIC. The Unit for youth affairs was established in The Ministry of Education and
Science in 2004, in which there was only a head of the unit working in the spring of 2004, but there were
two more tenures.
11
Since the task of the research is not to analyse in detail a field of youth policy, then here is only listed these 11 indicators without analysing
them: (1) non-formal education, (2) youth training policy, (3) legislation, (4) youth budget, (5) information, (6) multistage politics, (7) research
on youth issues, (8) collaboration, (9) cooperation among ministries, (10) innovations, (11) youth representation. For details see:
http://www.ljp.lv/data/11_indikatori_LJP.doc.
18

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
With a regulation of the Cabinet of Ministers12 in 2004 the field of youth was transmitted to the competence
of the Ministry for Children and Family Affairs, where a Department of Youth Affairs was established.
The most important normative acts that determine the youth policy in Latvia are the Concept of the State
Youth Policy13 and the State Youth Policy Programme14; the drafts of these documents were prepared in
the late 90s, but approved only in 2002. Until then there was not a single normative act that would
regulate this field.
In the Concept of the State Youth Policy youth is defined as a demographic group between the age of 15
till 25 and the youth policy was defined as a permanent field of state policy that determines the aims,
tasks and activities in order to solve problems that are connected with youth in all levels of the public
administration. A special feature of the youth policy is a movement to preventive work, youth integration
and collaboration in social, political, economic and cultural processes.
The Concept of the State Youth Policy mentions several problems that are connected with the youth and
in general youth is regarded as a problem in this document more than a resource. The Concept includes
several solutions to the youth problems. The following aim of the youth policy is forwarded: to promote the
formation of young people into comprehensively developed, responsible members of a democratic society
and to encourage the participation of youth in the political, economic, social and cultural processes on the
local, national and international level. The following main political tasks were underlined:
• To develop self-governments and initiatives of youth;
• To support the establishment of youth organisations and their unions, to promote their
development;
• To create possibilities of varied development in education, culture, science and sport fields;
• To secure representation of the interests of young people in the decision making processes;
• To promote voluntary work systems;
• To encourage civil and patriotic education of youth;
• To develop single youth information and consultations system;
• To develop a system of education and professional training of youth employees;
• To create understanding of young people about a healthy life style;
• To promote the involvement of young people and youth workers in international youth structures
and projects.
Basic principals of the Concept includes support to young people of the social risk groups and young
people with special needs, and secures the principle of non-discrimination and once every five years work
out of the action programme for the implementation of the state youth policy.
The Concept determines also the competences of state, local government institutions, educational
institutions and NGOs in the field of implementation of the youth policy. The competences of the state
institutions includes working out of the normative basis of the youth policy and legislation connected with
it, to promote cooperation between state and local government institutions and NGOs, as well as to draft
the State Youth Policy Programme and organize its implementation. The Conception anticipates certain
competences for the institutions of local government, for example, to establish a consultative council of
local governments for work with youth, to promote the development of youth organizations and training of
youth workers. The competences of educational institutions is to ensure the realization of the youth policy
goals, tasks and priorities in the educational institutions and to secure support to the self-governments
and initiatives of the students of the educational institutions. In turn one of the competences of youth
12
Regulation No 581 of the Cabinet of Ministers of August 20, 2004 “On Assigning Several Functions of the Ministry of Education and
Science to the Ministry for Children and Family Affairs”.
13
Approved in the meeting of the Cabinet of Ministers on March 19, 2002 (protocol No 12 49 §).
14
State Youth Policy Programme approved by the order No 281 of the Cabinet of Ministers of May 3, 2005 (protocol No 23 35.§)
19

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
organizations is to represent youth interests in the decision-making and realization in the field of youth
policy.
The MCFA has prepared a State Youth Policy Programme for 2005 – 2009 (further – Programme) after
taking over the competences of the Ministry of Education and Science. The Programme is worked out in
accordance with tasks included in the chapter “Children and Family Affairs”15 of the Declaration on Aigars
Kalvitis Lead the Cabinet of Ministers Intended Action16, and with the priorities in the youth field put
forward in the White Paper of the European Commission “New Impetus for European Youth”17. Previous
evaluation of the state programmes of youth policy (1998 – 2002 and 2002 – 2003) was taken into
account in working out of this Programme.
The aim of the Programme is to create a good environment that would help young people to start self-
dependent life as a responsible member of the society.
Subaims of the Programme:
1.To create a good legal and institutional environment for work with youth;
2.To create an information system corresponding to the interests and needs of young people;
3.To create a system of non-formal education of youth, to develop youth voluntary work and to
increase abilities of youth to make use of their leisure time;
4.To create youth friendly health care services;
5.To promote youth employment;
6.To support youth participation in establishing civil society;
7.To better prevention measures of the youth crime.
The NYCL worked out following youth policy principls:
• Principal of involvement – to promote active participation of young people in public processes,
especially, in processes that are connected with the political decision making;
• Principal of the information accessibility – to promote provision of youth with the information
according to their needs and interests that is necessary for active participation in all social
processes, if the normative acts do not state otherwise;
• Principal of equal opportunities – to secure to every young person without any discrimination
opportunitiy to participate in all social processes and be an independent member of society;
• Principal of the observation of the interests of the youth – by solving issues that ar connected with
youth to take into account their interests, rights, needs and possibilities;
• Principal of the social and economic preconditions – to promote the creation of such social and
economic preconditions that would secure a possibility for all young people to be independent
and to be integrated in the Latvian society.
2.4. Youth Policy Agents – Their Role, Functions and Cooperation
The Ministry for Children and Family Affairs has the main responsibility on development and
implementation of the youth policy.18; it is a leading public administrative institution in the field of protection
of rights of children, family and youth.
The Ministry has the following functions:
 To formulate a state policy in the field of protection of rights of children, family and youth;
15
“We will ensure determined state youth policy by working out Youth Act and enabling circumstances for youth self-initiative and
collaboration in social life”, “Strengthen open, democratic and civil society of Latvia based on inhabitants mutual help and their active
participation in rightful state governance”. Declaration on Aigars Kalvitis Lead the Cabinet of Ministers Intended Action, December 1, 2004.
16
December 1, 2004 .
17
„White Paper: A New Impetus for European Youth.” COM(2001) 681.
18
http://www.bm.gov.lv
20

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
 To organise and coordinate implementation of the policy in the field of protection of rights of
children, family and youth.
The Department of Youth Affairs of the Ministry for Children and Family Affairs follows the youth policy;
and its main task is to coordinate implementation of the state policy in the field of youth.
The Ministry for Children and Family Affairs organises the work of two consultative institutions. The
Coordination Council of Youth Policy (Jaunatnes politikas koordinācijas padome) is a consultative and
coordinative institution, whose aim is to ensure development and implementation of youth policy in the
state and to secure involvement of young people in the decision-making process. The task of the Council
is to make sure the implementation of the coordinated youth policy takes place in the State. The Council
consist of 8 Ministers (Minister of Economics, Minister of Interior, Minister of Education and Science,
Minister of Welfare, Minister of Culture, Minister of Health, Minister for Children and Family Affairs,
Minister for Special Assignments for Society Integration Affairs), the chairman of The Latvian Association
of Local and Regional Governments and the president of the National Youth Council of Latvia (Latvijas
Jaunatnes padome). The Consultative Commission for Youth Organisations (Jaunatnes organizāciju
konsultatīvā komisija) is a completely new institution that was established on April 4, 2007. The main
tasks of CCYO are to analyse the youth policy, to identify problems and to work out proposals for the
development. Such mechanism will allow ensuring the development of determined and effective youth
policy. CCYO is formed of representatives of different active youth organisations. The Consultative
Commission will prepare its position and opinion and will submit it to the Coordination Council of Youth
Policy (Jaunatnes politikas koordinācijas padome).
The youth policy is cross-sectoral policy that involves different fields; that is why implementers of youth
policy are various subjects – state, local government institutions, non-governmental institutions and
informal groups. The ministries within their competence implement the youth policy on the state level.
Ministries support youth organisations that are connected with the field of these ministries, for example,
the Ministry of Agriculture supports Latvian 4H Movement (Latvijas mazpulku organizācija), the Ministry of
Defence organises and leads the Youth Guards (Jaunsardze).
The Concept of State Youth Policy determines certain competences of the local governments in the filed
of realization of the youth policy, but the local governments object that as this is yet another field, where
local government has to work, that has not any additional finances. The Ministry for Children and Family
Affairs announces different project tenders within national financing programmes where local
governments can participate and receive financing. With the financial support from the Ministry, several
youth initiative centres have been established in local governments in recent years, but now the local
governments ensures their work. The Concept envisages the introduction of the youth affairs
coordinator post in local governments, but this, however, is not a binding suggestion. In April 2007 45
youth affairs coordinators were engaged in local governments, part of them works in the city councils, part
– in education administrations, others – in children and youth centres.
One of the most influential subjects is the National Youth Council of Latvia (Latvijas Jaunatnes
padome) that is a union of youth organizations established in 1992. The NYCL defines its mission as
increasing the quality of life of young people and represent their interests, by promoting the importance of
youth organisations, stimulating their development, cooperation and involvement in political processes, in
order to establish democratic society in Latvia. Since 2002 the NYCL has been actively involved in
planning of the development of the youth policy by implementing several important projects in order to
work out and lobby the Youth Act.
21

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Several youth organisations are active in the non-governmental sector in Latvia that implement youth
policy, yet as many researches on non-governmental organisations show 19 it is difficult to determine
precisely their number or division of their working fields, because there is no separate classification that
would distinguish youth organisations. Part of organisations is united in the National Youth Council of
Latvia (Latvijas Jaunatnes padome), but not all of them.
Informal groups are also active in many places, where young people realise different initiatives, but have
not formally established a union. Informal groups and youth organisations organise events and projects in
order to facilitate life of young people and represent interests or young people on national, regional and
local level.
Important subjects in youth politics are youth workers or persons that work with young people. These
people have significant importance in the implementation of youth policy. It is a term that is used in non-
governmental sector and is adopted from the term used in Europe “youthworker”. Youth workers or
persons that work with young people is not a classified profession in Latvia, term “youth worker” is
determined in the Concept of the State Youth Policy, but since 2002 there have been many discussions
about the term. Similar to youth affairs coordinators in local governments youth workers work in different
institutions (youth initiative centres, health centres, evening schools, children and youth centres, etc).
Youth workers are in direct contact with young people; promote their development and education.
There are many important state and international institutions that work in the field of youth policy in
Latvia, by organising different events that are connected with this field. Among these institutions UN
structures have to be mentioned: UNICEF that organises different projects for youth and children, the
main focus is on children and teenagers though, less for young people; UNESCO that turns more to the
education and culture of young people; state agency “Agency of International programmes for Youth” that
is responsible for the implementation of the EU non-formal education programme “Youth in Action”; state
agency “European Union Information Agency”.
2.5. Latvian Youth Policy in the Framework of the European Union
Youth policy in Europe is carried out in different levels: European, national and local level. On the
European level the main agents are international institutions (both intergovernmental and non-
governmental organisations), on the national level – governmental and state institutions. In many
countries a large part of responsibility for the development of youth policy is delegated to regional and
decentralised state administrative institutions.
On national level two opposite models for development of youth policy can be outlined. One is a
centralised model, where a separate youth affairs ministry is active or a separate ministry is entrusted the
competences of youth affairs. In Europe this strategy is adopted in Germany, Spain, Greece and Portugal.
The other is dissipated model, where youth affairs are distributed in different ministries and there is no
separate institution, which is responsible for youth. This situation is working in Italy, Denmark and Iceland.
Most of European countries are in between these two models20.
In European level youth policy is developed in different ways both by working out guidelines and
documents, and by including youth dimension in other policies and specific programmes, and by creating
separate programmes for youth development.
19
„Role of Youth Public Organisations in Implementing State Youth Policy”, the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the University of
Latvia, Riga, 2003.
20
Info Youth, cooperation network in youth affairs. http://www.infoyouth.org/UDIP/GB/GB_2_0_org_gouv.htm
22

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
The most important youth policy document is the White Paper “New Impetus for European Youth” 21 that
was made in consultation with young people, researchers and representative of countries. Four fields of
youth policy were identified in the White Paper, in which active involvement is necessary: active
participation of young people, important information and information services for young people, promotion
of voluntary work of young people and improvement of knowledge about youth. The White Paper
introduced an open society method in the youth policy that includes determination of priority topics,
preparation of common tasks and guidelines and foresees consultations with young people in this
process. It has to be stressed out that the White Paper has only permissive nature.
The White Paper puts forward positions of the EU member states on issues of youth policy, but political
responsibility about the development and implementation of youth policy is on the shoulders of the
member states, because youth policy has to be made as closely as possible to the youth itself, so that it
corresponds to their needs and interests, taking into account that situation and problems of young people
differ from country to country. At the same time the White Paper admits that the EU policy and
programmes influence young people, especially in the fields of education, employment, professional
training and access to information technologies.
After publishing the White Paper, the Council of the EU with the Resolution established a framework of
cooperation in the field of youth in Europe22. In the Resolution the Council invites the European
Commission and the member states, each within their own areas of competence to use open method of
communication and the horizontal consideration of the youth aspect in different policies, taking into
account matters such as the needs, the situation, the living conditions and the expectations of youth. The
Council defined a timeframe for introduction of the White Paper and invited the Commission to prepare a
report about the application of each priority in the member states. The Council invited the member states
to participate in the preparation of the reports and to prepare an overview about the situation in their
respective countries, by consulting young people and youth organisations. The Council called on the
member states, with due regard to the principle of subsidiarity, to strive to the achieving the aims in the
youth field set forth by the Council and to carry out measures to implement the intentions outlined in the
White Paper.
An important document in the EU related to the youth is the Green Paper \"Confronting demographic
change: a new solidarity between the generations\" 23, where it is outlined that it is important to integrate
young people into the labour market and to support them as they pursue ‘non-linear’ careers, alternating
between work, study, unemployment and retraining or the updating of skills.
The EU member states adopted the European Youth Pact in 2005, whose aim is to improve education,
training, mobility, employment and social inclusion of young people, whilst helping to achieve a work-life
balance with the family life. The Pact has defined trends, in which member states are invited to act. The
European Youth Pact is one of the instruments for achieving the revised Lisbon objectives. The Council of
the EU in many documents has invited the Commission and the member states to carry out actions in
order to activate work on trends outlined in the Pact, thus improving implementation of the European
Employment Strategy and the Social Integration Strategy.
Validation of non-formal education is very significant trend in the youth policy field. In recent years on
European level there have been several large discussions and conferences, in which disputes about
significance of non-formal education in youth development and opportunities to achieve wider recognition
of non-formal education took place. On European level there has been worked out several instruments for
21
„White Paper: A New Impetus for European Youth.” COM(2001) 681.
22
Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States. Meeting within the Council of 27 June
2002 Regarding the Framework of European Cooperation in the Youth Field (2002/C 168/02). Official Journal of the European Communities,
13.7.2002, C168/2.
23
„Green Paper: Confronting Demographic Change: a New Solidarity between the Generations.\" COM(2005) 94 final.
23

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
validation of non-formal education. The Council of the EU has worked out a portfolio for European youth
leaders and youth workers, where youth workers and representatives of youth organisations can share
their experience in youth field. Since 2005 the European Commission develops and implements the
European level validation instrument Youthpass, which is meant for young people that have participated in
the projects of the programmes “Youth” and “Youth in Action”, thus promoting no-formal education
validation. The aim of this instrument is to ensure employability of young people and youth workers, the
reflection upon the personal non-formal learning process, the social recognition of youth work. It is
expected that Youthpass will be linked with other European level initiatives (such as, Europass and other
EU civil collaboration programmes).
The normative acts related to youth policy is not binding for member states, they express determination
and trends of member states. Working out own policy planning documents Latvia has taken into
consideration priorities and trends defined in the European level documents.
2.6. Awareness and Knowledge of the Latvian Young People about the Youth Policy
Overall, only 7% of young people declare that they are well aware about the youth policy of Latvia (see
Figure 1), but 26% of the young people state that they have never heard of it. Approximately 60% have
heard or read something about the youth policy of Latvia, but do not know anything in detail.
While analysing the social demographic scope (see Table 1), it is obvious that young people at the age
between 19 – 25, male, of Latvian nationality,
Figure 1. Awareness of Youth Policy (YP) of Latvia.
residents of Riga are informed about the youth
policy, whilst people at the age between 17 – 18, I have heard,
I am very well read something
who live outside Riga have more frequently not aware about about the YP,
heard anything about the youth policy. the YP but I don’t really
6.6% know anything
about it
In general these indicators cannot be valued as No answer 34.7%
very negative, especially because of the fact that 7.8%
the Youth Act is not approved in the Parliament.
At the same time it is important to stress out that
I have never
young people, who themselves are members of heard, read
I am informed
that there is a
youth organizations are more informed, thus anything about
YP in Latvia,
directly or indirectly collaborating in the working YP and know
but know
nothing about it
out of the youth policy or participating in the 25.5%
nothing more
about it
debates about it. This in turn means that until now 25.3%
there has not been a lot of explanation work done,
in order to inform target groups – youth representatives – about the necessity and advantages of such
policy.
24

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Table 1. Awareness of Young People about the Youth Policy (YP) of Latvia
AGE GENDER NATIONALITY DOMICILE
Russian, Outside
15-16 17 18 19-25 Male Female Latvian Riga
% other Riga
I am very well aware about
3.6 5.3 2.7 15.5 10.5 4.6 7.9 3.6 11.0 6.0
the YP
I have heard, read
something about the YP, but
38.4 34.8 26.7 40.1 31.4 36.9 35.5 33.0 36.6 34.4
I don’t really know anything
about it
I am informed that there is a
YP in Latvia, but know 24.1 23.5 26.0 28.9 22.3 27.7 24.4 27.4 26.8 25.1
nothing more about it
I have never heard, read
anything about YP and 25.0 28.7 31.3 14.1 27.1 25.0 25.8 24.9 22.0 26.0
know nothing about it
No answer 8.9 7.7 13.3 1.4 8.7 5.8 6.4 11.2 3.7 8.4
TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
In a way the overall awareness of young people, of course, is influenced by the attitude of these young
people towards policy as such. The data obtained in the research about the life values of these young
people24 indicates that the importance of policy has very moderate impact: in a five-point scale young
people recognize the importance of politics in their lives with 2,39 points, thus placing it with unimportant
values together with religion.
The data about the concerns of young people about the political processes in the country and their local
government proves the low level of importance of the politics in the lives of these young people, as well:
only about 40% affirm that they follow the information about the current events in their local governments
and the country in general25.
At the same time it has to be mentioned that the majority of young people think that they have no access
to information about the possibilities to get involved in political activities: about 60% underline that they
have no access to information about possibilities to be involved in the activities of their local government
and NGO, 78% have no information about possibilities to collaborate in political parties, whereas 29% – in
youth organizations26. Therefore even such factor can be a substantial reason for an overall passivity of
young people in relation to the policy of the state in general and the youth policy as in the current case.
Even the young people, who indicated that they know something about the youth policy of Latvia, when
asked to explain in more details, what exactly they have heard, read or know, mostly state in their replies
that in reality they are not informed about the youth policy of Latvia, but rather about different activities of
young people in politics in general. As it can be seen in the responses of the young people (see Table 2)
activities of youth organizations of political parties, possibilities of young people to involve themselves in
politics, activities of different youth (student, pupils) organizations are considered as youth policy.
24
See Chapter 4.1.
25
For details see Figure 14.
26
For details see Figure 12.
25

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Table 2. Knowledge of Young People of Youth Policy of Latvia – Answers to the Question “What Do You know about Youth Policy
of Latvia?”
There is a council, where young people from different organizations participate and decide on issues that are important to young people,
which are then put for approval in the Parliament
I know that some politicians have young advisors and that the youngest politician in Latvia is 22 years old
I know that some parties have political youth organizations
There are youth political parties that are involved and meet with the politicians and come up with their ideas to them
I have heard that a lot of young people involve themselves in the Tautas partija, yet nothing serious takes place. Someone tried to
convince me to join it, because they organize lot of parties and one can get drunk.
We have a Pupils Council in our city
That is policy that solves problems of young people and tries to improve lives of young people.
I have heard of the Youth Organization of the Tautas partija
I know that in the youth policy it is possible to watch the real work of the Parliament
I know that a lot of young people go to foreign countries for exchange programmes.
I have participated in different youth seminars about the EU that I enjoyed very much, and they helped me to learn a lot about my rights.
I have seen TV programmes, where young people try to get involved in political issues. I don’t know, what their future might be, but I think
they have little chances.
Youth policy of Latvia protects welfare and expression of opinions of young people – the opinion is spread further the school.
I know about the fight of the societies of Russian schools against the education reform.
I know that young people participate in political parties, although I have not noticed any successes. Young people do not have power in
our country, unless they use clear picketing or pogroms.
I know there is the Student Union of Latvia (SUL) (Latvijas studentu apvienība)
The National Youth Council of Latvia (NYCL) (Latvijas Jaunatnes padome) has done a lot of work in this field.
I have heard that young people have an opportunity in some way to get involved in the politics, but there has not been a case when they
realised any of their ideas.
Recently a Youth Act has been approved. Talks, projects are realised regularly in this field.
Young people have opportunities to spread ideas of different parties, etc, in their schools. For example, to work in the interests of the
Tautas partija.
I have heard that a few years ago the Cabinet of Ministers approved the youth policy and that there was no youth policy before in the
Republic of Latvia.
Some of the political parties have youth organizations.
I know that parties have youth sections, in which one can get involved. The parties mainly raise the next generation based in these
sections.
I know that the youth policy of Latvia is realised by MCFA in cooperation with some youth organizations (SUL, NYCL etc.)
The fact that there is such a thing as a youth policy, and as far as I understand it is something, where young people express their opinion,
discussions about the problems and activities of young people take place (that is as far as I understand).
I know that there are many youth organizations.
Everybody has a chance to get involved in different youth organizations (governmental, non-governmental), through which bigger things
can be pushed further.
The National Youth Council of Latvia (Latvijas Jaunatnes padome) is working. Coordinates and leads Latvian youth organizations.
Represents interests of young people, demanding Youth Act to the Parliament.
The NYCL has worked out the youth policy. I think that it is not approved, but I have read about it.
I know that there is the Youth Act. The rights of young people are not observed. There is a lack of information. The government treats
young people aggressively.
The Youth Act is railroaded through the Parliament. The youth policy is actively supported by the MCFA.
In my opinion, that it is a youth lead movement with the efforts to influence the decisions of the politicians.
The Youth Act that the Parliament does not want to approve, good-for-nothing educational system that educates indifferent people.
I know that after an active pushing of the Youth Act through the Parliament it is stuck at the moment and is not approved. It defines, who
is a young person, his rights, obligations, support from the local government.
I have heard that the work has been done on the Youth Act that is meant to ensure the opening of the youth centres in local governments.
It will be defined who really is a young person, as well.
A Law on the Youth Policy was approved in Latvia. There was a picket of young people at the Parliament house before the Midsummer
fest in order to faster the approval of the law. This law defines finally, who is a young person in Latvia.
Thus it can be concluded that only very few among young people have heard about the emerging Youth
Act, its content and significance.
26

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
2.7. Knowledge of Youth Workers, Non-governmental and Youth Organizations about the Youth
Policy of Latvia
Most of the interviewed experts of the youth affairs underline that in general they orientate themselves in
the youth policy of Latvia. Only a few of youth workers think that they are not very well informed about the
youth policy of Latvia, because in big terms it is oriented towards active young people, while leaving the
young people of the social risk groups disregarded.
Youth affairs coordinators (YAC) (Jaunatnes lietu koordinatori) think that they are rather well informed
about the state youth policy and they indicate that they know, where to find necessary information in this
field (including using the home page of the MCFA), the MCFA and the National Youth Council of Latvia
(Latvijas Jaunatnes padome) regularly provides information, for example, by sending e-mails on regular
basis.
Different youth organizations and NGOs are most often just briefly informed about the youth policy. Most
of them are informed that the harmonization of the Youth Act is taking place, of course. At the same time
the representatives of organizations cannot make detailed comments and analysis about the youth policy,
because they admit that they have not gotten acquainted with the directions of the policy. The exception is
organizations that have themselves participated in the discussions and preparations of the emerging
Youth Act.
At the same time it has to be mentioned that the knowledge in organizations on youth policy in Latvia
usually are very fragmentary – someone knows only that the new Youth Act is emerging, someone is
informed that the law will give legal regulation to the actions of different institutions that are connected to
youth, someone – that financial issues will be arranged. But, in general, wide and reasonable knowledge,
how the youth policy has been realised now, can be witnessed very seldom.
It has to be mentioned that there is no conceptual understanding about, what concrete advantages will
appear in everyday life after the approval of the Youth Act. At this moment it can be noted that
representatives of organizations quite often mention the non-approval of the Youth Act as a cause for all
problems – by asking to put forward suggestions, how to improve the situation for young people in very
concrete issues, the representatives of organizations as well as youth workers often mention, firstly, the
necessity to approve the law, at the same time not being able to define, how the law will change, for
example, the attitude of local governments towards the initiatives of young people.
At the same time another important aspect has to be mentioned – taking into account that the Youth Act
has been a subject for approval for many years now, young people, who are informed about that, lose
their faith that it actually will change anything in their everyday lives, thus they loose their interest to be
informed about the current events of youth policy. During the research young people pointed this out
about the role of the youth organizations in the realisation of the state youth policy: „a lot can be written,
but it does not mean that the tasks put forward will be fulfilled”27. The researchers in this study
characterise the attitude of youth organizations as sceptical – if, at first, they believed that putting in order
laws and regulations can give a positive result, then after many years of trying to get the approval of the
law, there is a conviction that no one is really interested in the youth policy and the fact that the attitude of
the state towards young people is uninterested, but concrete actions – fragmentary and not coordinated.
Individual activities of youth workers and coordinators influencing the youth policy can be assessed as
being passive and is confined in most cases with the arrangement of casual issues. Some of the experts
involved in the youth NGO consciously disassociate themselves from the politics, being of the opinion that
27
„The Role of the Youth Non-governmental Organizations in the Realization of the State Youth Policy.” University of Latvia, Institute of
Philosophy and Sociology, Riga, 2003.
27

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
it is the competence of the Government, but the youth workers have to do real work to improve the
situation of young people. Many youth affairs experts have tried in their turn to influence youth affairs. For
instance, a youth affairs expert from Liepaja has tried to improve the situation for young people by writing
suggestions to different state institutions, and these suggestions have been taken on board. A
representative of an NGO from Jekabpils together with young people has submitted proposals to the local
government. A youth affairs expert from Gulbene has participated in working groups, discussions and in
the conference about the preparation of the Youth Act, she participated actively by commenting different
documents. The youth organization “Avantis” has initiated a discussion in the public field about the spread
of the sexuality in the youth media. There have been consultations with the Minister for Children and
Family Affairs.
At the same time the interviewees point out that they often feel not heard. “No one asks us anything, we
get a notice via e-mail that such an issue has been approved and that is it, I do not know who makes all
these decisions” (YAC) “Maybe it is a feeling that you will not be listened to” (NGO) „Until now The
Ministry of Education and Science, the State Youth Initiative Centre, the National Youth Council of Latvia
(Latvijas Jaunatnes padome) think that Latvia ends in Riga... And those, who are somewhere in regions,
their opinion is not asked. We have made many different versions how we could forward our proposals, or
the discussions about the youth policy. The discussion was very long, there were many suggestions, but
they were not introduced in the project.” (YAC)
One of the reasons for fragmentary and flatness is the fact that there is no unified information source that
could be available and used for the needs of different target groups. Yong people find out something
about the youth policy through media, youth organizations – in conferences, discussions, by meeting
politicians, youth workers – from local governments and their colleagues. Thus each of the involved target
group creates its own impression, which depends on, where and in which way the interpreted information
was received.
Youth affairs coordinators are the only group that name concretely the most frequently used information
source – informative e-mails from the Ministry and the NYCL, as well as information from the colleagues
and other local governments. This is the group, where mutual communication and information exchange is
developed at the best level, while, for instance, such an exchange among social workers is rather passive.
„It is the same for me as for the young people, if I want to, then I go and find it. I cannot say that the
information overflows me.” (YAC)
„I read information in the MCFA home page.” (YAC)
„Sometimes I use information that can be found in the SA „Youth International Programme Agency” home
page.” (YAC)
It is interesting that those youth affairs coordinators, who work in direct subordination to a local
government, have more frequently expressed the opinion that they have a lot and enough of information
about the youth policy in the country.
„By working in a local government I have access to different information, I cannot say that I feel
misinformed or not aware of something. Maybe it is different for those, who do not work directly in local
governments.” (YAC)
At the same time it has to be stressed that information flow mostly is one-sided – the Ministry or the NYLC
provides information, but it does not provide the feedback. This is one of the reasons, why interviewed
youth workers and experts quite often feel not heard.
In this regard the initiative of the MCFA has been positively assessed to create one unified home page
that would provide comprehensive information to all interested. A suggestion is to make the home page
not only for statistical data, but also as an interactive virtual environment that promotes and secures
28

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
communication, where different experts and the young people themselves can exchange views, make
proposals and receive answers to all questions they are interested in.
„I hope that the new MCFA page will give an opportunity both for youth affairs coordinators to
communicate among themselves as well as will figure out, how to involve young people to express their
opinions.” (YAC)
Thus it can concluded that in the field of the youth policy there are three problematic domains: awareness
of the young people as a direct target group about the youth policy in general, information about its
concrete issues, and young people disbelief that political documents and action programmes will have a
positive effect on their everyday lives.
29

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
3. ANALYSIS OF THE PROCESS OF THE FORMATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE YOUTH
POLICY
3.1. General Evaluation of the Youth Policy Subjects on the Implementation of Policy
Overall all the target groups included in the research approve the fact that “youth as a sphere has finally
been raised to a visible level” (PA). Youth workers and youth affairs coordinators think positively about the
fact that young people are moved forward on the state policy level as a separate specific target group,
which has to make its own policy, own action programmes: “we started to talk about youth as one group,
once we had children and adults, but now we have noticed that between children and adults are young
people that have other interests” (YAC).
Equally positive feedback is about the large representation of youth affairs in the MCFA; with hope that
young people will be able to move forward the development of the youth policy, because they know the
needs of this target group the best. “I think that with the appearance of young people in the MCFA the
youth policy started to settle. It is not easy, because these young people have to face with the lack of
understanding from other politicians or the local governments, but at least work is being done.” (YO) “The
specifics of Latvia are such that those, who make the youth policy are young adults. I think that in
common tendencies it is good, because those things that emerge are closer to that young person, yet
there is still mistrust.”(YO)
In separate interviews a small scepticism can be noticed that can be associated to the fact that until now
youth policy was never a consecutive, long-term process – it was influenced by political processes in the
country, by readiness of concrete persons and opportunities to move forward youth issues for review and
most importantly – by available finances, the amount of which was uncertain and always very limited.
“Youth policy develops now, but very unevenly and is unbalanced. Therefore it is strange that one year
the funding for youth policy is 15 000, but the next year it is 20 times more. It is uneven.” (YO) “Many
things in youth policy happen very impulsively, which maybe is a minus, because there is no system.”
(YO) “We flounder about on the same spot. The work on the Youth Act started in 1998 and we have not
moved any further. The Governments and positions change all the time and we cannot move ahead.”
(CYC) “Policy moved forward, but very slowly. Something stops and it is not clear between the
Ministries.”(YO) “In the beginning of the year I searched the web page of the MCFA and there was an
announcement that a Programme of Youth Policy 2005 – 2009 is being prepared. And there was a bucket
of issues, the implementation of which was foreseen to start in 2005 with the realisation in 2006; and next
to it was a note that there is none, none, none, in progress. If we take into account that the state budget
for youth policy for many years was 15 000 lats, it is clear that nothing much can be done for that money.”
(PA)
A representative of a youth organisation pointed out to an interesting fact: “there is no Act, but still many
things are going on. I know that the MCFA is trying to put in order this system, but there is a little
opposition from people that ALREADY have done something before and think that they have done it the
best.” (YO) Following – the longer the Youth Act is not adopted, the further the everyday work in the field
of youth policy will move, that will be problematic to adjust to the requirements of the Act. It can be seen
as one of the administrative obstacles that can occur already after the adoption of the normative acts.
It is interesting that separate experts have expressed their incomprehension that young people have their
special policy and have estimated that youth as a target group has to be stressed out in all other fields of
politics: “The most absurd thing is to prepare a Youth Act. I cannot separate Youth Act from all other
policies. I cannot separate it from the education policy, from health policy, from integration policy, from
justice policy and all the rest. It is just one aspect. There has to be a multifunctional approach in all fields
and one law will not solve it.” (NGO).
30

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Despite the fact that a part of youth workers and especially social workers thought that specific action
programmes are necessary specially for the youth from the social risk groups, yet a part of young people
reject this necessity with arguments that there has to be a unitary youth policy that includes different youth
target groups, not putting out some as specific and more special than others: “I would be glad, if YP would
be united that does not equalise everyone formally, but would take into account the needs of each person
and minority groups, especially of risk groups. Equal opportunities will be in place, when the State gives
additional opportunities all those, who are at risk in order to put them to the same level with others. In
order not to have segregation – one programme for invalids, another for minorities, for women – yet
another. We need a unified youth programme! Everyone has to have equal opportunities, everyone has to
be happy.” (PA)
At the same time social risk groups are put forward as one of the priorities of youth policy, especially
stressing out regional differences for opportunities of young people. In addition experts point out to the
additional social risk group that has appeared during the last years – youth, whose parents have left the
country in search for work: “The specific situation of Latvia is the parents working in Ireland. Young
people feel offended that parents have been away.” (YW). As a specific situation in Latvia brought forward
in the interviews by the experts is the fact that “we have many boarding-schools and young people from
socially disadvantageous families, we have many children that grow up in institutions, but children need
parents” (YW). According to the experts these are fields, to which Latvian youth policy has paid very little
attention: “I think that activities of ministries are more focussed on the socially active young people and I
feel the same as the young person from a social risk group, who did not feel neither informed, nor spoken
to. It is easier to work with active young people and thus the work with the social risk is forgotten
somewhat. It is the most productive and most easy to measure, activities, youth training take place, but in
reality this attention should be paid to the social risk.” (SW).
In a more general term the experts point out that at the moment more attention and activities are devoted
to the youth that are active at a state level, comparatively less attention is paid to those that are passive in
both formal and non-formal education and free time as well. The involvement especially of this passive
young people the experts consider a much more important question that the broadening of the activities
for already active youth.
One of the most significant criticism to today youth policy is its insufficient explanation to both direct (youth
affairs coordinators, social risk employees, local governments, education institutions, youth itself) and
indirect (parents of young people, employers, etc.) subjects. It is proved by this research – as it will be
shown in further chapters quite often subjects involved do not know the real situation, do not know about
the activities realised by the MCFA etc. It means that one of the most important questions in realisation of
the policy is direct communication in order to secure the reach of information to all the parties involved.
“The young person on the street does not see, why the Youth Act is necessary.”(PA) “If a person does not
see, what it is meant for, then he treats it indifferently.”(YO)
The following fact partly is common with the above-mentioned: all the interviewees mentioned as the most
important fact that the MCFA in preparation and realisation of the policy should take into account the point
of view of young people themselves, yet only a few experts evaluated that it has already been done
properly. If experts did not have doubts about the active youth (those, who themselves are involved in
different organisations, who participate and collaborate individually) that they are involved, than experts
were to a great extent of the opinion about the rest of youth (this is a majority) that they are involved very
minimally and their opinion was neither summarised, nor analysed and thus – taken into account. “The
point of view of young people has to be taken into account – the one of diverse youth, not only the active
part.” (SW) “I can see that those young people that are in organisations, are actively consulted with,
asked the opinion, but it is a small part. The largest part does not even know that the MCFA is doing
31

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
something and how it concerns them at all. I can see here a big problem that this information is not
conveyed.” (YAC).
The experts interviewed in the regions quite often estimate that they feel left aside in the aspect of the
youth policy, think that the needs of the youth of Riga are taken into account and realised as the ones for
the residents living outside the biggest cities. Equally it is pointed to the fact that a unified policy cannot be
established that will be adjusted to all and regional disparities and specifics of each concrete place have
to be taken into consideration. But that, of course, is not an issue about the national youth policy, rather
about the local action programmes in implementation of youth policy. “The youth policy is not organised
well in the regions. It requires special attention.” (YO) “Maybe something more should be offered to that
countryside, especially in the small parishes. The Youth Act is not finalised yet, maybe it will foresee the
local governments to take upon more activities and something will happen in the regions.”(CYC) “The
regional principle has to be taken onboard, the youth affairs have to be developed in all regions, not only
in cities or Riga.” (YO).
An important organisational objection mentioned in interviews is the following: “there is no unity in
connection to those working with the youth, there is a chaos – each in own field and throwing away the
money” (PA). The experts think that there is ambiguity in the administrative field – it is not clear, which
institution carries out which tasks in implementation of youth policy, which is responsible for what.
Similarly regional representatives mention that “local governments are not obliged to work with youth and
they do not do that” (YO).
3.2. The Most Urgent Problems in Work with Youth and Implementation of Youth Policy from the
Point of View of Each Entity
This chapter summarises and analyses the points of views of the target groups involved in implementation
of youth policy and youth work. As it will be noted in the further layout the opinion of the target groups
frequently are not precise that indicates lack of information, yet the authors of the research are of the
opinion that it is important to illustrate and show these false opinions and beliefs, because they underline
the fields and aspects of policy, in which the work of different institutions has been insufficient. The
incomplete knowledge of the youth affairs coordinators, social workers, representatives of the local
governments, etc shows that both overall the government, and ministries and institutions involved in
realisation of youth policy have not comprehensively realised communication with the subjects involved.
Moreover the suggestions stressed are not the ones of the authors, but ones of the respondents of the
target groups. In the context of the research it is important to sum up and analyse the opinion of different
subjects involved in realisation of the of youth policy in order to study real situation, how different parties
involved understand today’s situation and the short- and long-term challenges. Basing on this information
it is possible to work out concrete both action and communication programmes in order to increase the
level of awareness and knowledge of the subjects involved.
3.2.1. Opinion of Youth Affairs Coordinators
From the point of view of the youth affairs coordinators the interests of youth are not protected enough on
a level of local governments, National Youth Council of Latvia (Latvijas Jaunatnes padome) has done it on
the state level. Situation is especially problematic in regions; there are little youth and non-governmental
organisations that are not always able to talk on equal terms with the local government in the name of the
youth of their region. But according to the coordinators there isn’t one strong organisation in Riga that is
able to represent interests of all youth in Riga. “When there are youth organisations, there has to be a
32

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
strong player that can be worked with. Today there is no such concrete organisation that would represent
youth of Riga. There is a Riga Pupil’s Council that kind of speaks in the name of the pupils of Riga. These
organisations split because each one wants to work with something on their own and each one wants to
be the master of the situation.” (YAC).
Different entities of the youth policy have different understanding about, what is “youth” and what are
different functions of each entity, when working with youth. One of the problems is the fact that – if it is not
defined that each institution has to work specifically with youth group, then they refer to the formal
necessity of such definition. Many YAC have pointed out to this issue exactly in the context of the local
governments, that often agree that they should take more work in the filed of youth.
Youth affairs coordinators point out that the development of the youth filed in Latvia is delayed by the fact
that many institutions are in charge of the youth policy. For example, the Ministry of Education and
Science is in charge of non-formal education, while the overall Youth policy – in the competence of
BGLM, thus each of those has its own view about the informal education and the division of the spheres
of competence does not allow developing the non-formal education as an important factor of youth
development. At the same time there is no consensus among YAC, which ministry should be in charge of
this issue – some think that this field of education should be under the authority of the MCFA, others point
out that youth cannot be separated from education system and think that youth policy should be given to
the management of Ministry of Education and Science (as it used to be before giving the youth policy to
the MCFA).
Different organisations connected to youth often start to cooperate only post factum, namely, only after
the problem among young people appeared. The fact that there is not a single person in several local
governments that would work with the youth only makes this situation worse. From one point of view the
indisposition of different organisations or the lack of capacity to create cooperation is noticeable here,
from the other point of view the lack of understanding of local governments about the positive gains from
such cooperation. “This network has to be established, we have talked to the ministries so many times
that each local government has to have one coordinator. And further to establish the institution of their
representation that will know what is necessary to whom in each parish. Because we can curse as much
as we please, while we boil in our juice. But while we are all on our own and while the institutions up there
will act so formally, nothing will change.” (YAC) “We have to cooperate all the time. We are trying to
establish a tradition, when members of the Parliament come to us and the young people come from the
other side – from the council, from me and we discuss the problem over. They listen to us, answer” (YAC).
Many Latvian cities do not have youth policy on the level of local government; there is a lack of
consistency. YAC mentions several positive examples, where strategies for work with youth is prepared,
for example in Liepaja, Cesis and Valmiera, but these are only separate cases that do not provide
comprehensive attention towards youth in all regions.
At the state level certain work functions of the youth affairs coordinators and the responsibility of the local
governments while carrying out these functions are not defined. The State does not secure training and
improvement of qualification of the youth workers. Although it should be mentioned that frequently there
have been organised training seminars for youth affairs coordinators of municipalities and YIC’s leaders.
“It is on the level of enthusiasm at the moment. They believed in me and I carry this work forward. It is not
written anywhere that the youth specialists are needed. There is still a lack of order on the state level.”
(YAC)
Youth affairs experts stress out that too big bureaucratic obstacles delays different youth initiatives and
lessens the motivation of young people themselves to collaborate and realise their interests. One of the
striking examples is the bureaucratic procedure for establishing of camps. The representative of the youth
33

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
NGOs mention the complicated rules for establishing the camps as obstacles as well. Too many
documents demanded in order to organise a camp create situation, when the camps for young people are
called in other terms (seminars, academies, etc) in order to avoid the bureaucracy, yet at the same time it
is a sign to the youth about the unwillingness of the state institutions to cooperate and “come forward”.
“For example, the regulations of the Cabinet of Ministers about the order of organisation of the summer
camps. There are so many nightmares that do not work in the real life and make the organisation of the
camps very complicated.” (YAC)
One of the reproaches that YAC tells to the MCFA is about the ignorance of the regional disparities. The
activists in the regions frequently think that the policy is oriented towards the youth in Riga and biggest
cities, taking into account that there is a different situation outside the cities and especially in small
settlements. “To drive through the regions, to talk to youth and to find out their needs, interests and their
point of view about this document and to take into account the opinion of the youth residents in Riga,
because the mentality is different there, different opportunities in the financial sense as well. Inhabitants
of Riga are different from the rest of Latvia; Riga is not Latvia. There has to be serious talking with the
youth in the regions. A lot of things will come out there. (YAC).
As it is mentioned in the most of the interviews with youth affairs coordinators, there is a need for legal
regulations for YAC, but for now the post of the youth affairs coordinator is not included in the classifier of
the professions.
YAC informed that there are cases, when inappropriate people work with youth that psychologically are
not prepared to work with such a target group. It has to be mentioned that the real situation is such that it
is impossible to do a wide selection of work for youth workers, because such specialists are rare in the
country and at the moment they are not trained. “Not always right people are working with young people.
The question is not about the education he has, but what is the ability to work with youth.” (YAC).
A large part of youth affairs coordinators point out that they are lacking personnel. Frequently there is only
one person in the district responsible for the youth affairs coordination, which cannot work alone in all
fields. The realisation of youth policy in the concrete place depends on the concrete coordinator. “One
has to be involved with all heart, understand youth, be able to do everything.” (YAC) Youth affairs
coordinators point out – it is not enough with just one person that takes care of the youth affairs.
Especially, if this person has to monitor and organise youth affairs and at the same time to organise
different youth events. The youth affairs coordinators are expected to carry out too many functions at the
same time. “Those requirements that are drafted for the youth affairs coordinator – superman. Almost like
a president. He knows everything, can do everything. He is strong, active, healthy, clever, erudite,
consultant, philosopher, and a psychologist. He is everything.” (YAC) Besides it is underlined that youth
workers are paid a very low salary.
When talking about the motivation of young people to collaborate, the youth affairs coordinators often
point out too complicated formal procedures in the project tenders, in processes of obtaining the finances.
Different project tenders and their system of reports are too complicated to the youth that decreases the
willingness of young people. “Many times project application frighten away youth. It is written in so
complicated manner. It has to be simplified. The complex language frightens away the youth.” (YAC)
Quite often only official youth organisations can apply for the project tenders, but informal unions or
consultative councils that are under supervision of the local governments cannot apply. “Only non-
governmental organisations can apply for projects. The developer of the strategy in our district is this
Consultative Council. It is subordinated to the District Council of the Talsi District. But with that we cannot
apply to any projects.” (YAC)
34

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Youth affairs experts mention as a problem that has to be solved the fact that non-governmental
organisations cannot be officially established without the participation of adults. Other age limits
established by the State worsen participation of youth in the socio-political activities. Work of the adults in
the youth sphere today can be come across more often than the initiatives of youth or collaboration with
them as with partners.
Many projects need co-financing that is very difficult to find for a youth organisation.
The youth clubs that have little attendance have been closed. Local governments often realising that there
is no economic benefit from youth initiative centres want to close them. “I think that only now the support
centres (youth interest clubs) in Latvia are appearing. To secure their sustainability. It will spread across
Latvia and the local government will say that attendance is not big there. What for? It is better to let in
someone that pays the rent. It is important to keep the support not only on the level of local government,
but also of the state, because keeping it only on the level of local government, where the local
government can decide, whether or not they leave it at the internal issues, it can be risky.” (YAC)
Youth affairs coordinators think that the environment in many places of Latvia is not youth friendly that
does not promote the increase of activities of young people. Youth are not only not heard and accepted as
partners in solving of their problems, but they do not even think about the needs of youth even outside the
field of formal education. Following – youth in these local governments feel castaway, ignored from the
local politicians that in long-term creates socially unfriendly environment. “The second thing is to create a
friendly environment for young people, that is the same about the sports ground, about accessibility of
information.” (YAC) “There is activity. I think that we need more this friendly environment. Moreover we
need more physical resources that work with these young people. Because this is interest education that
is represented in schools. These are leaders of interest groups, superiors of brass band, head of drama
club. But beyond these informal things what is going on? We need more people, resources that are
working with them and activate them. We need someone that stimulates them.” (YAC)
Society and state institutions often do not listen to the opinion of youth, especially, if it is about making an
important decision. Many experts point out that adults (including officials) do not consider seriously
initiatives of young people. In spite of the fact that young people participate in different meetings and
discussions their opinions are not taken fully into account. “The dialogue is taking place, local government
is coming forward and want to talk, but in front of it there is a ready decision.” “Well, youngster, what are
you talking about here. No one comes here for working. Everyone is just hanging around.” “Young people
are the next voters, next taxpayers. They have to understand that this country needs them. Until now I
also feel like nobody needs us.” (YAC)
Very small number of young people get involved in the voluntary work 28. “An important issue is support of
volunteer children. To motivate and inform youth about their opportunities. Today these opportunities are
more than the actual doers.” (YAC)
Young people do not have enough working places during school vacations; there is no access to
opportunities to work in summer. Because of the different limitation of the labour legislation the
entrepreneurs have difficulties to employ youth. “They could give more employment to youth. In our camp
young people will also work for the minimal salary. Young people want to earn. There could be some kind
of tax discounts for enterprises that employ young people so that young people have work and
experience.” (YAC)
28
Active popularisation of voluntary work takes place now in level of both the MCFA, and non-governmental sector, however it must be
stressed that awareness of voluntary work as value cannot happen in short term, wherewith any development tendencies among young
people in this case should be valued as positive.
35

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
YAC quite often complain that now in Latvia there is a big propaganda about youth rights, they are too
much observed and imposed upon teachers. Young people know their rights very well, but nobody know
their duties. That is an important objection from many target groups interviewed. In addition too big
propaganda of the youth rights creates situation, when arbitrariness of young people appears in and
outside the school situations. “They know their rights. They do not know their duties. We have some that
can quote the articles of the Children’s Rights Protection Law. Maybe we should have a class or
something, when children are taught this law, so that they can orientate, when is the context. He has
heard of his rights, but we need that he knows what it means.” (YAC)
In general YAC evaluate the youth policy positively, they approve that the policy has been given urgency.
Different project tenders and increase of the finances on the youth field shows that the State has
acknowledged the youth as a specific target group that needs to be paid due attention.
“Yes, we can see that now many projects have been announced in a month, then it shows something the
youth themselves. Even if it does not change anything in the current situation it is clear that with one
project tender we will not change the attitude of young people. It shows that the State starts to think about
this issue.” (YAC)
“The last meeting was in the Ministry for Children and Family Affairs and it was a good one. We go there
like for a seminar and we have the materials with questions and we are involved, but this has happened
only in the last year. It is a positive change. It would be preferable if the personnel was lasting. But
something changes and we do not go down.” (YAC)
“I think that it is satisfactory, because the MCFA sends as often different things to e-mails, both things that
we had in different meetings and seminars. (..) It’s never as good as there would be nothing to improve.”
(YAC)
3.2.2. Opinion of Workers that Work with the Social Risk Groups
The same as with the youth in general the social risk group workers point that by making the policy the
specific needs and opinions of youth from risk groups are not taken into account. “We make programmes
according to our understanding, the way we would like to see them and there is not this society, dialogue
with youth about, what should be, the way it should be, what should be done. The decision is made in
their place.”
Employers that work with social risk groups indicate that the main problems that they are facing in their
everyday work are the lack of the personnel and problems in cooperation with the social services.
Youth from the social risk groups are involved in the free time activities to a very limited extent. The
opportunities of these groups of people to get involved in the free time, cultural, entertainment events, as
well social and especially political activities are very limited not as much because of the specifics of these
youth groups, rather because of the limited opportunities. One of the most important factors is the fact that
representatives of the social risk groups do not have wide range of opportunities to get involved in
activities with the rest of the young people. Youth of social risk groups live their lives independently from
the rest of the society. “Once there was a non-governmental organisation in Valmiera that was dealing
with the youth council in order to participate in projects and to realise planned activities. Social risk group
is removed from these young people. And I think that the organisation of such events should be
encouraged, where the youth of social risk groups could get integrated, where such cooperation would be
promoted, because now these are two different camps.” (SD)
One of the most important problems is use of the addictive substances – this is admitted both by the
experts interviewed, and the young people themselves. There is a State Addiction Agency that deals with
the research of the problems, prophylaxis and timely prevention, still social workers think that the its work
36

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
is not effective enough. “At the moment there is a lack of the programme about prevention of the addictive
substances on the state level in Latvia. There are thoughts about the conditions and limitations for trade.”
(SW). Here can be also observed that social workers are not well informed about work that has been done
at state level for decreasing usage of additive substances – national programmes have been elaborated
and implemented (for example, National Programme for Derogation and Control of Addiction and
Prevalence of Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances for 2005-2008). From the other side, it can be
observed that there are own specific addiction problems in each region – in one municipality it is
alcoholism problem, in other – drugs, but in other – computer addiction.
MCFA looks at the youth from the social risk group at the same level like at children with special needs,
thus there is no separate budget foreseen for the needs of these different, specific groups. From the other
side, experts stress out that it is necessary to include and integrate the youth of social risk group in the
majority society, and not to organise separate events. For example, to involve disabled youth in the
Nationwide Song and Dance Festival, not to organise separate Song and Dance Festival for these young
people. “The attitude depends on the structure of the society in general, the society still thinks within a
frame, in a specific frame of separation – specially for disabled people, specially for youth, specially for
minorities, specially for somebody else.” (YO) Yet the social workers that solve social problems would like
to see a bigger support for concrete risk groups. “I would like to see greater financial support. In the form
of those projects, so as to have noted means that are meant for youth of social risk groups. At the
moment I work with projects and the Ministry is working more with children with special needs. Youth of
social risk groups were added to children with special needs. We use each opportunity, but we cannot
promise a young person that there will be a camp, seminars in autumn.” (SW)
While talking about collaboration and involvement the representative of the union of disabled people
interviewed underlines that principle of collaboration is guaranteed at the moment, when different social
risk groups participate to full extent in events, initiatives, not when they are handed out as special, specific
groups in these events. The problematic drawing in of disabled people and people with mental disorders
in the education process of the school in often mentioned to prove the fact that this involvement is
developed to a very small extent in Latvia, namely – educational institutions do not want to accept these
children in the class equally with other children.
The existing education programmes for youth of social risk do not correspond to the specific character of
these youth groups – these young people lack skills that “common” pupils possess, they have problems to
concentrate their attention, difficulties to study for a longer period of time, etc. “They lack social skills.
They will not need the Pythagorean theorem, but they will need to stand for themselves.” (SW) “When I
started to work with the class of pedagogical correction, I realised quite quickly that it is wrong that the 17
year old people are forced to study according the adopted state standard programme.” (SW) “Then the
director reflected one case. In order to achieve the result, the class cannot have more than 12 pupils; if
you want to open a normal 9th class, you need at least 15 pupils, to open a catch-up class you need 16
pupils29.” (SW) “Another thing is about the adequacy. From one side we can study the material for the 9 th
grade. But young people have difficulties to concentrate in our school, so they don’t learn. It is not
adequate to their needs. They come here and the classes last from 9 in the morning to 3 afternoon. They
are youth with difficulties to learn. And then to want them to sit and do the homework is not realistic to
ask. There has to be responsibility, but they do not know that. You cannot teach it in the class, but in
practice. They do not achieve those education goals, when they learn. An innovation and level
29
The MES comment that necessary amount of pupil depends on populated area (republic cities and regional centres – 18-30 pupils, cities
and cities with rural area – 12-30, other populated areas – 8-30). Currently amendments is working out that will define that there will be
necessary 15 pupils to open 9th class (decreased because of decreasing birth-rate). As for social correction classes normative acts define
that there is allowed to be 8-15 pupils on one class for learning in primary education social and (or) pedagogical correction education
programmes. (Information source: Regulation of Cabinet of Ministers No.735 “Regulation on Minimal and Maximal Amount of Educatees in
Classes of State and Local Government General Education Institutions. Groups of Preschool Educational Institutions, Special Education
Institutions and Classes of Social and Pedagogical Correction (Riga, September 27, 2005 (prot.No.54 8§)) Wherewith in this quote
disinformation of social risk group worker is observable.
37

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
programme has to be introduced.” (SW) “To think about those young people that have real difficulties to
learn and that fall through the education system, to think about the alternative education systems. The
programmes for youth that have difficulties to learn can be facilitated.” (SW).
Workers that work with the youth of social risk have expressed opinion that at the level of the government
and ministries there is no comprehensive understanding about the children of social risk, their problems
and needs. “I think that ministries do not understand, what is going on in the real life.” (SW) “Today the
Youth policy in Latvia does not change anything for the situation of deaf young people and does not
consider this part of youth.” (SW) “There is a viewpoint in the society that the summer school is a stupid
school; that people who learn there are not accepted anywhere else. The overall opinion of the society is
negative. The attitude in our evening school is more individualistic. For example, my colleague was
organising an event, where youth of social risk came and stole things and she said that they should not
come anymore. But they have to be taught; who else will do it if not us.” (SW) “The real situation, needs of
youth, all data about addictions has to be taken into account. The advices given by people have to be
taken into consideration. The viewpoint of professionals and their thoughts. Ministries think that it is all not
that bad. The policy is formed in order to reach out for the youth. Building on the needs of youth.” (SW)
“The special needs of youth – disabled people have to be taken into account.” (SW)
Families, where youth have children at an early age, are especially subjected to risk, because young
people lack both financial means, and experience for action in such circumstances. “It is necessary to
support families with small children in order not to create situation, when we work and this process never
ends. These families have problems with the socio economic situation.” (SW)
There is the lack of educated teachers and social workers in schools, where work is done with the pupils
of social risk, while the number of potential pupils is very big. There are statements in the interviews that
the State has not realised the problem of teachers until now, has not counted the number of pupils and
the necessary number of teachers. Another problem in this aspect – these workers do only the functions
of pedagogues because of the lack of time it is impossible to carry out function of social pedagogue, youth
consultant. Social workers stress out that it is possible to involve youth of social risk only through
communication with them, but for that there is a lack of time and human resources. “The most real way to
involve these young people is through human resources. They need a person that says that it is a must.
When you have worked with him for a while, then you can say – you go and they listen. And there is no
point in the information campaigns. We don’t have it but abroad there are people, who go to schools and
involve people. They would have to work with all youth.”(SW) “Youth workers need to be people that work
with the non-formal education methods. (..) Latvia does not guarantee qualification of youth workers.”
(SW) “We have to think about the assistants for teachers in the schools.” (SW)
Workers that work with youth social risk group bring forward free time activities of these young people as
one of the most important problems. If risk group youth in the framework of formal education are engaged,
then outside of that the opportunities of young people are limited, because, first, these young people have
little chances to get involved in other youth groups to spend the free time, and, second, little activities are
organised for the risk group representatives. “From June till September we have to organise some kind of
day camps, but there is no camp leader. There are opportunities, but little. You can look at the web page
of the Education Department of the Riga City Council – there are summer camps. But places available
are not everywhere. So there are opportunities, but too little. Or children from the streets do not want the
to join them.” (SD)
While talking about the integration of the social risk group youth in the society, social workers point out
that specific character has to be taken into account that does not allow to realise integration projects. For
example, “if we talk about deaf young people, the accessibility of information is very limited for them.
38

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Usually they get information in the visual form – in sign language. A big problem is that the availability of
the sign language interpreter are very limited for them.” (SW)
3.2.3. Opinion of Representatives of NGOs
The main problem mentioned by representatives of NGOs is – youth policy the way it’s been implemented
at the moment lacks a concrete direction; it is not directed towards every young person, but to the youth
groups defined in advance. This policy does not reach out many young people, for example, those that
are not involved in NGOs. That results in situation when active young people are involved in many and
different activities, but passive young people are still not activated.
Youth non-governmental institutions frequently cannot function for a longer period of time, because the
finances are not passed for the next project, organisations often stop to work. The continuation of the
project is not secured. “I think that it is difficult for the youth in Latvia, because it is not put in order on the
state level in order to provide support to unions, at least in terms of financing. Once a year to have it, but
at least there would be some sort of basis. Actually there are a few of those unions in cities and regions,
because they cannot exist in a normal way. They have to die in starvation. If your project is not approved
and even if it is approved for three years. The finances end after a year and that’s the end of it.” (NGO)
Youth in organisations have difficulties with the preparation of the financial reports, because often it is the
first contact with such finances. Young people don’t have good knowledge on financial report completion,
project documentation.
The representatives of regional NGOs stress out that regional organisations lack the support from the
state to develop opportunities of youth, they think that the youth policy is directed to youth of Riga.
Youth NGOs workers often lack capacity in project writing and implementing them.
Legislation that concerns the issues of the voluntary work is not entirely in order, and entrepreneurs do
not give credit to the benefits of the voluntary work. Voluntary work has low prestige in society overall,
int.al., among young people.
The cooperation among ministries is not fully successful; young people doing voluntary work abroad often
have problems with visas and other formalities, because the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not informed
about the diverse activities of Latvian youth abroad. “The cooperation is not that big, it has to be
improved. At least among the ministries, if there is a project, then all ministries should know, what that is.
Do any other institutions know? The same voluntary work to obtain visa. As not to wait for months to get
visa. Ministry for Children and Family Affairs knows that, but the Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not.”
(NGO) As pointed by the representative of NGOs they have to explain each time to the officials of the
ministries, what is the concrete project and what purposes is the visa for.
Youth do not know, whether the State can financially realise projects they are interested in, in turn the
State does not know, what the young person wants. Frequently the work and initiatives of young people
are in vain, because it turns out that the concrete activities are impossible to support because of some
kind of reasons. Youth have no clue about the fields and activities that can be supported.
Youth organisations have low intercommunication. There is no single institution that young people trust.
“There in no intercommunication and that mechanism. There is no single institution that young people
trust.” (NGO)
39

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
One of the problems put forward is that youth organisations cooperate little among themselves, they even
often compete with each other. Overall that does not promote the opportunities to influence important
decisions. Each organisation works in its own narrow specific field, without setting common, wider goals.
Cooperation takes place more through projects, not conceptually. The Research conducted in 2003
proves that. “Answering the question if the organisation represented cooperates with other organisations,
about two thirds from the leaders of organisations confirmed that organisation cooperates from time to
time with other youth organisation. Practically all those who mentioned that they have cooperated with
another organisation mentioned that the reason was realisation of a concrete project.” 30
One of the reasons why this intercommunication does not take place is that there is not wide range of
information available about other organisations. Contacts most often are on a personal level, not among
organisations. Thus the potential to cooperate is for those organisations, whose representatives are
personally acquainted, not for those that in substance work in the same field. In case if it is necessary to
cooperate with a similar organisations in another district, region or State, there is no information available
about the list of such organisations.
The change of personnel delays the long-term work and conceptual action of different organisations. The
interests of young people are very inconsistent, thus – involvement in organisations are often for a short –
term, and then the young person looks for other interesting activities.
3.2.4. Opinion of Representatives of Local Governments and Ministries (Experts)
All local governments do not have at least one person that would deal with the youth affairs.
One of the biggest problems concerning the youth as a target group of the youth policy is the low
motivation of youth to get involved and collaborate. There are different reasons for that, but the experts
stress out that the solutions have to be looked not only in schools, but also on the level of the state policy
and in the family.
The experts quite often mention that schools mostly work with formal education, without paying attention
to non-formal education. Youth in schools should learn not only the official and formal education
programme. But should obtain comprehensive social skills – teamwork, communication, formulation and
argumentation of opinion, setting out the problems and finding solutions. It can be called a comprehensive
civil education. Overall social and communicative skills are, of course, included in education programmes,
yet no-formal education is a separate education course that is not included in the system of formal
education.
The problem is with the low level of understanding of teachers about the role of the non-governmental
organisations and the non-governmental sector in general. The lack of understanding about work of public
and non-governmental organisations can be also noticed in local governments – the heads of local
governments often think that representative of these organisations interfere in their work fields.
30
“Role of Youth Public Organisations in Implementing the State Youth Policy” published by the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the
University of Latvia in 2003.
40

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
3.3. Analysis of the Experience of Cooperation among the Entities of the Youth Policy
3.3.1. Review about the Experience of Cooperation
The main entities of the youth policy in Latvia are different state and non-governmental institutions that
look more at the establishment of the system of youth affairs, people that work with youth (youth workers,
teachers), local governments (youth affairs coordinators, workers that are employed in institutions of local
governments, whose work is not work with youth, but youth is one of the target groups), youth
organisations (public and school local governments) and youth themselves. The experts of the research
point to the cooperation with other entities, frequently it is a formal or connected only with transfer of
information, but not experience and ideas. The resources in the youth affairs are not sufficient and thus
there is a mutual competition among different entities that does not promote cooperation, however
particularly cooperation is necessary in order to make sure that actions are not carried out in parallel or
even in opposite directions and development can be achieved in the youth policy.
Analysing cooperation of different entities is noticeable that it is more project oriented than promoting
strategic cooperation. Each of the entities of Youth policy makes his own action strategy, works in
his specific field and direction, but marks of strategic cooperation cannot be noticed. While analysing
concrete examples of cooperation, it is evident that cases of cooperation are short-term, they occurred
from concrete needs or problems and cooperation finishes after the solution of those. The entities
themselves confirm that as well: “This cooperation is episodical. Those, who organise interest education,
then those who sit in the Council, then the probation services, including social workers, police, custody
court – the cooperation is not that.. that cooperation is episodical.” (CYC)
One of the most important promoters of cooperation would be establishment of a unified informative
system, in framework of which different entities could exchange information, experience, learn, what
other institutions and organisations are doing. At the moment there is no such unified communication
model. In separate cases there is a one-sided communication, when, for example, MCFA sends out
electronic reports about the current news in the ministry or when NYCL informs their members about the
news in the fields. Yet there is no common unified informative space for all entities.
Cooperation, of course, cannot be introduced “from above”, it has to be organised with the involvement of
organisations, youth initiative groups, as well as the state institutions. But during the research quite often it
turned out that different entities are not interested to create a comprehensive cooperation, because
they think that would influence too much the inner order of the organisation or institution. It is noticed that
organisations see threat in the comprehensive cooperation, thinking that the opinion and desires of big
and “powerful” organisations would prevail, while the smaller organisations would be static collaborators.
A wide communicative work has to be done in this regard in order to explain the benefits from
cooperation, as well as to share experience about the cooperation models that would guarantee equal
participation of all the parties.
The vertical cooperation is seen more in term of the importance of information, namely – higher
institutions provide information for the lower ones that distribute information further to the entities that are
subordinated to them. Analysing in this informative aspect the main problem is the fact that was
mentioned in the report that – there is information, but there is no communication. Both youth
themselves and youth policy entities of different levels think that there is enough of information, but it does
not reach the target, because it is provided in a formal way, whilst a more effective would be a model of
providing information that would foresee the direct and indirect communication among different entities.
For example, the Ministry is often reproached of lack of the feedback – overall work of MCFA in providing
information is evaluated positively, at the same time, when analysing deeper, a many reproofs are
mentioned that, first, the Ministry “listens, but does not hear” and, second, it incomprehensively integrates
41

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
the listened things in the policy documents and action programmes. The fact that the current problematic
issues of the field brought forward by different entities in the last sections do not always correspond to the
real situation, proves that there are problems in securing communication in the vertical cooperation.
It is difficult to evaluate vertical cooperation among different institutions, because there is no clear
mechanism for the cooperation model. For example, it is not clear if and what kind of communication
there should be among ministries and local governments, between ministries and youth organisations.
Thus each concrete case the experiences of this cooperation are very individualistic, depending often on
the personalities, not the targeted cooperation models. From the interviews carried out it turn out that the
most successful communication is between MCFA and YAC and youth organisations. It is determined by
the effective work of providing information, as well as realisation of projects. In these cases there is the
most positive interest and readiness to cooperate from both sides.
In communication with the local governments the situation is much more passive that maybe is
determined by the unwillingness of the local governments to take upon additional functions and tasks in
the field of youth. In addition – as stated before – if there is no legal regulation that determines concrete
cooperation mechanism the local governments do not think it necessary to create and implement these
models. Here the MCFA and non-governmental sector should carry out a wide informative and
communicative work in order to increase understanding of the society in general and of the local
governments about youth as an important group of society, whose well-being and observance of interests
will to a large extent determine the future of each local government.
As a very positive aspect should be mention youth attitude towards the Children and Family Affairs
Minister – as noticed in the youth questionnaire and in discussions of focus groups and according to the
experts the youth see the Minister and wherewith the MCFA in a much more positive light than any other
ministry. “Baštik is active and I like that” (FGD, active) “This minister is more often in TV than the previous
ones, I guess he does something too.” (FGD, passive) “Baštik is a cool guy.” (FGD, active) “He solves the
issues at least to some extent.” (FGD, active) “We can say that Baštik works good, because we know that
he was nominated for the post of the president.” (FGD active) Thus – it is a big advantage of this ministry
by establishing communication with the youth in different direct (meetings, seminars, questionnaires) and
indirect (virtual communication, ability to sent initiatives to the Ministry about the solution to the youth
problems) ways and this advantage should be realised.
Analysing the horizontal cooperation, it is possible to draw out several problems. Obviously that
cooperation among different state institution causes problems, for example, the most problematic is
cooperation between education institutions and social services, youth affair coordinators, in special cases
with local governments. Youth organisations and YAC have frequently complained that it is difficult to
organise their involvement in activities in the schools, because teachers think that the most important
thing for youth to do in school is to study.
Another problematic factor of cooperation is interministerial cooperation. The experts interviewed think
that at the moment, first, informative communication and, second, real cooperation among different
ministries is underdeveloped. The respondents indicated that realisation of youth policy concerns not
only the MCFA, but also other ministries, but those are often not informed and do not understand their role
in solving the youth issues.
The third problem to be mentioned is the cooperation among different youth organisations. As mentioned
above in the research cooperation of different youth organisations is underdeveloped in Latvia that
interdicts realisation of big, strategic goals and working out of common projects. The most common
feature here is the personal inability to agree on the common work, as well as the perception of other
organisations as competitors. Side problem – lack of information. Of course, if anyone wants to find
42

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
information, then it is possible, but cooperation would be encouraged by the existence of a unified
information system, where it would be quick to find other organisations that work in the field of interest or
working in other district.
The positive horizontal cooperation is evident in those local governments, where YAC work closely with
the local governments and other institutions – in these cases there is a wider awareness of YAC about the
current news and problems of realisation of youth policy. Equally a successful cooperation among
different institutions can be noticed in these local governments. This obviously means that local
government has to be the coordination institution in solving the youth affairs in local level. First, it gives
wider information on opportunities and, second, the status of the local government allows realising
cooperation in a more successful way, because different institutions at least partly are under supervision
of the local government.
If we talk about concrete forms of cooperation the Consultative Councils can be mentioned as
successful according to the many experts evaluation. These councils can be considered successful,
because they represent youth experts from different fields, thus it is possible to evaluate and solve almost
any issue and problem in the youth field in the framework of the council. The introduction and successful
work of the councils depends largely on concrete people that make it work.
Very Successful example. Talsi. Youth Affairs Consultative Council (Jaunatnes lietu konsultatīvā padome)
is very successful in Talsi region. The Council and the director of the Centre for Children and Youth of the
Talsi region (Talsu rajona bērnu un jaunatnes centrs) consult the heads of the local governments, how
best to organise youth work in the local governments, they also work with the youth affairs consultants or
people that work with youth in schools and local governments. These duties are often given to the
librarians, leaders of the directors of the People’s Houses. There are different partners working in the
Council, for instance, representatives from the education institutions, social services, NGO centre of the
Northern Kurzeme, etc. The Consultative Council was jointly worked out strategy to improve cooperation.
A handbook is being prepared about the youth organisations and local governments of the regional scale.
A methodological material has been prepared in the Centre for Children and Youth of the Talsi region
(Talsu rajona bērnu un jaunatnes centrs), how to involve and how to work with young people that are
interested about opportunities to organise something, how to establish a youth organisation. The Talsi
People’s Region Fund (Talsu iedzīvotāju novada fonds) and Talsi People’s Forum (Talsu iedzīvotāju
forums) are involved in the youth affairs of Talsi.
In cooperation between youth and youth organisations with the state institutions an important obstacle
even for local governments are the long bureaucratic procedures that have to be done in order to look
through and to harmonise projects, initiatives. According to the representative of the Riga City Council
“everything happens very slowly, we need time in order to put together things that we do and what they
do. The main problem is that the youth organisations are small and mobile and everything happens fast,
whilst we are slow.” (PA)
Quite often young people face situations, when the self-government and other institutions invite youth
only “for a tick”, when young people are allowed to express themselves, but their opinions are not taken
into account and not even looked at. This is one of the most important problems in cooperation between
state institutions and youth, because after such situations youth, of course, will not have motivation to
participate in the projects realised by institutions, similarly it will seriously influence the overall attitude and
trust of young people in the state power, realisation of policy.
3.3.2. Examples of the Experience of Cooperation
Since the field of the youth policy is a new one it is impossible to analyse actions and cooperation of the
different entities of policy in the long run. As mentioned before cooperation is very irregular and
43

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
unsystematic at the moment, thus oriented more on solutions of concrete problems or realisation of
concrete projects, initiatives.
This chapter will give the review of the concrete examples mentioned in interviews by the different entities
of youth policy – youth affair coordinators, social workers, representatives of the youth organisations,
NGOs, as well as local governments and other state institutions.
Cooperation is very fragmentary and short term at the moment, therefore it is impossible to talk about
special cooperation models (exception is Talsi, Liepaja, Cesis cities; there are youth policy documents as
well as mechanisms for their implementation worked out and implemented) – each local government has
them different, thus here is the list of successes and failures that have come up in the course of the
interviews. The following summary of the experience can inspire new initiatives in other local
governments, organisations and youth initiative groups of Latvia.
A very successful example31. Liepaja. The Youth Affairs Commission of the Liepaja City Council started
work with the Action Programme of Youth Policy of the Liepaja City in 2002. A working group of active
young people was established that involved youth from the Youth Affairs Commission of the Liepaja City
Council, youth organisations, schools, high schools and other organisations. Overall in 2 years since
2003 until 2005 more than 80 active people from Liepaja were involved in the working groups. In
October and November 2005 the Action Programme of Youth Policy of the Liepaja City was widely
discussed in the schools, youth organisations and other places of assemble of youth of Liepaja. 200
active young people were involved in discussions about the youth policy of Liepaja, expressing 300
concrete examples about the possibilities to improve lives of young people on Liepaja.
Cooperation among youth, youth organisations and state institutions (including local
governments)
Successes:
• “Meetings and consultative councils are successful, because there are conversations face to
face with the ministers that are responsible for youth affairs. I think that these meetings have
never been a waste of words, but real conversation, explanation of things that we need.” (YAC);
• “In many Western countries there are youth specialists who work with young people are not
young – around 40 – 60 years and so it means that they write a project un do everything, young
people only have to come! And there is no point in that! Quite often these old people do
everything instead, young people do not participate. We have it this way that young people
“push” the project themselves, and we should keep it this way! So that after years we won’t
have it like this!” (FGD, active);
• “We cooperate with the Barbel local government that helps with the premises in organisations
of events. If the local government can, then it helps financially, if not, then it provides the
premises. And other neighbouring local governments. Those provide more financial support.”
(YO);
• “We need support to the youth form the leadership of the parishes. And let’s hope that the
new act will provide, what the local governments have to do in order to improve the situation. We
will have a camp this summer for young people with low self-confidence, who have not finished
the 9th grade and do not study after the 9th grade. We had a similar camp a year ago with the EU
financing and we had very good results. 70% of those young people went to study to boarding
schools, evening schools. If you take this youngster by the hand one of our goals is to show, how
people with good education live and work and how people without education. Then we took them
to our wood-processing workshop, where people without education work very hard.. and we took
them to places, where people with good education work. That made them think. And we offered
31
Information source: “Action Programme of Youth Policy of the Liepaja City 2006-2010” Liepaja, 2006.
44

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
concrete opportunities, for example – where he can go and study after seventh grade. And the
result was really good. We organised an alumni event for these children and when they came,
they told that their eyes have opened a little bit.. they said thank you. And these children we
found with the assistance of the parishes. The Parishes are given the information. The main thing
for these young people is to feel that they are needed.” (CYC);
• “Valmiera City Council listens to the youth quite a lot, there are regular meetings with the
members of the Council, specialists. So these processes are easy to impact on the level of the
local government” (SW);
• “On the level of the local government (in Valmiera) the work is done very well and now we work
with the programme for prevention of addiction on the level of local government, where
events to reduce the dependence on the addictive substances are planned and here it is
meant for the social risk group youth.” (SW);
• “We had a protest two years ago against sexual permissiveness in the youth media. One could
read very inviting articles in the youth press, there were even photos that offends human’s
sexuality and invited to try everything as soon as possible that is very wrong, because a person is
not mature until he is 21. And media has a lot of power. Therefore we turned against it and we
had a lot of support. A letter was publicised in the portal Delfi and there were around 600
supportive comments from the parents. And we met with Mr.Baštik and talked about how to
solve this situation. And I think that it all calmed down after that little scandal. At least the press
writes more concrete things about that and invite appropriate specialists so that they consult on
these issues.” (YO);
• “Together with the Ministry of Education and Science we realise a programme that
promotes sports activities in the schools, we think of different campaigns how to attract youth
to sports. Second year in a row we invite popular sportsmen in order to conduct classes in
schools. This year there was a championship – competition between the classes with support
from the Ministry of Education and Science and Zelta Zivtina ZZ. There was a regional
elimination, final and there was a very, very big responsiveness. And the main goal was to bring
closer to sports children, who don’t do it in everyday life” (YO);
• “A positive example is cooperation of Ministry for Children and Family Affairs with the non-
governmental organisations, because they give the finances, support.” (YO).
Failures:
• “We had a Youth Affairs Council in Kuldiga; there were all these institution and we met once a
week, then at least we had information. And it was good that we went to the Regional Board and
told, what happened in the last week. Now nothing like that is happening. It is difficult to say why.
Well, we don’t know, what is going on the higher level.. we give written information about us, but
it would be important for us to know, what is going higher.” (CYC);
• “The State has to cooperate with the institutions that work with the social risk groups. But let’s say
that local governments do not want to understand this idea of the centre for the street children.
Here they work with children, but the Riga City Council looks at it as a business. I do not know,
why there is such an attitude.” (YO);
• “Our organisation is a live example – a Swedish organisation UGT wrote a project in 1999 in
order to create a day centre for the street children. They financed the renovation. They thought
that they will finance our work for some 5 years and then the City Council will undertake it. They
45

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
finished the project and then the problems started – first, with the premises. When the
government and the local government change, the rules change. This building belonged to the
Riga City Council, it was a deal that, while this club exists, there will be no payment for the
premises, but suddenly they show a bill for 14 000LVL that we have to pay for the rent. But at the
same time the Welfare Department of the Riga Council told us – write project and we will help
you, but the rent they cannot pay. They will pay salaries to social workers, groups. So then it
turns out – one institution helps, another takes it away. We still have a situation that they ask us
this money to pay for the rent! There is good attitude and bad experience as well, but now I think
and I hope that from the government, specifically from the Ministry of Children and Family Affairs,
we will have better cooperation to find a compromise in the issue of premises. We are not a
commercial institution! We cannot ask these children for a membership fee. That would be a
nightmare.” (YO);
• “Today I went to the Ministry for Children and Family Affairs about the statute of one high school,
and so – the mechanism is so inelastic, there is this ready template. It does not matter that we
had objections on several pages.. and they were so nick-picked – what are you thinking here..
well, we pushed through one question, but the rest they proved that they are right. And they said
that maybe we could harmonise those statutes the next time, and not by coming to them each
time, but simply by calling or in any other way. That showed that they do not want to
communicate much.. but that is also illustrated by the Youth Act.” (FGD, active);
• “There are different tenders just from the Ministry for Children and Family Affairs, but the non-
governmental organisations cannot react. The positive thing was the fact that I am a youth affair
coordinator and these things are told in the seminars and you just simply wait. But there are no
people in youth organisations that watches all the time, when the project is announced. The
young people go on hiking and if it needs more time, then it is more difficult. You cannot make it.
You physically cannot do something of a quality. Young organisations could find it too short in
time.” (YO);
• “Camps, for instance, nobody dares to do something like that – youth organisations. When they
see, what has to be filled in, then no, we will call it a summer academy. Because these laws are
terrible. There has to be a certificate of a camp leader, where there is no place. Or you have to
pay a lot of money. You gain nothing, because practical things are told there. You pay LVL 40 in
order to get a paper. It is much simpler in other countries, I have been a leader in the camp in
Germany, and nobody asks anything there. These laws are necessary, but not that much.” (YO);
• “It has happened that the regulation prepared by the Ministry of Education and Science has
included definition of the non-formal education for people 35 years and up, but non-formal
education exists for youth as well. We objected to that, but they did not take it into account.” (YO);
• “Now the local government is oriented to its administrative apparatus. The big goals are meant for
others. If they get benefit, then they participate, if not, then they don’t.” (YO);
• “If there was a person in the local government that would work with the field, then and I would can
call him and ask him. Now I call secretary and the secretary moves me and then she circulates
and then she disappears somewhere. If I would know the person, then it is easier to work.” (YO);
• ”We cooperate with the Ministry for Children and Family Affairs. The Ministry kind of organises
the working groups, but at the same time they take the ideas, but those that are not necessary.
They have their own rules.” (PO);
46

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
• „The worst thing is that the Youth Act is not adopted, thus youth has no reason to go to the local
governments, the State and ask something according to law. There is no point of take-off. We
cannot blame anyone for not implementing the youth policy if there is no legal basis.” (YO);
• “I have written about non-formal education – suggestions for the European positions. I stopped
with the fact that the conditions that we put, they told us that they are weird, unclear. We wrote
recommendations and they “sent” us. And we even made an effort, because they needed the
response quite quickly from the Ministry of Education, but in result we did not get anything.” (YO);
• “Then we have contacts with the Education Council of Daugavlpils, Daugavpils District Council.
We have difficult cooperation with the Daugavpils City Council. We do not correspond to the
employee that works there. And we do not make special effort. We organise our activities that
take place in Daugavpils as well, but we work separately. Of course it would be nice if we could
cooperate, because these activities can be united and they would be twice as good and better.”
(NGO);
• “I do not remember the year it happened, but there was a seminar in Dobele “Young Person and
the Local Government”. So I went to this seminar with the representatives of the Council as a
representative of youth and I was surprised that, when the common group work was done,
nobody listened to young people. It was more to make a public image.” (NGO);
• “A girl from my organisation submitted a project about letting young people know more the
opportunities to study. And this project was not even given a look because this is a field of adult
education centre. That is very wrong. Who would better know than the youth themselves.” (NGO);
• “I personally had only one negative experience, when we gave in the application for organisation
of an event and the lawyer from the Ogre Region Council without looking said that nothing there
could be correct. Only because we are youth. And it also comes to my mind that the Council
sends from one cabinet to another and we do not understand where we have to go and what
exactly do we need.” (NGO);
• “Education institution, if we talk about the administration of institutions – there is one part that is
not interested. They look at as quite aggressively. The stress in many schools is on studies, but
you have to learn teamwork.” (NGO);
• “It is a little more difficult with the education institutions, because teachers do not always want to
change. But we still talk to them, teach them. etc. It is easier with the social services. We could
cooperate with them any time because we did not touch upon any of their interests, but teachers
obviously thought differently.” (YAC)
Mutual collaboration between state institutions and cooperation with local governments
Success:
• “The last meeting was carried out at the Ministry of Children and Family Affairs and was a good
one. We attend it as a seminar and there is a question material prepared for us, and we are
involved therein; however it has come so only during the last year. That is a positive moment.”
(PA);
• „Wherewith we are this consultative council, then one of its major objectives is to work with
leaders of municipalities. In order to consult them in terms of youth work, we have developed a
strategy around all the district points. And the second is the direct collaboration with municipal
47

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
leaders; we are trying to find ways towards the youth work organization. There are no problems
with education institutions, due to the fact that we have everything at single spot. The Ministry of
Education and Science pay me the wage. And the children and youth centre coordinates
education of interests, education work and pupils’ self-governments. There are no problems at all
with schools. Now we have planned to make a youth handbook especially concerning youth
organizations, self-governments at district scope. Situation with social services is also good,
because I have included social services in the consultative council. Thus we consult with all
social workers. I have been visiting social workers and discussing everything, the limits of the
functions. Such a consultative council should be established in every parish. Our orientation goes
like this. All these people both from the education field and employment service participate in the
consultative council, therefore it is easy. When any problem appears, I can discuss it with my
direct superiors and they communicate them further around the districts. We have Talsi Region
Foundation and Talsi population forum, and we see what is needed to be done. We are unique by
the fact that we have very good collaboration in all fields and between all institutions.” (CYC).
Failures:
• „I assess it rather averagely. And quite often the Ministry of Education and Science does not go
hand in hand with the Ministry for Children and Family Affairs. Also the Ministry of Health is not
open enough, to solve youth health issues, because great reforms and work are needed. I would
like more successful cooperation between the ministries. Optimally, if the Ministry for Children
and Family Affairs would be central and collaborated successfully with the Ministry of Health and
the Ministry of Education and Science. The Ministry of Health along with the organization
“Papardes zieds” is a negative example, already for the umpteenth time trying to realize friendly
health services for the youth, however still failing.” (YO);
• „The main problem is that it is impossible to achieve help for public organizations. We have a
great dream of youth house. It is impossible to manage. Everything depends on the leading party.
We do not know how to lobby. Money always is insufficient; there is lack of financial means.”
(PA);
• „We (local government) collaborate; however it comes rather hard, because there is not common
system. We collaborate when we are asked to. It does not happen when particular issues are
being solved. The collaboration is good, however not systemic.” (PA);
• „It seems that a Latvian according by its definition does not know how to collaborate. It is a
problem. Also collaboration at ministry level always has been a problem.” (PO);
• „It is not clearly defined what non-formal education is. The Ministry of Education and Science
understands it differently as it is understood by the Ministry for Children and Family Affairs and
our agency. By developing lifelong education strategy we do not feel ourselves as potential
institution of this part. Some time ago I had an idea to make a conference, by inviting experts,
lecturers and policy makers, to listen to them and then everything could be arranged accordingly.
Until now the notion by the Ministry of Education and Science, stating that informal education is in
most direct way connected to professional education, is dominant. In our terms non-formal
education is something else; it is not about professional knowledge, but learning of skills,
practices and knowledge. And only we have this kind of understanding of non-formal education. It
is a problem. We are participants but we are rejected.” (PA);
• „I do not want to say that it is a failure with the children and youth centres, but simply the system
is being duplicated; in case of the Ministry of Education those are centres of interests, but in case
of the Ministry for Children Affairs those are youth initiative centres. They are established as
48

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
separate centres; however in reality they are doing exactly the same. Although they were meant
more towards non-formal education, it has not developed as a wholesome unit.” (YO);
• „I had a big conference in Daugavpils – violence at school, family, society; and I was promised
that someone from the Ministry for Children and Family Affairs will come, but falsely. Nobody
came. They apologized a lot, but there are plenty of people able to come. If the Ministry is
indifferent, then what collaboration there can be?” (PA);
• „In several places youth commissions have been established; however they do not work. There is
a negative example in Liepaja. Previously there were young people in the commission of youth
affairs, representing the issues. There were young people from high schools, universities, non-
governmental organizations, professional schools, from the religious youth group. Everybody of
them did represent a group. The work was going very well and then suddenly, as it happens for
us in every 4 years, the political situation was changing, and the young people representing
political parties were put in this commission of youth affairs. In principle, everything went wrong
by that moment. We did not have information on high school pupils, because we did not have
representatives, due to the fact that nobody participated in these youth parties. There was not
information also from professional schools, because of the same; besides the interests were
totally different. Previously we had arranged responsibilities, but by this moment everything was
confused. And by this I want to say - do not mix youth with politics. All the parties wanted to enter
their youngster there, disrespectfully that these fields already had been assigned in the
regulation. They did not agree on particular youngster for every field. They simply said, we have a
good youngster, we put it in.” (PA).
Collaboration examples in particular municipalities
• Riga. Taking into account that Riga is a big city and there are many local government structures,
collaboration in youth field is burdened, however in most cases it is possible and is being
implemented successfully. As a positive example of collaboration between Riga City Council and
youth, the project tender announced by Riga City Council, where young people may apply for
scholarship at university with their project, has been mentioned by the expert. The most
successful projects Riga City Council includes in its further plans and implements them.
• Liepaja. The Commission on Youth Affairs is established in Liepaja, seriously and actively
working in Liepaja City Council, along with other commissions. By this young people have
possibility to realize their interests in Liepaja City Council. Also grown-ups guiding the young
people are working in this commission. The collaboration model of Liepaja City Council as
especially successful one has been excelled by the representative of Latvian Youth Council.
• Daugavpils. The youth consultative council is working in Daugavpils, collaborating with the
Education Board and the district Board, while pupils’ parliament is collaborating with Daugavpils
City Council. The local government of Daugavpils is participating in co-financing of different
camps. Also private companies are involved in the camps themselves, for example private sports
clubs. The coordinator of Daugavpils of youth affairs uses wide collaboration network to give the
information further and get it back, to solve particular issues – pupils' self-governments of the city
schools, teachers, school directors, education managers, deputies of directors in education field,
the youth centre “Jauniba”, utility services and other local government institutions are
collaborating. The south Latgalian NGO support centre successfully collaborates with different
institutions of local government of Daugavpils. The organization works more actively in
Daugavpils district and Latgale region, in order to make the different youth projects available also
there.
49

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
• Jelgava. Within youth field, successful collaboration is being carried out with social services in
Jelgava. The coordinators of youth affairs collaborate with the State Employment Agency by
helping young people to find working places during summer.
• Gulbene. Gulbene youth centre is collaborating successfully with city council and social service,
by organizing joint work events or events with pensioners, by using premises and transport
resources of the service. The collaboration is successful, if there is a particular project, necessity
of which can be well reasoned to the institutions in charge by the youth worker. Gulbene youth
centre is active and involves members of the youth centre in its activities. For example, in the
recent project on youth stopping its educating.
• Jekabpils. In Jekabpils young people are working within youth council, which is collaborating with
the city council; however according to the youth representative, opinions from youth are not being
completely heard. The methodologist of the Children and Youth Centre of Daugavpils for work
with youth indicates that collaboration with schools (administration and pedagogues) is
successful, while collaboration with local government – partially successful. When collaborating
the local government expects active participation also from the rest of parties involved (for
example, from the Children and Youth Centre, young people themselves etc.) The representative
of youth NGO of Jekabpils indicates that local government does not want to collaborate and
involve all parties working in the youth field; more frequently the youth council is being heard. A
fund supporting non-governmental organizations, by allocating financing for administrative
expenses, as well as supporting small projects has been established within Jekabpils District
Council. Similar financing feature is planned to be developed also by the city council.
• Kuldiga. In organizing of cultural events the Children and Youth Centre in Kuldiga collaborates
with the Culture centre, which advertises events in the monthly event review issue, press etc. The
Children and Youth centre in collaboration with the Development Agency implemented a common
project in Kuldiga on involvement of young people at social risk into education system and labour
market. The project had very good results. By successful collaboration between local
government, youth organization and foreign donors, the non-commercial culture development
centre “NEKAC” has developed in Kuldiga.
• Several experts of youth affairs, for example in Ogre, Kuldiga, Daugavpils in their territory have
carried out research on young people, in order to find out their interests, desires and problems.
• Ogre. In collaboration with Ogre Youth Initiative Centre the youth NGO develops a program on
motivation and involvement of youth, by means of which the young people could be involved and
informed. The organization mainly collaborates with the Youth Health Centre of Ogre, the
Children and Youth Centre of Ogre, as well as Ogre Region Culture Centre.
The most effective collaboration model of youth policy entities
When carrying out deep interviews with different experts involved in realization of youth policy and youth
affairs, they were asked to depict the collaboration model, regarded by them as the most optimal for
effective implementation of youth policy. By summarizing these opinions it is possible to establish
following potentially most effective operation mechanism of youth policy entities:
• The Ministry for Children and Family Affairs acts as the main coordinating institution, it
collaborates and coordinates work of other ministries concerning youth.
50

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
• Youth collaboration with youth affairs coordinators at local government level (youth self-initiatives,
promotion of ideas, transfer of ideas to municipalities both directly and by using youth affairs
coordinators).
• Youth consultative councils, where young people, youth professionals and other specialists at
local government level are involved. A commission on youth affairs within local government,
where young people depending on thematic issues would be attracted.
• Youth initiative centres could collaborate with different local government services, by solving
particular problems and developing common projects for solution of these problems. Currently it is
burdened by the lack of resources.
• Intense communication between different youth entities (both by making common events and
establishing common information system).
• There is a common information system, which is available to all entities of youth policy (in division
by target groups (for example, for young people, commission on youth affairs, local governments)
and in division by topics (for example, laws, normative acts, tenders and projects, possibilities to
be involved etc.))
• There are consultative institutions at national level, wherein representatives of different state
institutions are working (which is enhancing fast and effective solution of problems at national
policy level).
51

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
3.4. The Most Significant Issues to be Solved in Youth Field in the View by Its Entities
3.4.1. Opinion of Youth, Non-governmental and Public Organizations, and Youth Affairs
Coordinators
• “Regular and stable financing.” (YO);
• “Youth policy should be established in all regions, not only in Riga.” (PA);
• “Failure is that no researches on young people in Latvia ever have been made. Research is what
really has been missing until now.” (PA);
• “Failure is that Youth Act still has not been adopted.” (YO);
• “Moral support from the government, in order to provide youngsters a conviction to that their
opinion is being considered.” (YO);
• “Health problems should be solved in long-term perspective. Health, support centres should be
established for young people, where both the new expectant mothers and people having
encountered with violence acts are involved. It would be a major solution in youth policy, because
young people can not do anything without feeling of health and safety.” (SW);
• “Education in our country is very good; however there must be practice as well. The short-term
and long-term issue should be to implement non-formal education and approve it.” (YO);
• “Important issue could be voluntary work, because in Latvia there is not clear notion what its
actual concern is.” (NGO);
• “Not in the same way we are sitting now, but in a big hall with ministers invited. We want to be
taken into account.” (FGD, passive), „A meeting with the minister himself is needed, not with
many different people, who maybe will deliver the information for him, but may be not. (FGD,
active);
• “To establish a clear and logic collaboration scheme of entities involved in realization of youth
policy, in order to provide that different organizations do not work in parallel terms, by doing the
same activity in different directions.” (PA);
• “There is no classificatory, no coordinator of youth affairs, no description; it is not determined
what its concerns are. There is not common system; everybody works on its own. ” (PA);
• “Many young people even do not have a feeling that they are able to effect or change something!
They even do not know about such youth policy! The state has to prove that it is ready to make
advances for a youth!” (FGD, active);
• “Short-term involvement of youth. Also collaboration – local government, youth organizations,
young people, education institutions, common work of all these members. The situation often is
that everybody thinks of itself and perceives others as competitors. It is needed; however it will be
hard – to work for a single goal.” (YO);
52

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
• The youth quit the countryside. It could be a problem. It could be a problem in local governments.
It could be in long-term. We have to work, but with a vision for the next 5 years. In order to
prevent outflow from countryside local governments.” (YO);
• „Involving other parties in all activities; we should not work alone.” (YO);
• „Opinion is learnt timely, the needs are investigated, then further they are transferred to the
ministry, where development takes a place; gradually. More communication. To work out a
program for the next year, to carry out a survey.\" (YO);
• „The open coordination method must be achieved. When also representatives of other ministries
listen to the Ministry for Children and Youth Affairs; in order to provide partnership.\" (PA);
• „Circulation of information should be improved. Obligations should be divided more clearly; what
is everybody responsible of. For example, newsletters. In order to see activities of the ministry
and coordinator.” (NGO);
• „Probably coordination at ministry scope should be carried out to find out people, directly working
with youth at social risk. I have taken a part implicitly in solution of these positive youth issues.
However, specialists working on such issues have not come together. Perhaps such a regular
exchange of experience could be successful.” (SW).
3.4.2. Youth Opinion
It is possible to distinguish four main problem groups in opinions of youth itself, to be solved at
government level: leisure time, education, employment and addictions (alcohol, drugs, and
cigarettes).
The necessity to enlarge youth Figure 2. Youth Opinion on Main Latvian Government Issues to be
%
opportunities to spend leisure time, to Solved in Youth Field
To enlarge possibilities to rest, spend leisure
rest as the main issue to be solved has time for youth
28.3
been identified by 28% of young people Arrangement and improvement of education
13.8
system
(see Figure 2). Arrangement and To restrict availability of alcohol, drugs for
11.4
improvement of education system as youth
Improvement of employment, in order to
relevant issue is regarded by 14%. Also provide that youth can find a job
11.4
such aspects as improvement of Education free of charge 5.2
education programs, improvement of Safety of youth, combat against violence 4.5
teachers' professionalism, as well as To provide possibilities to do sports 3.4
assessment of education load have to be
Listen to youth opinion 3.4
mentioned. 11% as important issue
mentioned solution of different addiction Cheaper study courses, cheaper tuition fees 2.8
problems – addictions of alcohol, drugs, To assign financing for youth activities 2.5
and cigarettes have been stated as Possibilities for youth to work in summers 2.5
important problems by the young people
Health care 2.3
in their daily life. The same amount of
young people is upset by the youth Higher scholarship 2.2
employment problem. Here two aspects To reduce education load 2.2
can be distinguished: youth summer Other 24.6
work, provision of work after completion 40.6
Hard to say
53

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
of education. Quite frequently also problems to choose the most appropriate course of studies or
profession have been mentioned.
Concerns of different addictions as a problem have to be especially emphasized in the research – if it has
been identified as one of the most important issues by the young people themselves, it directly indicates
the wide distribution of the problem in this target group. It has been approved also by previous
researches. For example, in research carried out by the Riga Drugs Addiction Prevention Centre in 2002 32,
70% of pupils have considered that \"people drink too much\" and 89% have regarded alcohol consumption
as the main social problem in Latvia (besides 26% have delivered assessment that it is one of the most
important problems in Latvia). The reasons for consumption of alcohol have been analysed in the
research, by concluding that “generally grown-ups more are oriented to seek justifying reasons (poverty,
bad state, stress, low salary), while young people associate it with fun, communication, resting.” Young
people perceive alcohol as integral part of spending of leisure time, resting and entertainment.
This research also finds out smoking habits among young people, by revealing that only about 1/3 of
young people have never been smoking, while approximately 30% smoke almost every day.
Although majority (about 70%) of the young people assesses, that they have never been consuming
drugs, alarming are 30% of those young people confessing having tried drugs at least once. As
researchers have acknowledged – “diversity of narcotic substances have been tried by pupils of Riga
schools is surprising. Almost 30 names of different substances have been mentioned, including several
jargon names for a single substance.”
Concerning addictions among young people, also computer addiction has to be mentioned, which has
gained especial popularity in the recent years. It is assured also by the youth research carried out in 2004
– \"Distribution of Addiction of New Technologies among Young People in Riga” 33 – interesting data on
different modes of addiction observed among friends and acquaintances of young people have been
collected by this research. Exactly computer addiction has to be mentioned as the most common one –
30% of the young people have stated having friends or acquaintances, suffering from such addiction. Also
remaining modes of addiction can be mentioned as significant and widespread ones: alcohol addiction
(25%), internet addiction (20%), chat addiction (15%), gambling addiction (14%) and drug addiction (1%).
In different social demographic and regional groups also different perception of most significant issues in
the youth field can be acknowledged (see Table 3).
The younger ones require drawing greater attention to improvement of spending of leisure time, while
\"older\" youngsters more consider social problems to be topical – employment, availability of education
etc.
Russian young people comparably more frequently than Latvians have mentioned the need of
employment solution and expressed desire to restore Russian as education language.
Employment issues have been regarded as significant also for population living outside Riga. Also youth
violence problem, as well as problem of financial availability of education – amount of scholarships, tuition
fee, and total education costs – is regarded to be topical by population living outside Riga.
32
“Habits of Using Alcoholic Drinks and Attitude towards Limitation of Alcohol Dissemination of Inhabitants of Riga”, Riga Drugs Addiction
Prevention Centre, 2002
33
Authors of the research – I.Koroļeva, R.Rungule, S.Sniķere, M.Trapencieris. It was conducted by the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology
of the University of Latvia
54

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Table 3. The Main Issues to be Solved by the Latvian Government in the Youth Field
AGE NATIONALITY DOMICILE
Russian, Outside
15-16 17 18 19-25 Latvian Riga
% other Riga
To enlarge possibilities to rest, spend
32.1 25.9 27.3 30.3 31.5 20.8 31.7 27.8
leisure time for youth
Arrangement and improvement of
12.5 12.6 12.7 18.3 13.9 13.7 20.7 12.8
education system
To restrict availability of alcohol, drugs for
11.6 12.1 12.0 9.2 13.2 7.1 14.6 10.9
youth
Improvement of employment, in order to
5.4 10.9 10.0 18.3 12.1 9.6 9.8 11.6
provide that youth can find a job
Education free of charge 3.6 4.5 6.0 7.0 4.8 6.1 4.9 5.3
Safety of youth, combat against violence 7.1 3.6 6.7 1.4 5.1 3.0 2.4 4.7
To provide possibilities to do sports 1.8 4.9 4.7 0.7 4.0 2.0 2.4 3.5
To listen to youth opinion 5.4 1.6 2.7 5.6 4.4 1.0 1.2 3.7
Cheaper study courses, cheaper tuition
0.9 2.4 4.0 3.5 3.1 2.0 1.2 3.0
fees
To assign financing for youth activities 1.2 2.0 7.0 3.3 0.5 6.1 1.9
Possibilities for youth to work in summers 3.6 2.4 1.3 2.8 2.9 1.5 1.2 2.6
Health care 0.9 2.0 1.3 4.9 2.4 2.0 6.1 1.8
Higher scholarships 1.8 1.2 1.3 4.9 2.6 1.0 2.4 2.1
To reduce education load 0.9 2.8 2.7 1.4 2.4 1.5 4.9 1.8
Other 19.6 22.3 29.3 27.5 26.9 19.3 25.6 24.4
Hard to say 42.9 44.1 40.7 32.4 35.0 53.3 34.1 41.5
TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Generally, it is obvious that young people are interested in particular issues, particular problems to be
solved. Thus – activity programs, laws developed by politicians are not and will not be able to satisfy
young people demand of promotion and solution of particular issues. It should be taken into account when
planning and communicating the youth policy at national, as well as local level.
55

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
4. YOUTH AS A ENTITY OF THE YOUTH POLICY – SOCIOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION
This chapter marks several significant sociological descriptions that will be used further in analysis of the
research to describe social and political activities of young people. This chapter encompasses information
on issues that young people highlighted as the most significant ones in the youth field throughout this
research, as well as the aspects that the Department of Youth Affairs of the Ministry for Children and
Family Affairs brought forward as relevant in the youth field in the National Report on Youth Policy of
Latvia.
4.1. Description of Youth Values
Values of young people are the one of the most relevant aspects to which youth researches refer, when
analysing collaboration processes of young people. The dominant presumptions among young people
about essential and non-essential issues, conviction about, what is important in their lives and what is less
important, quite often give justification and motivation for particular actions or on the contrary – passivity.
Two approaches for measuring values were used within this research. First, the measurement included
the attitude of youth towards such conservative values as family, work, religion, politics, as well as attitude
towards life style values like free time, sports, and friends. Taking into account that one of the most
important aspects of the youth policy is youth health, it is also included in the measurement of youth
values in order to identify youth attitude towards health care and its availability. Assessment scale method
was used in these measurements – young people were asked to assess each value according to the
significance of these values in their lives from 1 (no significance) to 5 (very significant).
Secondly, German youth survey method34, was adapted to measure the most significant dimensions of
values of young people. Five dimensions of values were included in these measurements: (1) orientation
to family, (2) orientation to career, job, (3) participation in the modern society, (4) humanity, tolerance, (5)
independence, individuality. The research measured, how outspoken these dimensions of values are
among young people and what are the differences of these orientations among different youth target
groups.
Overall values of young people can be divided in thee Figure 3a. Values.
groups: most significant, averagely significant and Average in scale from 1 'Has no significance' to 5 'Very significant'
insignificant. A group of the most significant values include
(see Figure 3a): family (4,74 points in 5 point scale), friends Family 4.71
(4,56), health (4,44) and free time (4,44). Averagely Friends 4.56
significant for young people are studies (4,09), work (3,90),
Health 4.44
sports (3,56) and charity (3,10). Moreover less significant –
Free time 4.44
voluntary wok (2,56), politics (2,39) and religion (2,36).
Studies 4.09
Analysing significance of the values in social demographic Work 3.90
scale it is noticeable (see Table 4) that for young people at Sports 3.56
the age between 15 – 18 years such values as free time,
Charity 3.10
friends are comparatively more significant, while for 19 – 25
old young people social values – work, charity, voluntary Voluntary work 2.65
work, studies are more significant. Politics 2.39
Religion 2.36
It is also noticeable that those young people, whose
residence is outside Riga, give more importance to the values brought forward – thus they evaluate
34
Deutsche Shell (Hrsg.) Jugend 2000, Band 1, Leske+Budrich, Opladen 2000. Description of methodology see in the Annex 2.
56

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
importance of work, health, family, charity and sports in their life higher, while the inhabitants of Riga
evaluate politics and religion comparatively higher than other young people.
Table 4. Values
AVERAGE AGE GENDER NATIONALITY DOMICILE
FROM 1 TO Russian, Outside
15-16 17 18 19-25 Male Female Latvian Riga
5 other Riga
Family 4.66 4.71 4.79 4.67 4.64 4.75 4.71 4.72 4.43 4.75
Friends 4.58 4.53 4.55 4.58 4.45 4.62 4.61 4.45 4.51 4.56
Health 4.46 4.43 4.50 4.40 4.36 4.49 4.44 4.46 4.15 4.49
Free time 4.41 4.46 4.44 4.41 4.39 4.47 4.49 4.32 4.40 4.44
Studies 4.01 4.07 4.01 4.28 3.78 4.26 4.13 4.00 4.04 4.10
Work 3.78 3.91 3.96 3.91 3.95 3.87 3.90 3.90 3.82 3.91
Sports 3.76 3.59 3.56 3.36 3.97 3.33 3.56 3.56 3.32 3.60
Charity 3.24 3.10 3.00 3.10 2.87 3.20 3.02 3.28 2.81 3.14
Voluntary
2.76 2.54 2.58 2.82 2.50 2.72 2.60 2.76 2.59 2.66
work
Politics 2.29 2.29 2.40 2.64 2.43 2.36 2.45 2.25 2.57 2.36
Religion 2.35 2.28 2.27 2.61 2.11 2.50 2.31 2.48 2.48 2.35
While measuring the value-orientations of young people within the studied five dimensions – work, family,
modern society, independence and individuality, humanity and tolerance – it is noticeable (see Figure 3b)
that orientation to career and job and little less orientation to family characterises young people most
outspokenly. Young people also Figure 3b. Dimension of Values.
Index
assessed family in the value
measurements as one of the most 26.60
26.20
significant values in their life. Work got
quite less significance assessment, 24.15
although orientation to career and job 23.32
received the highest value. It is possible 22.50
that overall young people do not give that
importance to work in their life and
consider it as one of the non-essential
Orientation to Orientation to Independence, Participation in Humanity,
parts of their life – it is important for career, job family individuality modern society tolerance
young people to obtain good profession,
interesting job that would allow also to earn money, make a career, yet young people think of it as self-
evident and not something that has not to be given special value. It has to be equally pointed out that the
target group of the research is young people between the age 15 and 25 years, and only small part are
aware of their professional interests and choices and even smaller part is employed, that is why
perception of job and profession is quite often based on delusions and stereotypes.
Orientation to independence and individuality is comparatively outspoken among young people that
characterises ability to express and maintain ones own opinion even if others don’t agree, ability to be
individualistic, ability to make own choices despite other people’s opinion. It is very important that this kind
of dimension of values is observable among young people that act and form their opinion collectively.
Whereas dimensions – participation in modern society (interest in politics, evaluation of role of education,
learning foreign languages and new technologies etc.) and humanity and tolerance (being helpful, help
those in need, being tolerant towards those who are different, being useful for society etc.) appeared
during the research as comparatively less outspoken of dimensions of values. These observations are
alarming to some extent as it proves that there is intolerance towards those who differ among young
people (not only in a wider sense – towards representatives of different race, other nationality etc, but also
in a local and more narrow sense – towards those who are financially not well provided, or whose who
57

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
don’t succeed (or to the contrary – those who succeed) in studies etc). Comparatively low dimension of
values of tolerance and humanity among young people makes it difficult to popularise such essential
aspects as mutual help, voluntary work and active involvement of the target group as well.
In the social demographic framework (see Table 5), it is interesting to learn that orientation to job, career
is particularly evident to young people at the age between 15-16 years, that could be explained by the fact
that at this age view about work is unclear and certainty of job, career as a way of earning money (in
some way job as entertainment) prevails. It is also noticeable that orientation to job and career is
comparatively more outspoken among those of Russian nationality and those who reside outside Riga.
If orientation to career of young people decreases while they grow up, than significance of other studied
values increases – research data shows that for young people at the age between 19-25 years family,
humanity and tolerance and participation in modern society and independence, individuality are more
important in comparison to those at the age between 15-18.
Significant differences are observable in orientation to humanity and tolerance between male and female
target groups – it is outspokenly lower for the male target group.
Overall it is observable that representatives of male target group give less importance to almost every
analysed aspect, exception is only participation in modern society that is almost equally important for both
female and male target groups.
Table 5. Dimensions of Values
AGE GENDER NATIONALITY DOMICILE
Russian, Outside
15-16 17 18 19-25 Male Female Latvian Riga
INDEX other Riga
Orientation to
27.05 26.97 26.81 25.39 26.07 26.85 26.40 27.07 25.08 26.82
career, job
Orientation to
25.87 26.03 26.84 26.11 25.73 26.47 26.44 25.66 25.07 26.37
family
Independence,
23.75 24.25 23.91 24.54 23.78 24.36 24.20 24.01 23.68 24.22
individuality
Participation in
23.29 23.52 22.84 23.50 23.18 23.41 23.52 22.85 22.81 23.39
modern society
Humanity,
22.55 22.16 22.00 23.58 21.44 23.10 22.92 21.52 22.41 22.52
tolerance
Sociologist B.Zepa also pointed to the significance of values for collaboration and activity in her research
about political participation35 that was carried out in 1999. She draws attention to the fact that
individualism, hedonic oriented values are more urgent for young people, while for elder people these are
social values. The researcher is of the opinion that changes of views in values of the society, especially
the decrease of significance of national and social values, lowers the level of political participation (it is
observable among young people in particular). At the same time the sociologist points to the fact that
national and state values are not only values that can motivate young people to take part in political
activities, equally essential motivators could be, for example, minority rights, environment issues,
feminism etc.
During the research various target groups were asked to describe modern youth and define their specific
differences that characterise particularly present youth.
Largest part of experts interviewed (youth affairs coordinators, youth workers, social workers,
representatives of NGOs) expressed opinion that overall modern youth is very active, still they are known
35
B. Zepa (red.) “Political Collaboration Conductive Circumstances in Latvia”, Baltic Data House, Riga, 1999.
58

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
by instability of interests – they are carried away by doing something, but only for a short period of time,
then they look for other interests. That influences work of non-governmental and social organisation to a
large extent, as quite a large labour turnover is observable.
“I think young people are very active, at least those who I know. They try to do something and express
themselves.” (FGD, active)
“In my opinion, there are a lot of young people who are socially active and active in the art field, but there
are also a lot of young people who do nothing and are not interested in what happens in Latvia, and so.”
(FGD, active)
“Young people are doing great, you just have to speak to them and propose something to them, give
them jobs. Young people are open, they agree to come and do.” (YAC)
“In my opinion modern young people are very active, open, maybe willing to do but not patient enough to
finish what they started. They want to run everywhere, to participate, to do, but when they need to sit
down for a longer time – to cut, to glue, to make a scenario, to write a project, of course, they get tired.”
(YC)
Experts positively evaluate that “young people are more open, more determined” (YC), “very curious,
want to get to know about issues starting from studies to their surroundings, find out – why? Every young
person looks for a particular place for him, tries everything that might interest him. Question is for how
sustainable it is?” (YO)
At the same time part of experts admit that young people quite often are too lazy to do something
themselves. Young people are passive in choosing out-of-school occupations and pretty often in studies.
Part of experts also is of the opinion that young people quite often need to be “pushed’, ‘”pulled” in
different activities, because they rarely take initiative themselves.
“It seems to me that young people are very active, but at the same time most of them are very lazy. There
is a lot of opportunities and many young people talk that they want to do something, but they are too lazy
to acquire”. (YC)
“If you encourage young people, they will work, but they are not eager to take the initiative” (YO)
“Honestly, youth is pushable. If you poke them, they go. They need a little help, otherwise they don’t want
to do anything.” (CYC)
“Modern youth feels very free. They hardly obey limitations, frames that are set by the society. They feel
themselves as they have a say.” (YC) “I think that young people are very independent, dare a lot,
especially in the last years.” (FGD, active) That rather often creates problems in communication with
teachers and parents what is mentioned quite often by pedagogues, social workers and youth affairs
coordinators in this and other researches. They are of the opinion that young people have too much
freedom to refer to their rights, but they are not taught of and they do not abide to their duties.
One more conflict source between young people and parents, teachers should be mentioned – different
social experience of modern youth and different practice of establishing relationships with other
generations. It has to be mentioned as one of the most significant influence factors – the fact that modern
youth is the first generation that has no experience with a soviet state power, wherewith “this experience
related to soviet time is very different from the one of their parent’s generation that has knowledge of
Russian language. It is good, if they know Russian language. There is a rift between them and their
parent’s generation because they don’t have a common social experience.” (E) Here it should be
mentioned that part of modern youth’s essential experience is globalisation processes and Latvia’s joining
the EU that gives absolutely different, more wider range of opportunities: “particularly this generation was
changed very rapidly and crucially Latvia’s joining the EU, transparency of borders and major
globalisation attack, wherewith one has to study these young people to understand what kind of entity we
are dealing with and live together. Five years ago everything was different, we were not in the EU, there
wasn’t an educational reform implemented.” (PA) “These young people who were born after regaining of
59

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
independence have different perception of life. They are used to unlimited freedom, self-assurance is
larger and to some extent that influences their personality, their lack of respect.” (YO) Second significant
difference is everyday communication – modern youth’s “communication mode to a large extent is
streamed by digital technologies that is not the same as audiovisual format. Such matters as study
process, communication, establishing relationships, obtaining information, entertainment and socialisation
is streamed by digital technologies, that mediate relationships between people.” (E)
The most significant factor that rises permissiveness among young people and to a large extent
influences passivity of youth, according to experts mention is the fact that “you can sense that parents
don’t have much time to spend with young people. They are emotionally empty. Parents can control
young people less. Young people don’t know how to organise themselves.” (SW) “It is not determined
what is allowed and what is not in families. There is permissiveness.” (SW) “Parents are not an authority
anymore, don’t respect parents.” (YW) “A lot depends on environment where they are raised, because
there can be 10 km long distance between two schools, and in one school all young people are ready to
capture Riga, but when you go to the another school – everyone is so pessimistic, they will go to Ireland,
chop wood.. a lot depends on family, how it is established.” (FGD, active)
Second significant factor that influences youth values is cultural ideology of mass consumption coming in
Latvia. With its influence young people evaluate every activity more in a sense of materialism,
consumption than in categories of humanity, help. “If you take away a computer from him, he doesn’t
know what to do. You feel attitude of a consumer society.” (SP) Also one of the members of youth focus
group points to one of the biggest value orientation problems for modern youth – “young people don’t
have anything to struggle for, have no aim, before there was – state independence. We don’t have
anything to struggle for, we fight for nonsense.” (FGD, passive) And in this situation when youth doesn’t
have ideological, general values and aims, their everyday life is influenced by consumer values to a large
extent: “now there are no values, the most important thing is to be well dressed and look good.” (FGD,
passive), “they don’t know much about sharing, for a part of them a value is – a brand, consumption.”
(YO)
There is also a value such as – egoism, individualism – related to consumer culture; experts indicate that
modern youth is very oriented to personal benefit, to meet own needs and wishes, quite often not taking
into account needs and interests of other people or society altogether. “Material values, thoughts about
oneself increase and less though is given to values of society overall.” (PA) “Young people quite often are
very selfish, think only about their benefit.” (YAC) It was pointed out also in the research that was
collaborated during 200336: „many young people enjoy spending time in idleness, having a drink. [..] to a
large extent young people are interested in what happens around them as consumers – they are
interested in closest skating rink, school, stadium, respectively things that can give direct benefit to them”.
While looking for differences of values among different youth groups, mostly two differences appear:
regional and age group differences. Experts assess that young people from cities (especially Riga) have
certainly different system of value than those who are from regions, it is determined by, first, socio-
economic circumstances of their life, and secondly, available choices (regarding to free time, education,
professional choices). “There are some peculiarities in Latgale that are quite often explained by the
distance from Riga as socio-economic mecca of Latvia.” (E) “Young people feel better in Riga. They have
undeniably more uncountable opportunities. Not only opportunities, but also different kind of support for
implementing them.” (E) “There is a big difference among city youth and country youth. Large part of
inaction does miracles with a minus sign, because now people dare to do much more than they did
before.” (FGD, active) “I wanted to stress out that young people from Riga are totally different from young
people from countryside. Everything is enough for young people in Riga, they don’t need anything new,
36
“Role of Youth Public Organisations in Implementing State Youth Policy”, the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the University of
Latvia, Riga, 2003, 59.p.
60

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
they are quite spoiled.” (YO) “Youth from Riga is a separate category, because there is an opinion in
Riga, that if you live in Riga, then you have much wider choices and maybe motivation is not that big to
take and do everything.” (FGD, active)
The second significant difference in the aspect of values is the youth age group. Most of the interviewed
admitted that starting independent life changes values of young people fundamentally, that is most often
‘marked’ with starting studies far from domicile of your family or starting to work. Some experts mention
also establishment of a family as a border of change of values. All these changes of status are related to
limitation of freedom that has to be undertaken by young people to do new social roles – students,
parents, spouses, and workers. Wherewith limitation of freedom also influences behaviour of young
people and to a large extent their choices in social, cultural and entertainment, as well as political sense.
“There are very different values for young people at the age between 15 to 30. Young people 15 years old
are very ostentatious, they have very big differences.” (FGD, active)
“”There is a big difference when you are young and you are supported by your parents and when you
support yourself. Then values change inevitably.” (FGD, passive)
It is interesting that interviewed experts point to the modern youth feature – low assessment of value of
patriotism, own culture: “in other countries young people are more patriotic of own culture and State. Our
young people are not patriots of the country. No, they are, but there is a small percentage. But when you
go to other country within exchange programme you can see that they are with heart and soul for own
culture, but our youth is somewhat passive – with a bad grace “ou, what will we do there..” And also – this
yammer – this is Latvian national sport indeed.” (FGD, active)
Analysing specifically values of youth of social risk group, interviewed experts pointed at two outspoken
tendencies: devaluation of values caused by different addictions and development of specific value
system for low-income youth. As mentioned by several experts, the most important risk factor for modern
youth is usage of different addictive substances – alcohol, drugs, cigarettes that influence overall attitude
towards their life. Although it is impossible, of course, to affirm that usage of additive substances changes
value orientation of youth (and not the contrary); still experts mention this characteristic of modern youth
as the most essential. And these young people who are addicted “have practically no interests, they
absolutely don’t know what they want to do in their life.” (SW), “I can see that the value orientation has
decreased, they don’t’ see meaning in education, the only important thing is the lat earned.” (YW)
The second youth social risk group tendency is development of specific system of values for low-income
youth. Experts think it is very alarming that these young people have own, special understanding of their
own role in public life: “part of young people unfortunately is educated by society itself, not onhangers, but
people who have a low income status and these children gradually grow with thought that everyone owe
something to them, that is due to them, they got used to be cared of all the time, that they have discounts
everywhere.” (PA), “parents convince children: you have right for that – ask!” (SW) Experts in interviews
also point to the fact that these young people quite often don’t’ have interests at all, it is very difficult to
activate them to participate somewhere.
As one expert interviewed mentioned that these different tendencies are observable among young people
– different financial possibilities of parents of young people, alcoholism and drug addition, poor results in
school etc – create situation when “youth groups are establishing that don’t communicate between each
other and don’t know anything about each other.” (PA)
61

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
4.2. Description of Youth Opinion
4.2.1. Youth and Employment
Taking into account that orientation to job and career is very outspoken for modern youth and also the fact
that work although is not assessed as most significant value in life, still has cooperatively high significance
evaluation, it seemed important in the research to evaluate overall attitude towards employment, own
opportunities and wishes.
The most significant for young people seems (see Figure 4) to find an interesting job (93% admitted that it
is somewhat or very important for them). Majority of young people think that it is important that their job is
persistent (89%), that they can make a career Figure 4. Valuation of Job, Career.
%
(89%) and they can earn a lot of money
(89%). A necessity to learn prestigious Find interesting job 92.6
profession is comparatively less significant,
although considerably more than a half of Find persistent job 89.2
young people mentioned this work aspect as
significant (77%). Make career 88.8
Learn profitable
One of the experts interviewed pointed out an profession
88.5
interesting difference of employment situation
within the nationality groups: “Because of Earn a lot of money 84.6
their laziness and other reasons,
Learn prestigious
opportunities in labour market decreases for profession
77.0
Latvians, because they don’t learn Russian
language, in turn it increases for Russian young people, because they learn Latvian language, it inevitably
can lead to a situation after 3-4 years when Russian young people will have better chances than Latvians
in the labour market.” (E)
It is noticeable that as the most important job descriptions (see Figure 5) are an interesting job (55%),
career opportunities (46%) and agreeable colleagues (40%). Persistent job and opportunity for
improvement are important for approximately 1/3 respondents. Approximately 1/5 assessed work, which
corresponds to their own ability and work without stress as a significant aspect.
Essential regional difference is observable about job persistence (see Table 6) – that is more valued
among young people who live outside Riga (the reason is considerable unemployment problems in
regions), while inhabitants of Riga comparatively more often value opportunity for improvement as more
significant aspect for job.
It must be added that salary was not included in any evaluation, because researchers assumed that it
would be the most significant factor for all young people. It was also confirmed by the research conducted
in 2004 on values and lifestyle of consumers of Latvia37, where a question asked was “Why it is necessary
to work?”. As it is shown on Figure 6, majority think it is necessary to work to financially provide family and
themselves. In this case, the most interesting is a breakdown among age groups: if for young people at
the age between 18-20 the most significant reason to work seems “to live a prosperous life”, “to earn” and
“to make a rise in career”, then young people at the age between 21-25 comparatively often prevailed
other values such as “to realize themselves”, “to become useful for society”, “to perfect themselves”.
37
“Research on Values and Lifestyle of Consumers of Latvia” Riga, 2004. During the research there were surveyed 1 000 inhabitants in age
group between 18 till 74. For this particular research data on 18-25 years old young people were used. The research was conducted by a
researcher Gints Klāsons who gave possibility and permission to use data in this particular research.
62

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Table 6. Most Important Aspects for Job
DOMICILE Figure 5. Most Important Aspects for Job.
%
% Riga Outside Riga
Reputable Interesting work 54.8
position in 9.8 12.0 Career opportunities 46.2
society
Agreeable Agreeable colleagues 39.6
42.7 39.2
colleagues Persistent job 33.2
Work without
19.5 22.5 Opportunity to improve 28.6
stress
Persistent job 19.5 35.1 Work without stress 22.1
Career
34.1 48.0 Work that corresponds to own abilities 20.9
opportunities
Good working Possibility to be among people 16.7
18.3 14.9
time
Good working time 15.4
Social
15.9 11.2
guarantees Social guarantees 11.8
Opportunity for
43.9 26.4 Reputable position in society 11.7
improvement
Long vacation 11.0 5.4 Long vacation 6.1
Possibility to be Responsible job 4.8
11.0 17.6
among people
Responsible job 7.3 4.4 Other 10.1
Interesting work 48.8 55.7 Hard to say 0.5
Work that
corresponds to 15.9 21.6
own abilities
Within the aspect of employment an essential question is about
TOTAL 100.0 100.0
youth opportunities to plan their future – if a young person has
an opportunity to plan his professional
Figure 6. Why it is Necessary to Work?
development already in a primary school and %
68.9
especially in a secondary school, educational To provide financially oneself and family 66.7
70.8
process becomes more determined and fruitful, 32.2
whereas if a young person “sees” his future only To live a prosperous life
26.9
38.6
with a perspective of some months or years then ALL
31.3
To realize oneself 22.2 18-20
his motivation and choices are inconsistent, of 39.0
21-25
course, and with lower effectiveness in a long term To perfect oneself 23.4
28.6
perspective. The data of the 2007 research 33.0
28.4
conducted by the “Data Serviss” Ltd on youth 38
To earn good money 36.8
21.4
shows that only 9% of pupils plan their future 21.7
To use skills 20.8
further than 5 years, while 23% - only for the 22.4
nearest months, and 29% - only for 1-2 years. To make a rise in career
20.9
25.0
17.5
19.5
The mentioned “Data Serviss” research confirms To become useful for society 17.1
21.5
that young people to a large extent orientate 12.7
themselves towards those professions in the labour To achieve stable position in society 9.2
15.7
market that are required nowadays, wherewith they 8.1
To meet new friends, acquaintances 10.1
don’t plan their future in a long term perspective, 6.3
but react to short-term tendencies of the labour To achieve higher position in society
7.3
10.0
5.0
market. Of course, in this case the person in
charge of education and labour market policy should take responsibility, not youth themselves. The
research data shows that in 2007 young people mention: finances end economics (35%), commercials,
public relations and journalism (27%), tourism and hotel business (26%), management, state and
38
“Where Disappeared a Dream about Cosmonaut? Research on Youth Professional Orientation.” Riga, 2007. Research was conducted by
“Data Serviss” Ltd for “Junior Achievement – Latvija”. Here it must be stressed out that this research was carried out in internet that limits
reach of target group very significantly. Because in survey, in this, case, can participate only those who have an access to internet and only
those who are motivated, wherewith opinion of passive pupils are not represented here.
63

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
business management (23%), building and engineering field (23%) as more perspective fields (within
which they want to continue their studies).
Several questions regarding youth employment are incorporated in Eurobarometer researches on youth in
the EU member states39. The most interesting data here are about the main reasons why young people
can’t find job. Young people in Latvia mentioned lack of practical skills (25%) and lack of job opportunities
in Latvia (25%) as the main reasons. Significantly rarely young people referred to lack of opportunities to
raise qualification and professional training (7%), as well as inadequate professional orientation in schools
(5%).
Youth opinion about who will support them in looking for job is interesting. Previously mentioned research
data shows that young people in Latvia are sure that the best ‘assistant’ in looking for job will be high
school (25%), almost the same amount of young people thought that it would be the recruitment offices
(23%). Approximately 1/5 assessed that enterprises will help the most, but 7% thought that social services
could give good support in looking for job.
Differences are observable among young people from Latvia and the EU member states on the skills that
are necessary to find a good job. Latvian young people considered foreign languages (in Latvia – 26%, in
the EU – 16%), as well as knowledge in IT, computers and communication technologies (in Latvia – 21%,
in the EU – 17%) as the most significant. Latvian young people think that the most important skills are
communication and teamwork (in Latvia – 17%, in the EU – 27% (the most frequently mentioned factor in
the EU member states)), training skills, practise (in Latvia - 16%, in the EU – 21%) and entrepreneurship
skills, knowledge of business management (in Latvia – 14%, in the EU – 9%).
One of the most essential issues in employment aspect is mobility; therefore assessment on young
people’s readiness to change their domicile due to their job was included in this survey. Data shows that
not all young people are ready to Figure 7. Mobility
%
change their domicile to look for a
better job – only a little more than a half For better job would be ready to move to other 66.1
city or parish nearby current residence
expressed such readiness (see Figure
7). For better job would be ready to move to other
59.3
city or parish that is far from current residence
Young people are comparatively willing For better job would be ready to move to other
55.1
to move to another place nearby their country
current residence for a better job
(66%), but readiness for the movement In future would like to live in other country 46.7
to another region or even another
country was expressed comparatively rarer. These results are affirmed also in other researches, for
instance, pupil survey done in Valmiera region40 shows that more that 1/3 of pupils decided not to return
home after finishing far-off studies.
At the same time an alarming indictor is that almost half of young people agreed to the statement that in
future they would like to live in another country. Especially young people at the age between 15-16 are
sure about that (in this age group 56% agreed with this statement, while only 33% young people agreed to
it at the age between 19-25). Young people of Russian nationality more frequently think about moving
than Latvian young people (respectively – 59% and 41%).
39
“Young Europeans. A Survey Among People Aged Between 15-30 in the European Union. Analytical Report.” Flash Eurobarometer Series
#202, The Gallup Organization, February 2007. It must be stressed out that there is a different target group – 15-30 years old citizens were
surveyed.
40
„Entrepreneurship Environment in Valmiera Region.” EU structural fund open call “Promotion of Research on the Labour Market Issues”
project “Research and Analysis of Entrepreneurship Environment of Valmiera region” No. VPD1/ESF/NVA/05/APK/3.1.5.2./0021/2. Vidzeme
University Collage. Valmiera, 2007.
64

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
The previously mentioned research on youth professional orientation 41 gives interesting information on
mobility aspects. As data shows, approximately 1/5 young people who wish to study in the demanded
professions in Latvia, would like to work abroad (for example, from those who wish to study finances and
economics, 22% assessed that they gladly would work abroad, but from those, who choose journalism,
public relations and commercials, 28% would like to go abroad).
Of course, there would be essential obstacles for young people when moving to another country for job –
these obstacles were analysed in the preciously mentioned Eurobarometer research, as well. As data
shows, for young people of Latvia the most essential difficulty to find a job abroad is connected with
insufficient knowledge of foreign languages (36%), also young people mentioned a formal obstacle of
recognition of education, qualification certificate abroad (13%). Approximately 1/10 young people admitted
that they don’t know how to find a job abroad. Evaluating the situation in the Baltic state context, young
people of Latvia comparatively often assessed that they have difficulties with foreign languages, while
Estonian and Lithuanian comparatively often referred to different administrative obstacles.
Taking into account that young people make professional choice based on available information, it is
important to know what are the most significant aspects that form their professional orientation. The data
of previously conducted researches42 show that parents are the most influential opinion expressers on the
choice of profession (62%). At the same time part of young people (47%) assessed that their opinion is
the only one that is important for them. That in turn means that, when forming a short-term view about the
labour market, young people often are based on stereotyped assumptions about the profitability of a
profession, demand in labour market.
Still availability of additional information could stimulate a view of young people on labour market in long-
term perspective. Data of the mentioned research of “Data Serviss” Ltd shows that young people would
gladly participate in different kind of events that would help to choose a profession. The following helpful
events are identified as the most significant ones: meetings and discussions with representatives of
interested profession (57%), excursions to enterprises, institutions, opportunity to work in interested field
(48%), discussions, meeting with potential employers (39%), and also meeting, discussions with lecturers
of educational institution (37%).
It is possible to distinguish several essential problematic issues in employment field. One of the main is
incoherence between education and labour market – after graduation a young person cannot be sure that
his profession will be required and there is a big possibility that the content of education the person
obtained does not meet the particular practical requirements of the labour market. That creates stress and
incomprehension on the choice of profession, as well as decreases significance of education process
itself, thus causing to recognize higher or professional education as receiving “a paper’, not qualification.
“In my opinion, young people are not interested in education as a value, it is simply the necessity,
because then you can start to work and to earn money.” (YAC) The irony is that this situation is
observable simultaneously with increasing level of education and knowledge of young people: overall
knowledge and level of education of young people increases, but these values are not decisive anymore
in the establishment of the professional career (at the same time level of education is a significant factor
that decreases risk of unemployment). Compliance of education to labour market requirements is studied
in-depth in the research “Professional and High Education Programmes Compliance with Labour Market
Requirements” 43 of the Ministry of Welfare. In this research it is concluded that there is no background to
41
“Where Disappeared a Dream about Cosmonaut? Research on Youth Professional Orientation.” Riga, 2007. Research was conducted by
“Data Serviss” Ltd for “Junior Achievement – Latvija”.
42
Ibidem
43
„Professional and High Education Programmes Compliance with Labour Market Requirements.” Project “Studies of the Ministry of Welfare”
for the National Program “Studies of the Labour Market” from the European Union Structural Funds, No
VPD1/ESF/NVA/04/NP/3.1.5.1/0001/0003.The University of Latvia. Riga, 2007.
65

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
affirm that education is completely apart from labour market, yet there are named several significant
problems in this sphere: employers value that often graduated students don’t have appropriate practical
skills (vocational education and professional secondary education graduated students’ practical skills are
not satisfactory for 65% cases, but high education graduated students’ skills – 53%), level of required
working skills are higher than those obtained in school/ high school, professional and high education
system is too regulated and bureaucratic, cooperation between educational institutions and employers are
not sufficient, and there is not secured qualitative practise work and its compliance to study programmes,
and other issues. In this research it is pointed out that only 48% of labour force work in profession where
last education was obtained. The main reason for not working in profession where education is obtained
among 15 to 24 years old young people it is insufficient professional preparedness; that indicates that
educational institutions in Latvia give insufficient professional skills, especially practical skills.
The second problematic issue (that partly raises from previously mentioned) is youth unemployment. 44
From one side, it is very difficult to find the first job for young people without practical skills, which forces
them to choose job that doesn’t correspond to their own qualifications in order to adopt in the labour
market. But from the other side, young people cannot be sure at all in which field and how their carer,
professional experience will develop; that causes young people to be more flexible and mobile than their
parents and grandparents were and whose work experience was designable and foreseeable. Young
people also mention that unemployment qualification courses are not always available and suitable for
them. For example, they cannot always attend courses, because the group has to be complete, but there
are not enough people who want to attend particular course. A significant problem is unofficial
employment; especially it is urgent in regions. Young people register themselves as unemployed quite
often and simultaneously do temporary jobs, work unofficially, and as a result they can’t attend
qualification courses very frequently. These are issues that can significantly influence professional
choices and opportunities, a common evaluation and attitude towards the State of young people. There is
also a significant social risk factor that young people won’t be able to thoroughly adjust to the labour
market and would get into a circle from which it is difficult to get out.
Within the study “Professional Activities of Graduates of Higher and Vocational Education Institutions after
Graduation”45 researchers studied youth professional work after graduating. In this study as problems of
youth professional preparedness are mentioned: aging technologies used in studies, limited opportunities
for practical work, disability of graduated students to adapt in labour market and to adjust its rules and
limitations, too high requirements of young workers towards employers (both financial, and social).
4.2.2. Youth Trust in State Institutions
One of the hypotheses that were formed by the researchers during this study is the assumption that
political and social activities of young people are influenced to a large extent by an overall trust in state
institutions. That is why respondents were asked to evaluate their trust in 15 different state, local and non-
governmental institutions. Although assumption about trust didn’t prove to be true, still these results give
significant insight on the overall attitude of youth to state, official institutions.
Table 7. Trusting in Institutions
44
Data of Central Statistical Bureau on work searchers proportion among total active inhabitants shows following youth unemployment rates
among 15-24 years old young people: in 2003 – 18.5%; in 2004 – 18.2%; in 2005 – 12.9%; in 2006 – 13.1%; in I quarter of 2007 – 11.2%.
45
„Professional Activities of Graduates of Higher and Vocational Education Institutions after Graduation.” University of Latvia, Agency of the
University of Latvia “Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the University of Latvia”, Baltkonsults, LTD. Project “Studies of the Ministry of
Welfare” for the National Program “Studies of the Labour Market” from the European Union Structural Funds, No
VPD1/ESF/NVA/04/NP/3.1.5.1/0001/0003. Riga, 2007.
66

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
NATIONALITY Figure 8. Trusting in Institutions.
Russian,
Latvian Average in scale 1'Have no trust ' to 5 'Have absolute trust'
AVERAGE FROM 1 TO 5 other
Youth organisations 3.56 3.31
Youth organisations 3.48
Bank of Latvia 3.51 3.30
Bank of Latvia 3.45
President of Latvia 3.69 2.53
Education system 3.32 3.38 President of Latvia 3.35
European Union 3.27 3.02 Education system 3.33
Church 3.13 3.23 European Union 3.19
Latvian army 3.38 2.61 Church 3.16
Local government 3.16 3.02 Latvian army 3.15
State institutions 3.09 2.93 Local government 3.12
Non-governmental 3.04
3.06 2.91 State institutions
organisations
Non-governmental organisations 3.01
Court system 3.01 2.92
Police 2.99 2.95 Court system 2.98
Labour union 2.83 2.61 Police 2.98
Prime Minister 2.71 2.59 Labour union 2.76
Parliament 2.52 2.44 Prime Minister 2.67
Parliament 2.50
Data shows that (see Figure 8) youth organisations (3.48 points in 5 point scale), the Bank of Latvia (3,45)
and the State President46 (3,35) have the highest trust rate. Education system (3,33), the European Union
(3,19), church (3,16), Latvian army (3,15) and local governments (3,12) have comparatively high trust
rates. Comparatively lower – the Parliament (2,50) and the Prime Minister (2,67).
Overall it can be seen (see Table 7) that trust of young people of Russian nationality in different state
institutions is rather low in comparison to the Latvian youth, especially differences are noticeable in
attitude towards the President (among Latvian youth – 3,69, Russian youth – 2,53), Latvian army
(respectively 3,38 and 2,61) and state institutions (3,09 and 2,93).
4.2.3. Youth in Riga and in the Regions
One more significant hypothesis was formed during the research on regional disparities; namely, it was
assumed that young people who live outside Riga have less opportunity for collaboration and activities
than those people who live in Riga (and partly in other big cities). This assumption during the research
proved partly to be true, although not completely – youth opportunities often are more versatile both in
Riga, and outside Riga, but problem is that not all offered opportunities are interesting for young people.
Overall it can be observed that young people to a large extent are sure that regional disparities in
availability of different opportunities exist in Latvia (see Figure 9). Most frequently young people were
certain that young people from the cities have more opportunities than those who live in the countryside
(73% agreed to this statement completely or partly). Approximately half of young people think that for
those who live outside Riga it is more difficult to find a good job, but 42% are sure that those who live
outside Riga have also less opportunity to receive a good education.
At the same time young people don’t think that to live in Riga is in advantage in comparison to anywhere
else in Latvia – 29% young people agreed to such a statement.
46
The research was conducted before elections of the president of Latvia, that is why this indicator should be analysed taking into
consideration that the assessment was given about Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga.
67

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Figure 9. Youth in Riga and in Regions.
%
Youth that have rich parents have more chances
79.7
than others
Youth from cities have more chances than those who
73.4
are from countryside
Youth who live outside Riga have limited
51.5
opportunities to find job
Youth who live outside Riga have limited
41.5
opportunities to get good education
To live in Riga is much better than to live anywhere
28.7
else in Latvia
In order to study if regional disparities are the main limitative factor of opportunities, in addition to
evaluation of regional opportunities respondents were asked to evaluate the impact of financial situation of
their parents on youth opportunities. The data of the research shows that there are more young people
who are sure that those who have rich parents have more chances than those who think that their
opportunities are influenced by domicile. Therefore it can’t be unequivocally stated that disparities of
domicile (regional disparities) is the factor that creates inequality of opportunities. Equally important are
another indirect factors, for example, parents’ financial provision.
4.2.4. Youth Health Care
One of the most important fields of youth policy is health. Young people themselves bring forward health
care as one of the most actual issue that has to be solved. That is why a block of questions on what is
attitude towards health of young people, how they evaluate possibility to receive comprehensive health
care and other questions was enclosed within the research.
First of all, it must be stressed out that young people think that health is one of the most significant values
in their life – value of good health made sense both for young people at the age between 15-17, and
18-25 age group. 47
Overall more than half of young people affirm that they take care of their state of heath on regular basis
(67%), thereto 58% admit that they have healthy lifestyle (see Figure 10). Rarer young people were sure
that the State health care system meets youth requirements, and that the State can provide its inhabitants
with comprehensive heath care.
Figure 10. Health.
%
I take care of my state of health on regular basis 67.0
In my opinion, I lead a healthy life 57.9
I am sure I will receive qualitative health care in case
33.9
of illness
Health care services in Latvia meet requirements of
32.7
young people
In my opinion, the State can provide all inhabitants
28.4
with comprehensive health care
At the same time there are different views among young people about what heath care should be, how
health care should be carried out in everyday life. The life quality research indicated 48 that young people
think that the best way to keep your health in good shape is sports (boys were most sure about that),
47
See Chapter 4.1. about values of youth.
48
I.Trapenciere „I Rock, You Rock. Does He/She Rock? Cool...: About Youth Life Quality.” Issue of publications „Life Quality in Latvia.”
(B.Bela, T.Tisenkopfs (red.)) The Chancery of the President of Latvia, Publishing house „Zinātne”, 2006, 110.-153.p.
68

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
healthy nourishment and vitamins (girls were most sure about that), and healthy lifestyle overall (no
smoking, drink alcohol, valuable rest and sleep).
Only 34% of young people are sure that in case of illness they will receive qualitative health care. And
only 1/3 young people think that health care services in Latvia meets youth requirements. Even less
young people (28%) think that state can ensure comprehensive health care to all inhabitants in Latvia.
Evaluating socio-demographic disparities, it is observable (see Table 8) that young people at the age
between 15-17 are more optimistic about the heath care system, while young people at the age between
19-25 are even very pessimistic in evaluating chances of the state to ensure comprehensive health care
to all inhabitants. It is interesting that more often young people at the age between 15-16 admitted that
they take care of their state of health than young people at the age between 19-25.
Regional disparities also can be observed: young people who reside outside Riga are more often sure
that in the case of necessity they will receive comprehensive health care, and health care system meets
the requirements of young people, and that it can provide all inhabitants with comprehensive health care.
In turn, inhabitants of Riga comparatively more often admitted that they lead a healthy lifestyle.
Table 8. Health
AGE GENDER NATIONALITY DOMICILE
Russian, Outside
15-16 17 18 19-25 Male Female Latvian Riga
AVERAGE FROM 1 TO 4 other Riga
I take care of my state of
2.96 2.89 2.91 2.82 2.81 2.94 2.89 2.90 2.80 2.91
health on regular basis
In my opinion, I lead a
2.76 2.67 2.58 2.60 2.66 2.64 2.67 2.61 2.71 2.64
healthy life
I am sure I will receive
qualitative health care in 2.17 2.28 2.09 1.86 2.24 2.06 2.08 2.23 2.04 2.14
case of illness
Health care services in
Latvia meet requirements 2.20 2.24 2.22 2.03 2.25 2.15 2.18 2.17 2.09 2.20
of young people
In my opinion, the State
can provide all inhabitants
2.24 2.23 2.24 2.01 2.33 2.10 2.18 2.20 2.14 2.19
with comprehensive health
care
The previously mentioned life quality research shows pessimistic view on overall positively evaluated
health care system by young people, explaining that only small part of young people have personal
experience using these services. For example, it is concluded that those who rarely visit doctors overall
are more satisfied with the health care system, but those who have personal experience in using health
care services are often even very unsatisfied.
In the interviews the researchers also observed that health care outside Riga is considered quite often as
low-graded and that can qualitatively help only in “not very serious” cases of illness. It is interesting that
girls more often than boys expressed dissatisfaction with the health care services, that can be explained
with the fact that girls visit doctors more often than boys.
One of the main reasons for dissatisfaction often is lack of possibility to choose a doctor. Also
dissatisfaction is caused by doctor and attended personal attitude towards patients (insensitiveness,
impatience, carelessness).
For young people from the countryside the most significant aspect mentioned is the lack of confidentiality
in the health care system. Quite often they don’t visit doctor because they are afraid that doctor will tell
someone else about the visit and afterwards their friends and acquaintances will know about it.
69

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
The researchers point at the problem that for young people doctor’s visit is for free only with an
appointment of a family doctor, but if they don’t want to go to a family doctor in their parish or city, then
they need to pay themselves for the medical examination, that again prohibits to receive health care due
to financial inaccessibility.
70

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
5. SOCIAL, CULTURAL AND POLITICAL COLLABORATION OF YOUNG PEOPLE
5.1. Overview about the Collaboration of Young people in Latvia
Analysing youth involvement and collaboration, attention most frequently is paid to only political and social
activities that are not the only available forms of participation in the out of school life for young people.
Participation in the cultural, non-formal education and public activities are equally important, because it
also shows youth socialisation mechanism, acceptance and recognition of overall values of society.
This research studied youth collaboration in several levels. First, the study focused on the extent to what
young people are active or passive in different participation forms, i.e., if they participate gladly or they
prefer watching, if they are participants or consumers. Secondly, particular participation forms of different
spheres were analysed: participation in school/ high school activities, participation in the interest groups
(spending their leisure time), participation in public and social activities and, last, participation in political
activities.
It is not possible to assess forms and types of participation and to analyse them without looking at
different influence factors that establish the opinion and persuasions of young people, therefore it is
endeavoured to identify those factors that could be the most influential on the collaboration of young
people (by analysing influence by both youth values, and referent groups (friends, parents, teachers, also
mass media)) in this research.
It is unequivocally inferred in the previously conducted researches that participation of young people in
Latvia is very low and most of young people do not get involved in social processes. Still, attention should
be paid to the fact that within these studies participation most often is considered as an active involvement
in social or even political activities, in which even adults rarely get involved. Therefore it was important for
the authors of this particular research to analyse not only an active participation, but also passive in order
to identify the extent to which young people in general are orientated towards insight of public, social and
political processes and their connection to own status and opportunities on individual level. Of course, our
research confirms also a very low activity of young people particularly in the sense of involvement
(collaboration in social and political organisations, campaigns, events etc.), at the same time it identifies
that approximately 30-50% of young people look for information on current events of the local
government, the State and even the EU. Within this research we are of the opinion that this is also
valuable as a certain participation form, because it causes informative background for potential activities
of young people for collaboration in those cases when their interests or opinions are not taken into
account.
Experts interviewed pointed out that the inconsistency of interest is very common to modern youth – there
are a lot of opportunities, interests are less consistent (they pay less attention to every opportunity). From
the point of view of experts youth can be divided in two groups in general – very active (those, who get
involved in several interest groups, activities simultaneously) and very passive (don’t get involved
anywhere). “All non-governmental organisations meet each other and there are the same people. There is
a wide range of opportunities to participate somewhere. But background is the same people.” (FGD,
passive) Overall, data of this research affirms that as well, yet the segmentation of youth will show, that
quite a large number of young pope are active in some particular activities, but passive – in others (for
example, young people, who are active in social activities are passive in political and school events), that
in turn makes us look to youth activities in another perspective – how important it is for a young person to
be active in all spheres? Or is it more important for young person to have some definite interests?
71

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
People who work with young people of social risk groups admit that young people from socially
disadvantaged families involve themselves very rarely, despite the different projects, where these young
people are being involved. Apparently an optimal form and way, how to motivate those young people to
participate is not achieved here. First, involving only young people from these families will not give
comprehensive solution, it is a complex issue that has to be solved on the level of both school, and family.
Participation of other social risk groups can be equally assessed as a very passive one, and there are
several reasons for that: dominant stereotypes towards representatives of these groups in society,
passivity of young people themselves (fear of participation, shyness, often psychological problems),
unwillingness of youth to participate in the events with children of risk groups etc.
The overall results of youth collaboration show (see Figure 11) that approximately 25% of young people
haven’t participated in either school, or organised leisure time (interest groups, bodies), either public, or
social activity in the last years. There is a larger proportion of young people (approximately 37%) that
haven’t participated in any political activity. Whereas, one can notice a very high participation rate in
cultural and entertaining activities, e.g., attending different events.
Figure 11. SUMMARY of activities.
%
Don't participate Participate
Cultural and entertainment
1.5 98.5
events
School/ high school activities 23.3 76.7
Interest, hobby groups 26.0 74.0
Social and public activities 27.5 72.5
Political activities 36.9 63.1
Participation in different organisations also indicates youth activity. Measurements of the Eurobarometer
give these data on the EU level.49 Approximately 22% of young people in the EU member states are
involved in different organisations (approximately half of these young people are involved in sports team
and associations). In comparison of the new and old member states of the EU, it can be observed that
participation in official organisations is less outspoken in the new member states – for example, only 10%
of young people are involved in organisations in Latvia, while more than 20% do it in old member states.
This research indicates also that youth organisations are more successful in Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary
and Cyprus – 28% of young people in Latvia who are involved in an organisation did it particularly in a
youth organisation (in old EU member states this rate does not exceed 10%).
Analysing reasons why young people haven’t participated in any activity, more often comes because of
lack of opportunities. Although in general young people themselves and representatives of local
government, school and youth organisations admit that versatile opportunities to involve and participate
are available for young people, still quite often it is observed that activities available don’t meet the
interests of young people. For example, almost every local government has provided young people with
opportunity to do sports, as well as to participate in the interests groups (most often – dance, singing,
drama club), still not every young person is interested in these particular activities. It marks a problem that
49
“Young Europeans. A Survey Among People Aged Between 15-30 in the European Union. Analytical Report.” Flash Eurobarometer Series
#202, The Gallup Organization, February 2007. It must be stressed out that there is a different target group – 15-30 years old citizens were
surveyed.
72

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
local government cannot always react and fulfil versatile youth interests, therefore part of young people
don’t have opportunity to realize their hobbies.
To achieve an absolute collaboration (when all young people are involved in any kind of activity) is
apparently an aim beyond the reach, still it is essential to provide every young person with (1) information
on available participation forms and ways, and (2) opportunities to implement them.
5.2. Availability of Information on Possibilities to Participate
Awareness of young people about different opportunities to get involved in activities can be divided in
three groups (see Figure 12): (1) majority of young people admit that they are informed about possibilities
to participate in their school/ high school activities (91%), in youth interest group activities (83%), as well
as in work of social organisations of youth (70%); (2) approximately 2/5 young people assess that they are
informed about possibilities to collaborate in work of their own local government (43%) and non-
governmental and social organisations (42%); (3) only small part of young people has affirmed that they
have an access to information on possibilities to participate in the work of religious (27%) and political
(21%) organisations.
Figure 12. Available Information About Possibility to Participate in...
%
No Yes
Activities of own school/ high school 7.5 91.1
Activities of youth interest groups, clubs 16.3 82.8
Work of youth social organisations 28.7 70.4
Work of own local government 56.2 43.2
Work of non-governmental and social organisations 57.5 41.6
Work of religious organisations 71.7 26.6
Work of political organisations 77.6 20.9
Wherewith, although it is considered that at the information age information is available in a widespread
way and without restraint, still assessment of young people show that in reality information is received
only about the nearest living and education place – own school and local government. Still it can’t be also
unequivocally affirmed that information is not available, rather it is not searched or even is not important to
young people. Interviewed experts also point to that: “in my opinion, young people lack that information, it
is not binding on them, wherewith they don’t read and don’t know that they have opportunities to spend
their free time. Because it is easier to do nothing. And they don’t go after information. And information
campaign can’t be blamed, but instead their passivity in receiving information.” (NGO) “This information
doesn’t reach young people in a way they could understand it. Maybe 30% of young people are active,
but for more young people information in not available, but if it is, they don’t understand it.” (CYC) “Most
of read information is meant for the media and it could happen that it is not particularly for a young person
who reading this information can interpret it completely differently than it was thought to be. Information
that circulates around us quite often is not devised for a young person, and there occurs a problem.” (YO)
Another informative problem occurs here: formally there is a lot of information and it is accessible freely,
yet in reality it doesn’t reach young people. Several experts pointed at that during interviews – quite often
information is presented and distributed formally, without studying, where it has a potential to reach the
target group sooner (for an example the situation, when information about different events and activities is
offered on the local government internet home pages or newspapers, which young people don’t use as an
information source). Second factor – “There is a lot of information, and because there is so many, young
73

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
people get confused: information comes from friends, family, school, press, TV.” (SW), “I can confirm for
100% that they don’t receive this information – this information doesn’t reach them despite internet,
booklets, they can comprehend all information, then there is a situation when the most important things
go further.” (PA), - the next group of experts thinks that the main question is not the amount of
information, but definition and usage of the most appropriate communication form: “young people need
alternative opportunities of offering information” (YAC), as one of the most suitable forms is offered: “the
best way is when this information goes from mouth to mouth – one gets involved and invites others and
others” (SW), “they like when someone tell about this information, they don’t want to read.” (YO)
The data points to that as well – those young people who assessed that they don’t have available
information receive news on opportunities how to spend free time – the majority (67%) receive information
from their friends and two times less than other young people – from mass media (respectively 18% and
9%).
Outspoken disparities are observable also in a regional cut: there are fields where residents of Riga are
better informed and there are some where awareness is better outside Riga. As data shows (see Table 9)
young people outside Riga are more informed about possibilities to participate in activities and work on
their own educational institution, interest groups, youth social organisations, as well as own local
government, but residents of Riga, in turn, are better informed about possibilities to participate in the work
of non-governmental, social and political organisations.
Table 9. Availability of Information on Possibilities to Participate
OUTSIDE
RIGA
% RIGA
Activities of own school/ high school 79.3 92.8
Activities of youth interest groups, clubs 67.1 85.1
Work of youth social organisations 63.4 71.4
Work of own local government 28.0 45.3
Work of non-governmental and social organisations 53.7 39.9
Work of religious organisations 23.2 27.1
Work of political organisations 29.3 19.7
According to the data of the research (see Figure 13) young people receive information about the
possibilities to spend their free time from fiends (72%); it means that the most effective communication
way with young people is exactly the so called “mouth-to-mouth” principle not official information in press,
television or posters. Internet is also used as an information source comparatively often (28%).
Information from posters and mass media is received rarer (19% and 18% respectively). It is impossible to
announce, but it can be given a wild guess that Figure 13. Information Source For Possibilities of
internet, posters and mass media is a primary % Spending Free Time.
information source, where news, information is
From friends 72.4
received, then it is spread further among friends and
acquaintances. Internet 28.4
Small differences are noticeable also in the regional Advertisements 19.4
cut – posters and advertisements (most often placed 17.8
Mass media (press, TV, radio)
in schools), as well as mass media are used
comparatively often as an information source outside From parents 4.1
Riga, where access to internet is rarer. It is also
observable that young people, between the age of 19-25, identify internet as an information source more
often than young people at the age between 15-18 years. However, it is not related to the preferences of
the receiving forms of information in a particular age group, but rather to the available opportunities, i.e.,
internet for high school students is more available than for pupils of primary and secondary schools.
74

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Of utmost importance is not only the issue to what extent the information is available and where young
people turn to get it, but equally the question if this particular information is important to young people.
Therefore a question about interest of young people in the particular field information was enclosed in the
survey. Figure 14 shows that approximately 20% of young people are apolitical and affirm that they are
not interested in information about their own local government, state institutions, the EU, as well as social
and non-governmental organisations at all.
Figure 14. Follow Information About...
%
Not interested at all Interested very little Follow for only relevant information Follow for all information regularly
Events of own school/ high school -4.9 24.6 49.3 18.9
Work of Government -16.3 38.2 37.5 6.6
Work of own local government -17.4 42.1 31.3 7.1
Work of different social and non-governmental organisations -20.1 40.4 28.9 8.9
Events of the European Union -19.0 45.3 30.4 2.9
Majority of young people (overall 68%) keep track of the information about their education institution (it
must be stressed out that 5% of these young people assessed that they are not interested in such news).
Most often pupils from primary schools, boys and residents of Riga expressed their disinterest in news of
their education institution.
Approximately 2/5 young people go after the information about the work of the Government (44%), own
local government (38%) and different social and non-governmental organisations (38%). Young people at
the age between 15-16 years, including boys, were not interested in the work of the mentioned political
and social intuitions. However, significant differences can be noticed among demographic groups: young
people of Russian nationality are more interested in the work of their local government than Latvians,
while Latvian young people are more interested in the work of the Government; it can be also noticed that
these young people who reside outside Riga are more interested in the work of their local government, but
residents of Riga – in the work of Government.
Comparatively smaller amount of young people follow regularly the news from the EU, at the same time
30% still point out that they are interested in the news from the EU. It is important to emphasise that no
serious social demographic or regional disparities are observed in this case.
In comparison to other EU member states indicators about the interest of young people in events of their
own country and city, region are quite high: Eurobarometer research 50 shows that approximately 86%
Latvian citizens are interested in the events of their own country (this is one of the highest rates among
the EU member states), 79% also admitted that they are interested in news of their city or region (the
fourth highest rate among the EU member states). Interest about the news of the EU is comparatively
lower – 65% admitted that they are interested at least partly in news of the EU and this is an average
indicator among other EU member states.
50
“Young Europeans. A Survey Among People Aged Between 15-30 in the European Union. Analytical Report.” Flash Eurobarometer Series
#202, The Gallup Organization, February 2007. It must be stressed out that there is a different target group – 15-30 years old citizens were
surveyed.
75

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Significant information on young people’s interests in cultural news is given in the research “Youth
Cultural Activities and National Integration” 51 that was carried out in 2006 by the University of Latvia and
where topics in mass media that are interesting for young people are analysed. It is concluded that 60%
Latvians and 66% other nationals are interested in information about the culture of Europe. Differences
are observable between Latvian and other nationals groups regarding information of cultural events in
Latvia – 92% of Latvians are interested in such information, while other nationals - 77%. Youth other
nationals group, of course, is more interested in cultural events in Russia (57% other nationals and only
9% Latvians admitted that they are interested in cultural events in Russia, other nationals are even more
interested in cultural events in Russia than in their own domicile (28%, while Latvians – 48%)).
Thus overall it is not possible to affirm that young people are not informed about different social events in
political, social and cultural fields. There is even less ground to state that young people are not interested
in social and political issues. Young people, evidently, don’t keep the track regularly on different social
and political news; however, the most important news and facts do reach this target group.
Problematic, of course, is the group of young people who express absolute lack of interest in any public,
social or political activity. As socially demographic indicators show they are most often 15-17 years old,
outspokenly more often boys of Russian nationality, and pupils from secondary school. It must be
emphasized that there is no regional disparity among these young people: both in Riga, and outside Riga
there is an equal amount of that kind of young people who don’t show any interest in actualities of neither
their school, local government, the State, nor the EU. At the same time it is not possible to affirm that
these young people are not interested in anything previously mentioned – it can be observed most
frequently that young people are interested in just one field, but they have absolutely no interests in
others. Wherewith you can’t speak about apolitical and asocial young people, but rather about limitation of
interests and one should look for reasons why young people are not interested in events of wider context
(region, state, the EU).
5.3. Availability of Opportunities
Awareness is a primary factor to promote collaboration, yet availability of opportunities is equally
important: a young person can be well informed and motivated, but if there won’t be opportunities to
participate in his place of living or studies, collaboration will be very low and motivation of young people
will disappear with time. It must be emphasised that availability of opportunities does not mean only
availability of possibilities of interest groups, bodies, possibilities of spending free time, but also availability
of different sources for realisation of collaboration – time resources (study load, amount of free time),
financial resources (expenses of hobbies, interest groups, sports), transport resources (possibility to get to
place of the activity) etc.
Youth are most pessimistic about their opportunities to participate in the political decision making (see
Figure 15) – approximately ¼ of young people are of the opinion that they have no chances to be involved
in this process and also approximately 1/3 think that they have little chances for that. Overall it creates
negative background of subjective point of views towards the state policy and the state as such, as well as
readiness to participate in the political activities. The gathered data within the research shows the attitude
of young people towards politics overall is a very negative (predominantly personalizing it with the
Government and the Parliament) that directly influences their willingness to involve themselves in political
activities. It must be added here that parents have very significant role in forming such an opinion of
young people, whose negative point of view ‘transfers’ to children. Taking into account that young people
51
The research was conducted within grant scheme “Promotion of Society Integration in Latvia” of the Society Integration Fund. It was
conducted by the sociologist group of the Social Science Faculty of the University of Latvia in time period starting September 1, 2005 till
August 31, 2006, and the results of the research were summarised in the publication “Cultures. Youth. Media.” (Riga, 2006).
76

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
themselves don’t have enough alternative opinions (as interviewed experts and young people themselves
admitted – representatives neither of the Government, nor the Parliament and often also of the local
government don’t want to have discussions with young people and listen to their point of view),
pessimistic evaluations of their parents become the only source for forming their opinion.
% Figure 15. Opportunities.
Have no chance Have little chance Have big chances Have all chances
Chance to achieve success in life 0.8 12.4 43.5 33.5
Chance to fulfil own interests 2.2 17.8 43.5 29.0
Chance to choose most appealing profession 1.8 16.6 40.1 31.2
Chance to do most enjoyable sports 3.2 18.4 38.7 31.6
Chance to do most disirable hobbies 2.9 22.4 38.9 30.0
Chance to achieve financial success in life 1.2 19.0 39.8 27.6
Chance to spend free time as one wishes 2.9 22.9 38.4 26.9
Chance to get education as one wishes 2.6 20.9 40.4 24.3
Chance to attend cultural events as one wishes 2.3 28.0 38.2 24.4
Chance to participate in youth organisation work 4.1 24.4 35.6 19.7
Chance to receive valuable health care 4.5 29.2 37.0 17.7
Chance to participate in social and non-governmental
6.5 28.6 28.7 16.6
organisation work
Chance to participate in political organisation, party work 16.6 32.0 17.2 9.7
Chance to participate in political decision making 24.3 33.2 12.4 7.2
Young people are a little more optimistic about the chances to get involved in political organisations, in
work of parties (17% are of the opinion that they have no chances, 32% think that they have little
chances), however in this case it must be taken into account that involvement not always means ability
and chances to influence work of these organisations, decisions and actions. Wherewith – although
political parties and organisations are often formally open for youth collaboration, still practically youth
opinion is not taken into account. Attitude of politicians towards young people as to a capacitated social
group was identified as one of the reasons for negative attitude of young people towards participation in
politics during the in-depth interviews with experts and representatives of youth NGOs: even if the Local
government or the State listens to the opinion of young people, most often it doesn’t appear in the real
action programmes. Thereby young people are used to demonstrate power of democracy, but real
chances of young people to influence decisions and involve themselves in decision-making are secured
very rarely.
In this situation – when real opportunities to get involved in decision-making and influence them are very
low – it is important that the involvement has to be achieved at least on the level of NGOs and different
social organisations, still it is also observable that young people evaluate their possibilities as quite limited
in this aspect: approximately 35% assess that their chances to get involved in the work of social and non-
governmental organisations are minimal or they are nonexistent, and 29% give the same assessment to
their chances to be involved in the work of youth organisations.
77

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Although approximately 1/3 of young people express opinion that they are isolated from the work of
political and non-governmental sector, it can’t be unequivocally affirmed that situation is negative;
because approximately half of young people still assessed that they have high chances to be involved in
NGOs or youth organisations. In such a sense possibilities of youth collaboration in forming civil society
are secured, although its availability, of course, varies regionally. At the same time 30% of young people
who think that their chances are limited can’t be ignored. It must be added that overall young people
consider possibilities of involvement as a promoting factor of democracy – in the research 52 that was done
in 2004, 62% pupils surveyed assessed that possibilities to participate in different organisations develop
democracy a lot or to some extent (girls agreed on this statement more often than boys: respectively 65%
and 59%).
Speaking about youth possibilities, it must be evaluated in wider perspective – what is life quality of young
people, in what extent it meets youth wishes and how it influences motivation of youth and their chances
to succeed, realise their interests and aims. In such sense issues on availability of education, process of
choosing profession and health care are important. Majority of young people think that they have a high or
all chances to choose most appealing profession (about 71%), and to receive education as they wish
(about 64%). At the same time only 55% young people are convinced about their chances to receive a
valuable health care (34% think that they have none or little chances). It must be added here that data of
this and other researches don’t prove the assumption that health doesn’t seem as a significant value for
young people – in this research health is identified as the third important value among young people (see
Chapter 4.2.1. Figure 3), and in turn health was ranked the first in a survey “Your TOP 10 Values” 53 done
by the Riga’s Children and Youth Musical Theatre “RīBēJa MuTe”.
Essential life quality aspect is also possibility to spend the free time, doing most enjoyable hobbies.
Chances to attend those cultural events that young people would enjoy are valued as most limited: 30%
assessed that their chances are little or they are nonexistent and only 24% evaluated that they have all
chances. It is interesting that regional disparities don’t appear here and young people from Riga and
outside equally often give negative evaluation on attendance of cultural events.
Approximately ¼ young people think that they don’t have or have little chances to spend their free time as
they would wish, thereby the thesis brought forward in this study was confirmed once again – although
young people have available diverse opportunities to spend their free time, still they don’t always meet the
interests of young people. By concentrating on supporting and development only on sports as the free
time activities, other interest fields of young people are left disregarded. Overall only 65% of young people
admit that they have high or all chances to spend their free time as they wish. Besides, 22% assess that
they have little or no chances to do most enjoyable sports, that indicates that sport activities offered do not
always correspond to the wishes of youth.
Positive fact is that young people assess their chances to succeed in life as having high or even all
chances, as well as their chances to realize their interests – 70% of young people are sure about that.
Comparatively large amount of young people – 67% – think that they have a lot of chances to achieve
financial success in their life. Overall outlined data allow to conclude that although available possibilities
are not always valued positively, still future prospects, chances to reach own goals are assessed
comparatively positively and that allows to affirm that young people overall are optimistic and positive. Of
course, a significant role in maintaining or dissolution of this view will be the first experience of young
people in the labour market and start of an independent life. That is proved by the fact that young people
52
A. Geske, A. Grīnfelds, A. Kangro, R. Kiseļova, O. Tipāns. “Pupils’ Civil Education in Latvia within Society Integration Context 1999-2004”,
The Institute of Educational Research of The Faculty of Education and Psychology of the University of Latvia, Riga, 2004.
53
The survey was conducted in February-March 2007, overall 708 questionnaires of 12-18 years old youth were summarised. The aim of the
survey was to find out what are the most important values in life for modern teenagers and young people (source:
http://www.ribejamute.lv/default.asp?menu=5 ).
78

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
themselves bring forward employment as one of the most significant issue in the youth sphere to be
solved in the competence of the Government.
Evaluating disparities in different social demographic groups, small differences are noticeable: Russian
young people valued their chances to attend cultural events and chances to get involved in work of youth
organisations comparatively lower than they wished, furthermore young people living outside Riga
evaluated their chances to get involved in decision making, to participate in political or social, or youth
organisations lower than of those young people living in Riga. It means that availability of social and public
activities must be broaden for those who live outside Riga, as well as either involvement of young people
of Russian nationality in Latvian organisations, or work and development of different Russian NGOs and
social organisations must be promoted.
Concerning particularly possibilities to participate in different kind of activities, interviewed experts valued
that young people have a very wide range of possibilities to participate, as well as – possibilities to initiate
their own projects: “I think that there are a lot of possibilities, you just need to want and find the right place
where you feel well.” (PA) Although experts point out that “of course, there are possibilities, which you
cannot join without money, but for now if you want to do something out of your school time, there are
chances” (PA). One of the social workers points to interesting financial aspect: “as soon as someone
starts seriously to do some sports, there is a need for equipment and I assume that not every family can
afford it. Here initially some kind of boat, a rocket or a stick is given to a young person, but this is only the
start. As soon as the basic skills are learned and to achieve some success, unfortunately they need to
buy their own equipment” (SW).
Experts interviewed point out that young people in Latvia now have quite a wide range of possibilities not
only in spending their free time, but also in public, social and political activities, because “now legislation
is absolutely unlimited and it allows young people to participate, involve themselves in these social
processes” (YAC).
The small-size local government problem is brought forward as one of the most important youth
possibilities issues, i.e., limitation of youth possibilities in receiving education (because school is situated
in another parish, village), in the sense of spending free time (because there are no sport gyms, cultural
establishments, also youth clubs in small parishes), as well as in professional employment (because
parish can’t offer neither working places, nor proper wages for young people). To a big extent it promotes
youth migration to cities and encourages the aging of these small parishes and reduction of the numbers
of the inhabitants, thus creating demographic and socio-economic problems in the regions. According to
the experts this is one of the biggest challenges on the regional level – to find ways to make young people
be interested in living not only in cities, but also in small settlement places in regions, because “the
development and the whole existence of the village broadly depends on the active involvement of young
people of their parish” (YW).
One more problem of availability of possibilities that experts point out is the possibilities of youth at the
age between 18–25 – if different kind of groups, clubs, etc are meant for teenagers, then after the age of
17 – 18 years opportunity to spend free time according to one’s interests is very limited: “There are
centres for youth and children in Riga city, where one can find different groups, until certain age they do,
after that age – no. This is the age, when one wants very active and extreme things. There are skate
parks were they could express themselves. They like to mix with each other, to talk about something at an
easy atmosphere with no supervisor from the top. Riga can offer these kind of centres of free time, which
are only 12 at the moment and they are situated only near the schools. There is a teacher present, who
sits in the corner, watches that everything is ok and invites young people to get involved in activities – if
they want to, then they do it, if not – then they don’t. They have possibility to be there, but taking into
account the fact that it is a teacher and that these are premises of the school, I doubt that young people
79

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
are interested.” (SW), “The biggest problem is for secondary school pupils. The secondary school pupils
say themselves that they have nothing to do. Groups are more for small children and primary school
pupils.” (YO)
Although the overall evaluation of experts about the possibilities of youth is rather optimistic, still part of
the interviewees assessed that a wide range of the possibilities available does not always correspond to
the diverse interests of young people: “Theoretically they have opportunities, but they not always attract
young people, interests are diverse” (YO), “maybe the opportunities offered by the State, are not the most
interesting ones for young people” (YO).
As stressed out by most of the interviewees the problem is not so much with the availability of possibilities
as it is with the motivation to use them, because young people quite often neither want to use the
possibilities of collaboration already available, nor want to create initiatives, projects of their own. “There
are possibilities, but a large part of young people do not use them. They do not use them because they do
not have motivation” (SW), “There are a lot of opportunities, but do they want them. It is difficult to
motivate young people to get involved in events, that do not bring direct benefit to them” (YAC).
Furthermore some experts think that different opportunities for young people to get involved are not
presented in an attractive way and therefore responsiveness of young people is at a low level: “there is a
lack of mechanisms of involvement, for instance, I know that there are those different Pupils’ centres and
groups for spending free time, all Riga is full of different, but the level of attendance is very, very low. One
of the biggest faults is that there is not enough advertisements, attractive ways of involvement, to
encourage young people” (YO), “information often is not up to date and even more importantly – not
stylish” (NGO).
5.4. Youth Opinion about the Value of Collaboration
Overall the opinion of young people about the values and results of collaboration is rather pessimistic (see
Figure 16) – a large number of young people assessed that young people do not have any influence on
politicians, there is no possibility to influence the issues that concern young people’s problems neither in
the State in general, nor in the local governments. Similarly young people are convinced that their
involvement in political activities would not change a thing, in addition they think that youth has no
comprehensive information available about the possibilities to get involved, participate in the decision-
making.
Figure 16. Participation Value and Influence Chances.
%
Youth if united can certainly achieve much more 79.6
Youth don’t have influence on politicians of the Parliament
67.0
and Government
Youth are not enough informed about chances to
66.4
participate in decision making on youth issues
My participation in political activities would not change
64.7
anything
Youth have big possibilities to influence with youth
57.8
problems concerned issues in own local government
Youth have big possibilities to influence with youth
43.9
problems concerned issues in the State
At the same time young people evaluate consolidation as the means of achieving goals by acknowledging
that by uniting youth could achieve and gain much more.
80

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
By analysing data in the framework of social demographic and regional groups differences can be spotted
(see Table 10). Young people 19 – 25 years old have been more optimistic in their views and
cooperatively rarer agreed with the statement that young people have no influence on the politicians
whatsoever. Similarly they have been more often convinced that involvement in political activities could
change at least something, as well as – that young people have opportunities to influence decision
making on issues connected to youth problems. At the same time representatives of this age group have
rather often agreed with the fact that young people have too little information available about the
possibilities to collaborate.
It has to be admitted that the Russian speaking young people have been rarer convinced that
consolidation of youth could bring opportunities to achieve more.
Table10. Value of Participation and Opportunities to Influence
AGE GENDER NATIONALITY DOMICILE
Russian, Outside
15-16 17 18 19-25 Male Female Latvian Riga
% other Riga
Youth if united can certainly
80.4 74.9 78.7 88.0 78.2 81.3 83.7 70.1 87.8 78.4
achieve much more
Youth don’t have influence on
politicians of the Parliament and 75.0 66.8 66.0 62.0 68.6 67.0 68.1 64.5 70.7 66.4
the Government
My participation in political
activities would not change 63.4 62.8 68.0 73.2 65.5 67.7 68.1 62.4 70.7 65.7
anything
Youth are not enough informed
about chances to participate in 67.0 66.4 70.0 54.2 63.3 67.0 65.2 63.5 58.5 65.6
decision making on youth issues
Youth have big possibilities to
influence with youth problems
60.7 55.9 50.7 66.2 52.8 61.4 59.9 52.8 56.1 58.0
concerned issues in own local
government
Youth have big possibilities to
influence with youth problems 41.1 44.9 37.3 51.4 48.9 42.2 43.4 45.2 41.5 44.3
concerned issues in the State
TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
In the realisation of the study the experts interviewed are of the opinion that youth “can influence at the
level of local government – they are listened to and their opinion is taken into consideration, but young
people do not undertake and underestimate, what they can do” (SW). It means that the initiative of young
people themselves and their desire to take action determines the effectiveness – as mentioned by the
youth workers in different cities of Latvia, all have at least some concrete examples that confirm that
persistent young people, who have a particular goal and who can act in a determined way, can achieve
positive results.
The research estimated the overall attitude of young people towards politics, understanding of the role of
politics in everyday life. According to the data in the Figure 17 young people are unequivocally convinced
that politicians at the state and local level should pay more attention to solving the problems of youth.
Similarly support to the participation of youth in politics was expresses, simultaneously estimating that
youth have too little knowledge about their rights.
It is interesting that a rather large part of young people were convinced that the decisions made by the
politicians have little effect on their every day life. It is possible that one of the reasons, why young people
do not see the reason and motivation to get involved in political activities – if they do not have direct
impact on the everyday life of young people themselves, then their value is, of course, much smaller.
81

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
In order to keep young people motivated to participate and get involved concrete benefits have to be
summed that participation gives, therefore one of the tasks of the research was to identify the arguments
that young people bring forward as advantages and disadvantages to participation in different social,
public and political activities.
Figure 17. Role of Politics in Youth Life.
%
Politicians in the Parliament have to pay more attention to
84.2
youth problems
Local government has to pay more attention to solving
81.3
youth problems
I support youth participation in politics 68.0
Youth don’t have enough knowledge about their rights 66.5
In my opinion, decisions made by politicians have little
43.5
influence on my daily life
My parents often discusses political and social issues 42.1
Overall young people evaluate participation in NGOs and public organisations both as an opportunity to
realise own interests, and as an opportunity to help those that need it (See Figure 18). Similarly young
people think that public and non-governmental organisations do a useful work for the society. It has to be
stressed out that young people are convinced – youth organisations can solve many problems important
to young people. But at the same time relatively small number of youth estimates that their friends would
get involved in some kind of public or non-governmental organisations.
% Figure 18. Valuation of NGO and Social Organisations.
Main benefit for participating in social and non-governmental
67.7
organisation work is realisation of own interests
By participating in youth organisations there is a chance to
65.4
solve different live issues for youth
Main benefit for participating in social and non-governmental
65.3
organisation work is a chance to help others
In my opinion, social and non-governmental organisations
61.8
do very useful work for society
Youth organisations can solve many vital problems of
61.1
young people
Many friends of mine are involved in some kind social or
36.3
non-governmental organisation
It has to be pointed out that several social demographic and regional differences can be noticed in these
opinions of young people (See Table 11). Young people at the age between 19 – 25 are more often
convinced that public organisations do a useful work for the society and that by involving in youth
organisations it is possible to achieve solution to the important problems of young people. Similarly people
at this age group declared that they have a friend, who participated in some kind of organisation. In the
overall evaluation – youth outside Riga and Russian young people were more sceptical about different
gains from getting involved in public or non-governmental activities, and representatives of these groups
were comparatively seldom convinced about the public usefulness of different organisations.
82

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Table 11. Evaluation of NGOs and Social Organisations
AGE GENDER NATIONALITY DOMICILE
Russian, Outside
15-16 17 18 19-25 Male Female Latvian Riga
% other Riga
Main benefit for
participating in social and
non-governmental 67.9 62.3 64.0 81.0 62.4 71.4 73.1 55.3 80.5 65.9
organisation work is
realisation of own interests
By participating in youth
organisations there is a
67.0 64.0 55.3 77.5 57.2 70.6 68.3 58.9 64.6 65.6
chance to solve different
live issues for youth
Main benefit for
participating in social and
non-governmental 66.1 57.1 61.3 83.1 58.5 70.1 70.3 53.8 82.9 62.7
organisation work is a
chance to help others
In my opinion, social and
non-governmental
59.8 57.5 53.3 79.6 57.2 65.3 65.0 54.3 76.8 59.6
organisations do very
useful work for society
Youth organisations can
solve many vital problems 61.6 60.7 50.7 72.5 52.0 67.0 63.7 55.3 69.5 59.9
of young people
Many friends of mine are
involved in some kind
36.6 32.8 26.0 52.8 39.7 34.7 39.6 28.4 48.8 34.4
social or non-
governmental organisation
TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Thus – even though conviction about the effectiveness and usefulness of these organisations is rather
explicit, although active participation of young people themselves for some kind of reasons is less explicit.
Therefore young people were asked to name the reasons in this questionnaire that according to their point
of view motivate young people to get involved and that prevent involvement of young people in public,
social and political activities.
5.5. Collaboration in School/ High school Activities
As mentioned in the report – 68% of youth admit that they keep an eye on information about activities of
their high school and 91% estimate that they have access to information about the possibilities to
participate in activities of their high school. It means that young people are completely provided with the
information about their school or high school activities or opportunities to get involved in them, although
young people are not always interested and motivated to get involved.
The mutual indicators about involvement indicate that 77% of youth have participated at least in some
kind of school/high school activity during the last year. The most active participants were young people,
girls, Russian youth, and secondary school pupils, outside Riga residents between age 15 – 16 and 18
(See Table 12).
83

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Table 12. Participation in School/ High school Activities
Have Haven’t
% participated participated
15-16 years 17.6 15.8
17 years 37.9 38.2
AGE
18 years 25.1 16.4
19-25 years 19.4 29.6
Male 35.0 38.3
GENDER
Female 65.0 61.7
Latvian 67.5 77.0
NATIONALITY
Russian, other 32.5 23.0
Primary school 3.2 1.3
Secondary
80.8 71.1
school
EDUCATIONAL
High school 14.8 25.0
INSTITUTION
Vocational
0.6 1.3
school
Don’t study 0.6 1.3
Riga 10.4 19.7
DOMICILE
Out side Riga 89.6 80.3
1 person 1.2 2.7
2-3 persons 31.1 33.3
FAMILY SIZE
4-5 persons 56.5 53.7
More than 5 11.2 10.2
Approximately 1/3 of the youth have been organisers of activities of some kind of educational institutions
(See Figure 19): 37% organised entertaining, but 30% –cultural events. 34% participated in educational
competition at the school, region, city or state level.
These indicators prove that young people
% Figure 19. Particiaption in School/ High School Activities.
are not only passive visitors of the school
events, but are active themselves in the Organisation of entertaining events in school/
36.7
organisation of these and participate in high school
these events. The following indicators Olympiad (school, district, city etc.) 33.8
prove it: 18% are participants of a sports
Organisation of cultural events in school/ high
association, but 14% participate in an school
29.6
amateur collective.
Member of sports team of school/ high school 18.3
Member of amateur group of school/ high
Comparatively large part of young people 14.4
school
– 13% - has participated in organisation Organisation of social and/ or political events
13.1
of social or political events in their in school/ high school
education institution. The same amount Representative of pupil/ student self-
12.9
government, council
of young people has informed that they
are representatives of a school or a Head of class/ course 9.4
student council, self-government.
Workman of school/ high school newspaper 6.3
About 1/10 of youth have officiated the Other 4.9
functions of the head of the class or
course, but 6% have participated in the Don't participate anywhere 23.3
school/ high school newspaper.
84

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Young people have shown other different activities (5%), in which they participated: sport competition,
education conference, school projects, school cultural events as participants, school joint work and
exchange programmes.
While evaluating difference in social demographic groups, it can be pointed out that Russian young
people have been more active in organising different events, but Latvians – more active as participants.
Overall Russian youth have more often involved in school activities than Latvians (82% and 74%
respectively).
Differences, of course, can be observed between the genders as well: girls have been more active in
participation and organisation of different events and activities; exception is sport events, where boys
were explicitly more active.
There is a tendency in the regional division that youth living outside Riga have participated in the school
activities outspokenly more often than those living in Riga: 21% of youth living outside Riga have not
participates in any school activity during the last year, while this number is 37% among the inhabitants of
Riga. It indicates to the fact that versatile outside school activities are available to the youth in Riga, where
they can participate, while school activities for youth residing outside Riga often is the only alternative for
spending their free time.
At the same time – although the level of the activity is rather high, yet 23% of the youth have participated
in neither school nor high school activity during the last year. Therefore this research was analysing, who
are these passive young people and was looking for the reasons of passiveness.
First, it can be noticed (See Table 12) that youth at the age between 19 – 25 participate more seldom in
activities of different education institutions that can be directly connected with the involvement in the
student life, when both the availability of any activities of the education institutions reduces (events in the
high schools take pale more seldom), and the availability of other outside school activities, ways of
spending time increases. Partly this hypothesis is affirmed by the division of the passive people among
the forms of the education institutions – comparatively often passive people are encountered among the
high school students. Although passive youth are found among secondary school students equally often;
that indicates that by starting studies in the secondary school the activity of young people decreases in
comparison to the primary school pupils. One of the reasons could be the increase in the amount of
studies (as indicated by the experts interviewed as well). Another reason – teenager age tendency to
deny any form of formal collaboration, conflicts with the teachers, parents.
It is noticed that the passive youth is met among the inhabitants of Riga – as mentioned before it is rather
connected with other alternatives of spending free time available for youth in Riga, thus school activities
are “in competition” with these diverse possibilities.
While evaluating the impact of other factors on the activities, it is noticeable that young people that have
admitted that they have no access to information about the opportunities to participate in the activities of
the school or high school have been more often passive ones – if only 6% of those who participated in the
activities of school assessed that they haven’t access to information, then 13% of passive young people
point to the problem of availability of information. At the same time it has to be mentioned that these
young people more often are not even interested about what happens in their education institution: 40% of
those, who have not participated in the activities of their school during the last year admit that they are not
interested at all (7%) in the activities of their school/high school activities or have limited interests (33%).
Taking into account that the overall satisfaction of young people with the education process, teachers,
management of the education institution and other aspects can seriously influence the impact on the
85

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
desire and motivation to collaborate, the research includes the analysis of this information as well.
According to the data youth that has been passive have given more negative assessment about the
quality of education and the teacher’s work in the schools. Yet differences between passive and active
youth are not that explicit so as to declare that dissatisfaction with the school is the reason for
passiveness, especially because both active and passive young people evaluated similarly opportunities
to participate in the decision making in own education institution and opportunities to spend free time
outside the school.
The Research on the civil education of pupils54 conducted in 2004 analyses several other aspects of the
collaboration of pupils in the creation of the school environment. One of the conclusions of this research is
that – despite the fact that the overall trust in the school as a state institution does not change
substantially, the active collaboration of pupils in the expression of the democratic school environment (in
the work of self-government, participation in discussions about the school problems, organisation of
different kind of working groups, etc.) decreases considerably. It can be concluded that pupils are more
sceptical about the possibilities to participate in finding solutions to the school problems.
The authors of the research mentioned point out that school has a special significance in the promotion of
the political collaboration by practising discussion in schools about political questions. On the basis of the
data analysed the researchers indicate that pupils discuss political issues most often with their parents,
least often with the teachers. Taking into account that the mass media available to the pupils are the one
that their parents use, then in general it can be evaluated as limited opportunities to get the
comprehensive information, therefore an important role is given to the school for supplying civil education.
It has to be mentioned that because of the rapid development of internet today everyone has access to a
wide range of information sources about any issue, but youth interest in politics have decreased during
the last years, therefore the issue of civil collaboration (on the school, self-governmental and national
levels) cannot be regarded separately from the issue of the values and interests of youth.
5.6. Leisure Time Activities
Spending free time is another important indicator that proves both the activity/ passivity of youth, and
points to the possibilities and interests of young people.
Taking into account that in this research different target groups mentioned the circumstances that young
people have too big amount of studies and thus too little free time to dedicate it to different kind of
activities, the research includes the question of the availability of free time to youth.
According to data (see Figure 20a) about 2/5 of youth in working days have only 1 – 3 hours of free time,
while 2/5 estimate that they have 3 – 6 hours free time. In the weekends (see Figure 20b) most of young
people – 71% - indicate that hey have more than 6 hours of free time. All in all it draws to the conclusion
that statements about the influence of the pupils’ load of studies on the leisure time are a little
overreacted, at the same time one cannot completely draw away the impact of the load on the ways of
spending free time: the bigger the load the more passive forms of spending leisure time are used.
Evaluating the social demographic division it can be observed that the amount of leisure time decreases
proportionally to the increase in the level of education: if 61% of pupils in the primary school have more
than 3 hours of leisure time, then in high school – only 41% of students.
54
A.Geske, A. Grīnfelds, A. Kangro, R. Kiseļova, O. Tipāns. “Pupils’ Civil Education in Latvia within Society Integration Context 1999-2004”,
The Institute of Educational Research of The Faculty of Education and Psychology of the University of Latvia, Riga, 2004.
86

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Figure 20a. Free Time at Working Days. Figure 20b. Free Time at Weekends.
3-6 hours More than 6 3-6 hours
40.2% hours 21.2%
10.6%
1-3 hours
Don't have 4.5%
free time at all
1.7% Less than 1
hour
No answer More than 6
0.3%
2.2% hours
71.0%
No answer
2.2%
Less than 1
hour Don't have
1-3 hours free time at all
4.3%
41.0% 0.9%
It can be noticed that young people living in Riga overall have less free time: 39% of youth estimate that
they have more than 3 hours of free time, while there are 53% of those residing outside Riga.
It is rather connected to the comparatively long time that young people have to spend on the way from
home to school or high school.
Although young people more than explicitly have pointed out that the most problematic issue in the youth
sphere is availability and diversity of the opportunities to spend free time, still, when asked to evaluate
their satisfaction with the opportunities to spend free Figure 21. Satisfaction With Possibilities of
time outside the school or high school, most of the % Spending Free Time Outside School/ High School.
respondents gave positive evaluation. 79% think that Totally
4.6
opportunities to spend free time satisfies them more or dissatisfied
completely (see Figure 21), while approximately 21% Somewhat
16.3
are of point of view that the opportunities to spend free dissatisfied
time are not satisfactory. Somewhat
47.8
satisfied
In order to obtain opportunity to estimate the changes
Totally satisfied 31.0
as time goes by for the obstacles to spending free time
the data of the Research “The Sociological Portrait of No answer 0.3
the Latvian Youth” 55 conducted by the Institute of
Philosophy and Sociology in 1999 is of great help. While
analysing the data about youth opinion on obstacles to the spend free time, the research of 1999
concludes that the main reasons are: “lack of money”, “lack of time”, “lack of necessary premises”, “lack of
teacher, trainer” and “lack of parents’ permission”. It is evident that the lack of opportunities of spending
free time appears here as a factor. Possibly it is connected with the choice of the methodology of the
concrete research, yet it is possible that this factor says that 8 years ago young people had access to
more diverse opportunities to spend free time overall and that those were limited by other factors, in turn
different interest groups and school clubs were closed in schools and self-governments as time went by.
In order to identify, what exactly dissatisfies young people, those who gave negative evaluations were
asked to define more accurately the reasons of dissatisfaction. As shown in the Table 13 most often
displeased young people complained that there are no opportunities to spend their free time available. In
addition – it has to be stressed out that among those residing outside Riga these arguments were brought
forward more often than among those who live in Riga (71% and 42% respectively). In comparison more
55
The data was quoted in the research “Role of Youth Public Organisations in Implementing the State Youth Policy” published by the Institute
of Philosophy and Sociology of the University of Latvia in 2003.
87

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
often – 20% cases – young people referred to the lack of free time as well (it has to be noted that among
residents of Riga outspokenly more often mentioned this reason for dissatisfaction: 50% evaluated that
they have little free time, while only 17% of residents outside Riga feel the lack of time).
Table 13. Reasons for Dissatisfaction with
Opportunities of Spending Free Time
%
Don’t have possibilities for spending
68.4
free time
Little events specially for young people 3.7
Too expensive events 11.8
Little free time 19.9
Hard to say 9.6
TOTAL 100.0
In order to identify the ways of spending free time that young people would prefer to be available, young
people were asked to name them in this research. Table 14 gives the summary on the ways of spending
free time that young people mentioned most often as agreeable and desirable. Overall 64% of young
people mentioned at least one way of spending free time they would prefer, but is not available at the
moment – it proves that a great part of youth cannot find suitable ways to spent their free time that would
fully correspond to their interests.
More often (30% of cases) young people have expressed the desire that the sport ground, sport gym
would be set or built in the territory of their local government, as well as – to provide accessibility of a
concrete sport activity. Equally often (9%) young people wanted the provision of a swimming pool for the
swimming exercises. The third category to be mentioned is the preference of youth to diversify the
provision of the interest groups – offering the possibilities to learn art, drama, music, physics, chemical, IT,
etc.
It is also evident that young people express the desire to have access to different entertainment places
and cultural opportunities – concerts (7%), cinema (6%), amusement parks (5%), discotheque (4%), etc.
Table 14. Opportunities for Spending Free Time Desired by Young people
%
Sports ground, gym, sports training 30.1
Swimming pool 9.4
Different interest groups (art, drama, physics, fashion,
7.2
computers etc.)
Dance classes, clubs (folk, modern, break dance) 7.1
Concerts 6.5
Movies 6.3
Funfair 5.4
Youth clubs, centres 4.8
Bowling 4.5
Discotheque 4.3
Recreation centre, park 3.4
Culture establishments (library, museum, theatre etc.) 3.1
Excursions, hiking 2.9
Walking places 2.8
TOTAL 100.0
While evaluating the forms of spending free time in the regional division, it is observed that residents of
Riga more often express the desire to have access to relaxation in the nature, excursions and hiking, as
well as walking places, while residents outside Riga would prefer to have opportunities to go to cinema,
88

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
concerts and bowling. Inhabitants of the capital city would like to have access to opportunities that are
available to the people that live outside Riga, in turn residents of other cities and the countryside would
prefer to have those opportunities that are available to the inhabitants of Riga. Therefore it is not possible
to declare that the opportunities of spending free time for young people are very limited in the regional
aspect, rather it depends on the opportunities of spending free time in the aspect of the regional
development. The desire expressed outside Riga is more about culture and entertainment, while in Riga –
about nature, fresh air activities.
It is important to put desired activities with the ones available to the youth now in order to evaluate to what
extent the current activities call to the desirable ones – therefore the questionnaire included questions
concerning the favourite ways of youth to spend free time and where they prefer to spend their free time.
Approximately half of youth (48%) named being with friends as the favourite way of spending their time
(see Figure 22). About 1/3 prefer to do sports when spending free time, while almost 1/5 of young people
prefer walking.
% Figure 22. Favourite Forms of Spending Free Time.
Spending time with friends (conversations,
48.1
walks etc.)
Doing sports 34.7
Walking 23.0
Doing nothing 16.6
Reading books, magazines 14.1
Relaxing at nature, hiking 13.2
Swimming, taking sunbaths 10.4
Using internet, chatting 10.4
Attending events, concerts 10.0
Listening music 9.5
Dancing 9.1
Watching TV 8.0
Watching movies 6.3
Travelling 5.7
Singing, making music 4.9
Playing computer games 4.5
Attending discotheques 4.0
Biking 3.7
Spending time with family 3.1
Driving a car, a motorbike 2.5
Having a drink 2.2
Studying (languages etc.) 2.0
Shopping 1.8
Working 1.7
Photographing 1.5
Attending clubs 1.5
Other 8.3
No answer 3.1
At the same time comparatively large amount of young people – 17% – admit that they do nothing in their
leisure time, which means spending time at home, sleeping, etc.
Approximately 1/10 prefers to read (books and magazines), take a rest at nature, swim and take a
sunbath, use internet, as well as to attend events, concerts and listen to music.
89

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Overall evaluation shows that ways of young peoples’ spending free time are very diverse and in terms of
interests – comprehensive. Yet when comparing these data with the data on the desired opportunities of
spending free time (see Table 14), it is obvious that young people lack diverse opportunities to participate
in interest groups, as well as to attend different cultural and entertaining events.
In comparing the data in regional perspective small differences can be noted (see Table 15): youth
residing in Riga, of course, mention attendance of events and concerts, dancing as their favourite way of
spending free time comparatively more often, while residents outside Riga – walking.
Table 15. Favourite Ways of Spending Free Time – TOP7
outside
RiGA
% % RiGA
Spending time with friends (conversations, walks etc.) 46.3 Spending time with friends (conversations, walks etc.) 48.3
Doing sports 39.0 Doing sports 34.1
Reading books, magazines 18.3 Walking 24.8
Doing nothing 17.1 Doing nothing 16.5
Attending events, concerts 14.6 Reading books, magazines 13.5
Relaxing at nature, hiking 14.6 Relaxing at nature, hiking 13.0
Dancing 13.4 Using internet, chatting 11.6
TOTAL 100.0 TOTAL 100.0
It has to be noted that this data does not illustrate the real activity of spending free time of young people,
rather favourite ways of spending free time. Taking into account that the real opportunities available are
used to differ from the desirable ones it is important Figure 23. Spending Free Time
to compare, what young people do in their leisure % 83.6
time and what are their favourite engagements. The Meeting friends
73.7
Research on the Life Style and Values of Watching TV
Consumers of Latvia conducted in 2004 will be of Reading newspapers, magazines
56
44.2
help for this comparison. 38.1
Walking
37.8 ALL
Data (see Figure 23) proves that the absolute Attending discotheques, nightclubs 18-20 years
majority of young people meet their friends (84%) in Visiting someone
28.5
21-25 years
leisure time, watch TV (74%), read newspapers and 27.8
Spending time in internet
magazines (44%), walk (38%), attend discotheques
25.6
and nightclubs (38%). It is evident that the biggest Doing sports
differences can be evaluated in such an aspect of Reading a book
23.2
spending free time like watching TV: 74% spend 20.4
Cooking for family or guests
their free time at the TV, but it is mentioned as a 18.7
favourite engagement by 8% of youth. It means that Playing computer games
17.0
the passive forms of spending free time are not Going to movies
always the right choice of youth, and frequently Receiving guests
15.2
(especially for the residents outside Riga), it is a Talking on the phone with friends, 15.0
forced engagement. If youth had access to more relatives
14.7
diverse opportunities in their free time to realise Attending concerts and theatre
their hobbies, interests, the passive forms of
spending free time would reduce to a certain extent. It is proved implicitly by the data about sports
activities: if sports is mentioned as a favourite way of spending free time by 26% of young people, then
only 35% call it a favourite engagement; that indicates that not all young people have full access to these
opportunities.
56
“Research on Values and Lifestyle of Consumers of Latvia” Riga, 2004. During the research there were surveyed 1 000 inhabitants in age
group between 18 till 74. For this particular research data on 18-25 years old young people were used. There are forms of spending free time
that mentioned at least 10% respondents shown in the Figure.
90

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Watching TV is mentioned quite often as one of the negative forms of spending free time. Watching TV is
one of the most popular ways of spending free time for children and youth that is discovered in all relevant
research works. For example, the Research “Civil Education of Latvian Pupils in the Context of Integration
of the Society 1999 – 2004” concludes that only 3% of the 8 grade pupils do not watch TV at all, while
43% watch TV every day for 3 and more hours. The authors point out “a more detailed information is
needed about what programmes in which TV channels the pupils watch. Only then conclusions can be
drawn about the extent to which and how television as the means of mass media influences the point of
view of pupils or their knowledge about different issues”. 57
Overall the activities of spending free time of Latvian young people does not differ much from those in
other EU member states. The Eurobarometer youth research shows58 that the youth of other EU member
states prefer to spend their free time: walking, doing sports and driving bicycles (45%), meeting friends,
dancing, having something to eat or drink (40%), reading (25%), using internet, playing video games
(21%), watching TV (19%), listening to music (17%) and going to cinema, theatre or concerts (16%). The
research points out several interesting differences in the framework of the EU member states – young
people in the new EU member states admitted much more frequently that they help at house work in
comparison to those in the old EU member states (26% of Latvian young people mentioned that they help
with house work in their leisure time, while proportion of such young people in the old EU member states
does not exceed 5%).
Places, where young people prefer to stay also indicate about their choice of spending leisure time,
therefore the research includes this measurement Figure 24. Places for Spending Free Time.
%
as well. 58% of young people prefer to spend
At home 58.1
their free time at home (see Figure 24), 44% - at At nature 44.1
nature, but 28% - at friends’ home. It is obvious At friend's home 27.5
that this data is inconsistent with the responses of Sea, river, lake 23.7
youth about their favourite ways of spending free Sports ground, gym 18.1
time (for example, large amount of spending free In the city 16.7
Outside - yard 16.1
time is related to spending time outside the home,
Clubs 11.7
but the data about the real places the free time is Places of entertainment 9.1
spent proves that young people spend their free Countryside 9.1
time mostly at home) that proves once again that Cafe, bar 5.4
not everyone has access to the outside of school Cinema 4.1
activities they would like to engage with. Discotheque 3.1
Children, youth centres 1.8
Different events, parties 1.5
While analysing data in the regional cut it is Bathhouse 1.4
possible to obtain additional proves to the fact Theatre 1.4
that opportunities available to youth influences Other 5.2
their activity (see Table 16): for example, No answer 4.0
residents outside Riga mentioned home as their
favourite way of spending time much more often (in Riga – 42%, outside Riga – 61%). If we take into
consideration other data identified in the research about the limited opportunities of youth to spend free
time in the region it is possible to make a wild guess that spending time at home is one of a few
alternatives that is available to youth outside the Capital City.
57
The research was conducted within grant scheme “Promotion of Society Integration in Latvia” of the Society Integration Fund. It was
conducted by the Institute of Educational Research of The Faculty of Education and Psychology of the University of Latvia and its authors are
A. Geske, A. Grīnfelds, A. Kangro, R. Kiseļova and O. Tipāns.
58
“Young Europeans. A Survey Among People Aged Between 15-30 in the European Union. Analytical Report.” Flash Eurobarometer Series
#202, The Gallup Organization, February 2007. It must be stressed out that there is a different target group – 15-30 years old citizens were
surveyed.
91

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Table 16. Places for Spending Free Time – TOP7
% RiGA % outside riga
At home 41.5 At home 60.5
At nature 41.5 At nature 44.5
In the city 31.7 At friends’ home 27.9
Sea, river, lake 28.0 Sea, river, lake 23.0
At friends’ home 24.4 Sports ground, gym 19.2
Countryside 19.5 Outside - yard 17.2
Clubs 11.0 In the city 14.6
TOTAL 100.0 TOTAL 100.0
Summarising data expressed earlier on about the spending free time, it is possible to conclude that young
people have access to diverse opportunities of spending free time, yet these opportunities do not always
correspond to the interests of young people (for example, lately a lot of attention is paid to support,
establishment of sport activities without provisions of other opportunities). Equally it is important to stress
out that diversification of the outside of school activities would allow to involve more young people in the
active spending of free time (instead of the current engagements), as well as to broaden the part of young
people that get involved in any concrete activities.
5.7. Collaboration in Interest Groups
One of the forms of spending free time is participation in different interest groups, clubs, and informal
groups; therefore the research questionnaire included questions about participation in these associations,
groups.
Overall 74% of young people take part in at least one interest group, club or association. Young people at
the age between 15 – 17 years, Russian nationality, secondary school pupils are the most active
participants of different interest groups and clubs; regional differences are not observed (young people
from Riga and other regions show equal level of activity in collaboration) (see Table 17). Young people at
the age between 19 – 25, Latvian nationality, students of high schools, from the large families and
interestingly enough – girls are comparatively less active in attending groups (maybe it can be explained
with the fact that most of the young people take part in different sports groups that is favourite
engagement of boys).
The research “Youth Identity Establishment and Collaboration”59 conducted in 2005 identifies and
analyses the reasons, why young people do not take part in art amateur performances, creation
associations. The main reasons listed: lack of time (52%), lack of interest (35%), lack of talent (17%), lack
of appropriate association (15%), lack of money (13%), too large distance to the place of rehearsals
(10%). Young people draw out the following main advantages from participation: opportunity to participate
in events, to act, to travel, opportunity to obtain new friends, to communicate with the like minded,
development and improvement of physical and mental talents, as well as development of skills and
acquirements.
Table 17. Participation in Interest Groups
% Have participated Haven’t participated
15-16 years 18.3 14.2
17 years 39.0 34.9
AGE
18 years 24.1 20.1
19-25 years 18.7 30.8
59
“Youth Identity Establishment and Collaboration. Overview of Research 2005”. Riga, 2005. The research was conducted by the Institute of
Philosophy and Sociology of the University of Latvia. The authors of the research are: R. Rungule, I. Koroļeva, S. Sniķere, I. Trapenciere, M.
Trapencieris, A. Aleksandrovs.
92

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Male 37.7 30.1
GENDER
Female 62.3 69.9
Latvian 69.3 71.0
NATIONALITY
Russian, other 30.7 29.0
Primary school 2.5 3.6
Secondary school 82.0 68.6
EDUCATIONAL
High school 14.1 26.0
INSTITUTIION
Vocational school 0.8 0.6
Not studying 0.6 1.2
Riga 12.4 13.0
DOMICILE
Outside Riga 87.6 87.0
1 person 1.5 1.8
2-3 persons 31.3 32.5
FAMILY SIZE
4-5 persons 56.7 53.4
More than 5 10.5 12.3
The biggest proportion of young people – approximately 1/3 – participate of some kind of sport
association, comparatively many young people learn dancing (18%) or sing in the choir (15%) (see Figure
25). A little less frequently young people get involved in music groups or bands (11%), as well as drama
groups (10%).
% Figure 25. Participation in Intereset Groups.
Sports team 34.9
Dance club 17.8
Choir 15.2
Band, group 11.1
Drama club 9.7
Visual art club 6.8
Fan club 6.6
Photo club 5.1
Other informal interest, friend group 8.0
Other interest group 11.7
Don't participate anywhere 26.0
The favourite groups for spending free time among young people are visual arts (7%) and photo (5%)
groups, as well ad popular music fan clubs (7%).
The comparatively large proportion of young people that indicated participation in other informal groups,
friend groups (8%), as well as other groups, unions (12%), etc. that are not mentioned in the common list
proves the versatile interests of these young people (see Table 18).
93

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Table 18. Informal Interest, Friends Groups and Interest, Hobby Groups, where Young People Participate
Informal interest groups Interest, hobby groups
% %
BMX 13.5 Youth organisation, club 25.0
Skateboarding 9.6 Foreign languages club 14.5
Snowboard 7.7 Pupil parliament, self-government 7.9
Novuss 7.7 Youth Guards 7.9
Photographing 7.7 Music school 7.9
Bicycling 7.7 Floristic club 3.9
Body building 3.8 Modelling school 3.9
Fashion, modelling clothes 3.8 European club 3.9
Table tennis 3.8 Political party 2.6
Billiard 3.8 Dance club 2.6
Roller-skating 3.8 Orchestra 2.6
Auto modelling 3.8 Bible studies 2.6
Motor-raiding 3.8 European Student Forum 2.6
Rock climbing 3.8 Society \"Youth for Smile\" 1.3
Movie amateurs 1.9 History club 1.3
Hairdressers 1.9 Gymnastics club 1.3
Extreme sports 1.9 APSYCTD 1.3
Metallists 1.9 Debate club 1.3
Emo 1.9 Decorative art studies 1.3
Punk 1.9 Committee on Protection of Children’s Rights 1.3
Public work 1.9 Psychology club 1.3
Hand-to-hand combat 1.9 Geography club 1.3
Sailing 1.9 Orienteering club 1.3
Badminton 1.9 Red Cross 1.3
Football 1.9 Auto school 1.3
Antique cars 1.9 AISEC 1.3
Guitarists 1.9 Culinary club 1.3
Folklore 1.9 Aerobics 1.3
Archaeology 1.9 Goethe society 1.3
Young politicians 1.9 Handicraft club 1.3
Motion theatre 1.3
Chess club 1.3
Sewing club 1.3
Scouts 1.3
5.8. Cultural and Entertainment Collaboration
In addition to different school and outside of school groups, interest groups young people can attend
separate cultural and entertainment events, thus being active not only in the sense of collaboration
according to interests, but in consumption of culture and entertainment as well.
99% of young people have attended some kind of cultural or entertainment event during the last year that
implicitly affirms that these events are more or less available to a large part of young people (the intensity
of the events differs of course – these are often available in Riga and the biggest cities, than in the
countryside, parishes (parish fests, summertime fest, celebration of the New Year, discos once a month,
etc.)).
Young people between the ages 18 – 25, girls of Latvian nationality are more active (see Table 19) in
attendance of different cultural and entertainment events (it can be easier explained with the moving of
young people to the living in the city for studies thus obtaining opportunities for a wider attendance of
94

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
cultural and entertaining events). It is impossible to analyse deeper the target group of passive young
people in this case, because it consists of only 1% of the respondents.
Table 19. Youth Participation in Cultural and Entertainment Events
Haven’t
Have participated
% participated
15-16 years 17.0 30.0
17 years 37.6 60.0
AGE
18 years 23.4 0.0
19-25 years 22.0 10.0
Male 35.3 66.7
GENDER
Female 64.7 33.3
Latvian 70.0 50.0
NATIONALITY
Russian, other 30.0 50.0
Primary school 2.8 0.0
Secondary school 78.3 90.0
EDUCATIONAL
High school 17.3 10.0
INSTITUTION
Vocational school 0.8 0.0
Don’t study 0.8 0.0
Riga 12.5 20.0
DOMICILE
Outside Riga 87.5 80.0
1 person 1.6 0.0
2-3 persons 31.3 55.6
FAMILY SIZE
4-5 persons 56.2 33.3
More than 5 11.0 11.1
Most of young people (see Figure 26) have attended cinemas (67%), museums (66%) and theatres (63%)
during the last year. Popular entertainment events were sport activities (57% attended those as viewers),
as well as hiking on nature paths, nature parks (57%).
A little more than half of youth – 53% – have
Figure 26. Attendance of Entertaining Events.
attended exhibitions, as well as entertained in %
music clubs during the last year. Cinema 67.3
Museum 65.6
44% of young people attended different popular Theatre 62.4
music concerts, 36% participated in sport
Sport competition as spectator 57.1
competitions as participants and 35% attended
Country park, trail 57.0
dancing events.
Exhibition 53.3
Considerably rarer young people attended Events in clubs 53.3
concerts of classic music (16%), circus (16%) and Popular music concert 44.2
opera (14%), as well as ballet (8%). Sport competition as participant 35.6
Dance event (competition, show) 35.0
The regional cut of the data proves that there is a Classical music concert 15.5
difference in participation of cultural and
Circus 15.5
entertainment events that indicates the
Opera 14.0
differences of opportunities in the Capital City and
outside. Table 20 indicates that young people Ballet 8.3
residing in Riga attended events like cinema, Don't attend 1.5
museums, theatres, exhibitions, concerts and
especially opera and ballet more often in comparison to ones residing outside Riga, which does not mean
that young people residing outside Riga are less interested rather that they have less opportunities. At the
95

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
same time young people residing outside Riga have attended sports activities and nature paths more
often as were more available to them.
Table 20. Attendance of Entertainment Events
% Riga Outside Riga
Cinema 85.4 64.7
Museum 72.0 64.7
Theatre 73.2 60.8
Sport competition as spectator 42.7 59.2
Country park, trail 56.1 57.1
Exhibition 72.0 50.6
Events in clubs 59.8 52.4
Popular music concert 59.8 42.0
Sport competition as participant 36.6 35.5
Dance event (competition, show) 30.5 35.7
Classical music concert 17.1 15.3
Circus 14.6 15.6
Opera 22.0 12.8
Ballet 14.6 7.4
Haven't attended 2.4 1.4
TOTAL 100.0 100.0
5.9. Social and Political Collaboration
73% of young people have taken part in public and social activities during the last year, while 63% of
young people participated in political activities in the course of the last four years.
19 – 25 year old, girls, Latvian nationals participated in public and social activities more often (see Table
21). Serious regional disparities are not noticed. The social demographic portrait of the politically actives
is similar – young people at the age between 19 – 25, girls, of Latvian nationality, high school student are
more active in collaborating in political activities. Unlike the social activities, serious regional differences
can be noticed in the collaboration of political activities – young residents of Riga outspokenly more often
got involved in some kind of activities than the residents outside the Capital City.
17 year olds are more often passive in social and public activities, in turn 17 and 15 – 16 years old
(secondary school pupils) were politically passive. Political activities seemed less exciting to boys and
Russian speaking youth, as well as for those residing outside Riga. Less active in participation in political
activities were representatives from large families.
Overall these indicators cannot be regarded as negative – parallel to the increase of the age of the young
person, increases social and political responsibility, thus the will and motivation to get involved. By
changing the values from entertainment and relaxation (15 – 17 years old) to social, goodness (18 – 25
years old), readiness to get involved, understanding about the value and importance of the social
collaboration changes.
96

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Table 21. Social and Political Collaboration
Social and public activities Political activities
Have Haven’t Have Haven’t
% participated participated participated participated
15-16 years 18.6 13.4 12.4 25.4
17 years 35.8 43.6 31.1 49.6
AGE
18 years 22.2 25.1 23.1 22.9
19-25 years 23.3 17.9 33.3 2.1
Male 35.2 37.1 32.6 41.1
GENDER
Female 64.8 62.9 67.4 58.9
Latvian 70.3 68.2 72.0 65.8
NATIONALITY
Russian, other 29.7 31.8 28.0 34.2
Primary school 3.0 2.2 1.5 5.0
Secondary school 77.5 81.0 69.6 93.8
EDUCATIONAL
High school 17.4 16.8 26.8 0.8
INSTITUTION
Vocational school 1.1 0.0 1.2 0.0
Don’t study 1.1 0.0 1.0 0.4
Riga 12.3 13.4 15.1 8.3
DOMICILE
Outside Riga 87.7 86.6 84.9 91.7
1 person 1.9 0.6 1.7 1.3
2-3 persons 31.6 31.6 32.8 29.7
FAMILY SIZE
4-5 persons 54.3 59.9 55.1 57.2
More than 5 12.1 7.9 10.4 11.9
When asked to indicate social and public activities, where young people participated during the last year
most of the young people mentioned putting in order the environment (see Figure 27) – 36% have
participated in these kind of activities. About 1/5 of the young people point out that the have done
voluntary work, yet the authors of this Figure 27. Participation in Social and Public Activities.
%
research are of the opinion that young
people do not really understand the Taking care of surrounding environment 35.9
meaning of the term “voluntary work”, Voluntary work 21.4
therefore they included activities that they
Protecting youth interests 20.4
have done without a reward at school or
at home. The research “The Gallup Support, help for oldsters 15.7
Organization” convened by Ensuring safety and order in own locality 15.1
“Eurobarometer” implicitly proves that; Support, help for young people and children
the data about Latvia prove that 12% of in trouble
13.2
young people are involved in some kind
60 Improving situation between Latvians and
10.9
foreigners
of voluntary work activities. It has to be
Animal protection 8.8
noted that it is the lowest indicator among
the Baltic States: 18% of young people in Support, help for disabled people 6.3
Lithuania are involved in the voluntary Support, help for poor countries 2.3
work, 14% - in Estonia61.
Don't participate anywhere 27.5
The same amount of young people (20%)
admits that they have participated in the protection of youth rights.
Approximately 15% of young people have supported, helped old people, as well as participated in
activities providing security and order in their domicile.
60
“Young Europeans. A Survey Among People Aged Between 15-30 in the European Union. Analytical Report.” Flash Eurobarometer Series
#202, The Gallup Organization, February 2007. It must be stressed out that there is a different target group – 15-30 years old citizens were
surveyed, as well as there is a difference in formulation of a question – young people were asked if in particular moment they are involved in
voluntary work. Overall 16% citizens of particular age group were involved in voluntary work at that time.
61
As shown in data on society overall 20% inhabitants are involved in voluntary work in Latvia, although overall 65% think that voluntary work
is important (“20% inhabitants involve themselves in voluntary work in Latvia.” Information portal www.delfi.lv, 17.04.2007.)
97

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
1/10 has participated in providing help to young people and children in trouble, participated in events to
improve situation among Latvians and other nationals.
9% thought it important to get involved in the protection of animals, 6% - in the support to disabled people,
but 2% - in providing assistance to poor countries.
In order to deeply analyse the attitude of young people to voluntary work, importance of social activities,
the young people were asked to respond to the several statements that ware included in the
questionnaire. These responses lead to the conclusion that young people in general are positively minded
towards doing some voluntary work, involvement in different social activities: young people support an
overall evaluation that one should actively get involved in projects of social assistance, and at the same
time they state that they themselves are ready to donate their free time in order to help others for free
(see Figure 28). It can be noticed here as well that – the elder the young person, the bigger support is
expressed to social activities, necessity of voluntary work as well as readiness to get involved themselves
(see Table 22).
Figure 28. Valuation of Voluntary Work.
%
I think youth have to participate actively in different social
help campaigns – help old people, disabled people and 75.0
children from disadvantageous family
I would gladly sacrifice my free time to help other people
53.6
for free (do voluntary work)
I know that my friends and acquaintances are involved in
43.5
voluntary work (help for free)
I would never do anything for free 24.7
At the same time the fact should be noticed that the expression: “I would never do something for free” has
not been evaluated unequivocally negatively, which means that young people think it important to receive
salary for their work. 17-18 year old people agree to this point of view most of all (more boys than girls, of
Russian than Latvian nationality), which have agreed more often that they never want to do anything
without payment. Similarly it proves to a certain extent that importance and advantages of voluntary work
are not quite understandable to young people or they seem a lot less important than the material
payment.
Table 22. Evaluation of Voluntary Work
AGE GENDER NATIONALITY DOMICILE
Russian, Outside
15-16 17 18 19-25 Male Female Latvian Riga
% other Riga
I think youth have to
participate actively in
71.4 72.9 72.7 83.8 67.7 80.3 77.3 69.5 75.6 74.9
different social help
campaigns
I would gladly sacrifice my
free time to help other 52.7 48.6 47.3 69.7 48.9 57.0 57.9 43.7 67.1 51.7
people for free
I know that my friends and
acquaintances are 39.3 36.8 38.7 63.4 40.6 45.9 46.7 36.0 53.7 42.0
involved in voluntary work
I would never do anything
21.4 30.8 25.3 16.2 32.3 21.1 23.3 27.9 23.2 25.0
for free
TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
98

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Positive evaluation can be given to the fact that comparatively lot of young people stated – their friends
and acquaintances are involved in the voluntary work, thus it would be easier to activate passive youth for
these activities by showing positive examples of other young people.
Those young people who got involved in any political activity during the last four years more often (35%)
have indicated discussions about politics with relatives, friends (see Figure 29). Approximately 1/5 have
met with the representatives of the local governments, as well as voted in the Parliament elections 62. 15%
have participated in the elections Figure 29. Participation in Political Activities.
of the local government, but 12% %
declare that they have met Discussions with relatives, friends about politics 34.6
representative of the Parliament
Meeting representatives of local government 18.6
or of the Government. An active
participation of the citizen – Voting in the Parliament elections 18.3
voting in the Parliament and local Voting in local government elections 15.2
government elections – of course
is less expressed for young Meeting representatives of Parliament, government 12.1
people than for elder persons, Participating in referendum 10.0
yet is cannot be stated that
Participating in discussions with politicians 9.7
young people are completely
apolitical in this sense. The Participating in political discussions in internet 8.4
questionnaire63 conducted before Participating in political demonstrations 7.4
the 2005 local government Writing articles about politics for school/ high school
elections by “SKDS” Ltd proves or local (parish, city, district) newspaper
5.7
it; the question asked was “Will Participating in political non-governmental or social
5.4
organisation
you participate in the elections of
Participating in political party 3.5
the local government that will
Writing articles about politics for state scale
take place on March 12, 2005” newspaper
2.0
and 43% of 18 – 24 years old 36.9
Don't participate anywhere
responded that they “Certainly
will” and in addition 29% - “it is
more likely that I will participate”. The conviction among the 45 and elder people about the participation in
the elections of the local government reaches 60%, yet there is some movement in the youth field that
cannot be underestimated. It has to be added that real participation was not as high as the young people
were indicating; still it was high overall – 49% of young people estimated in the survey 64 after the elections
of the local government that they went to the polls. This research analyses the reasons why people did or
did not participate in the elections. As it is mentioned in the analytical review then among young people
(18 – 24 years) the main reasons that motivated the participation are: “it is the duty of the citizen” (50%),
“wanted to support a particular party” (33%). Among others one of the main reasons mentioned was “hope
for a brighter future”, yet the importance of this factor was smaller among young people than in other age
groups. The main reasons, why young people did not participate in elections among 18 – 24 years olds
are the same as for those in elder age groups – “no trust, don’t trust anyone”, “there was none to vote for,
did not know who to vote for”, “see no point”. The reason “was busy, working” was mentioned
comparatively more often among young people.
62
It must be taken into consideration that the target group contains young people 15-25 years old, wherewith – not everybody had rights of
voting when research was conducted.
63
„Electors Attitude and Awareness about Local Government Elections. Survey of Latvian Inhabitants. February, 2005.” Marketing and public
opinion research centre „SKDS”, Riga, 2005.
64
„Electors’ Collaboration Influencing Factors in Local Government Elections. Survey of Latvian Inhabitants. March 13-21,2005.” Marketing
and public opinion research centre „SKDS”, Riga, 2005. It must be taken into account that in Latvia electoral qualification stars with 18 years,
that is why in this research overall indicators on the local government and the government elections (Figure 31 shows data of all sampling
e.g. young people of 15-25 years old) are lower than in other researches where target group begins with 18 years old young people.
99

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Approximately 1/10 of young people participated in referendum65 and participated in discussions with
politicians. 8% involved in discussions in internet.
Less than 1/10 of young people are involved in active forms of political activities: 7% participated in
political meetings, demonstrations or protests, 6% wrote articles about politics in local press, 5%
participated in an NGO or public organisation connected with politics, but 4% participated in work of
political party.
In the regional division of participation in political activities disparities are noticeable (see Table 23).
Residents of Riga have more frequently participated in the elections of the Parliament, local government
and referendums; equally inhabitants of Riga were more active collaborators in organisations connected
with politics. 39% of residents outside Riga have not participated in any political activities during the last
four years, while the number of the passive youth residing in Riga was just 24%.
Table 23. Participation in Political Activities
NATIONALITY DOMICILE
Russian, Outside
Latvian Riga
% other Riga
Discuss politics regularly with relatives, friends 34.8 34.0 35.4 34.4
Have met representatives of local government 20.9 13.2 17.1 18.8
Voted in Parliament elections 23.3 6.6 45.1 14.4
Voted in local government elections 19.4 5.6 32.9 12.7
Have met representatives of Parliament, government 14.8 6.1 13.4 12.0
Participated in referendum 12.8 3.6 26.8 7.6
Participated in discussions with politicians 10.6 7.6 15.9 8.8
Participate regularly in political discussions in internet 8.1 9.1 8.5 8.4
Have participated in political demonstrations 5.9 10.7 9.8 7.0
Have written articles about politics for school/ university or local newspaper 5.7 5.6 9.8 5.1
Have participated in political non-governmental or social organisation 5.5 5.1 11.0 4.6
Have participated in political party 4.0 2.5 4.9 3.3
Have written articles about politics for state scale newspaper 2.2 1.5 4.9 1.6
Haven’t participated 34.8 41.6 24.4 38.7
TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
There are differences among the groups of nationalities: Latvian nationals were more active in different
political activities, while activities of Russian youth were more explicit only in the participation in the
political meetings and demonstrations. It is evident that everyday passive collaboration (discussions about
politics with relatives, friends, in Internet) is equally expressed between both nationalities, yet the real
participation and thus the possibilities of influence among Latvian youth are beyond comparison. There
are several possible explanations and it is impossible to declare if the reasons for the passivity of Russian
nationals are the status of a non-citizen, the negative attitude of the parents towards the State, its policy
or the disinterest of the young people themselves and the prevalence of other interests. Yet it has to be
outlined – if these young people are given opportunity to speak out and discuss, but the opportunity to
influence the decision making process is not provided, it potentially creates a negative social background
to the overall attitude to the state policy in general, thus decreasing the motivation to participate in political
activities by replacing them with the acts of protest.
Overall it can be observed that a very small number of young people start an active participation to
influence the political process, most often expressing their political opinion only in discussions and
participating in conversations with politicians, but themselves not taking an active role in moving the
policy.
65
The research was conducted when there was signing-in carried out in Latvia for initiating referendum on the pulled up laws “Amendment to
Law on National Security” and “Amendment to Law on State Security Institutions” by State President Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga, wherewith young
people considered signing-in as participating in referendum.
100

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
At the same time statistics shows that, for instance, an increasing number of young people candidate in
the elections of local government with each time – 251 person at the age between 21 – 25 stood as
candidates for the local government in 1997, the age level was decreased in the year 2005 until 188, thus
677 persons stood as candidates that year66. At the same time the researchers point out that voters in
general are sceptical about young candidates and unwillingly vote for them, especially in the region of
Riga and other cities.
One of the hypothesis that has been put forward most often in order to reason low political activity in
society is the fact that a large part of society does not trust state institutions, politicians, political process in
general, etc. The data of this research does not prove that (see Table 24) – although a certain tendency
appears that those, who do not participate in social and political activities, give smaller trust indicators
about several institutions, yet these differences are not that remarkable as to allow to conclude that the
trust crisis is the main reason for denial of trust. For example, the trust indicators for the Prime Minister
and the Parliament are equally low for both active and passive people.
Table 24. Trust in Institutions vs Participation in Social and Political Activities
Public and social activities Political activities
Have Haven’t Have Haven’t
AVERAGE FROM 1 TILL 5 participated participated participated participated
Labour unions 2.78 2.72 2.81 2.67
Latvian army 3.21 3.00 3.19 3.09
Police 3.01 2.91 3.02 2.91
State institutions 3.06 2.98 3.11 2.92
Church 3.18 3.12 3.16 3.16
President of Latvia 3.38 3.28 3.40 3.26
Parliament 2.52 2.45 2.51 2.47
Bank of Latvia 3.47 3.39 3.48 3.40
European Union 3.20 3.18 3.24 3.11
Court system 2.99 2.96 3.01 2.94
Education system 3.36 3.27 3.32 3.35
Prime Minister 2.71 2.58 2.68 2.65
Youth organisations 3.56 3.26 3.49 3.47
Local government 3.19 2.94 3.18 3.03
Non-governmental organisations 3.09 2.80 3.11 2.84
In the framework of this research the reasons for social and political activities as well as passivity in these
activities were not analysed, however, Eurobarometer Youth Research 67 indirectly provides information
about it; which analyses the main factors that could promote the involvement of youth in public, civil and
political activities. The main identified circumstances for the promotion of the involvement of young people
are the following: the youth activity could be stimulated by the address of politicians to the youth before
making of decisions about the youth issues (overall in the EU – 81%, in Latvia – 81%), one of the
stimulating factors mentioned was a wider accessibility of opportunities to do voluntary work (in the EU –
74%, in Latvia – 62%), as well as introduction of a compulsory education programme about the civil
society in the schools (in the EU – 70%, in Latvia – 53%). One of the factors brought forward that could
induce social activity is the reduction of the limitation of the age when young people can vote – 19% of the
EU nationals mentioned, but 27% - in Latvia (that is one of the highest indicators among the EU member
states).
66
“Political Collaboration of Youth in Local Government Elections”, Valmiera, 2005. Research was conducted by the Vidzeme University
College for the secretariat of the Minister for Special Assignments for Society Integration Affairs. Authors of the research: D. Jansone, V.
Silkāne and J. Ikstens.
67
“Young Europeans. A Survey Among People Aged Between 15-30 in the European Union. Analytical Report.” Flash Eurobarometer Series
#202, The Gallup Organization, February 2007. It must be stressed out that there is a different target group – 15-30 years old citizens were
surveyed.
101

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
The Research mentioned asks the young people to name the types of activities that could potentially be
the most effective in order to make politicians “hear” the opinion of young people. Similarly like in the EU
the activities admitted to be the most effective in Latvia are: participation in the discussions (35%), joining
the party (18%) and participation in the trade unions (11%). It has to be stressed out that in Latvia
(similarly like in other new EU member states), in comparison to the old member states demonstrations
and signing of requests and petitions have been admitted to be an effective political activity comparatively
less frequently.
It has to be equally mentioned that the Eurobarometer research concludes – Latvia together with Estonia,
Bulgaria, Hungary and Malta are among the countries, where the political collaboration of youth is at a
very low level. In the framework of this aspect it is important to know the most important influence agents
among youth on political issues that thus would be the most appropriate ones to activate youth political
collaboration. The Research “Civil Values in the Latvian and Minority Programmes: Comparison” 68
conducted in 2005 gives this data. The biggest disparities can be found between Latvian and Russian
youth: the main authorities in political issues for Latvians are television (52%) and parents (52%), while
the importance of television is much lower among the Russian youth (34%) thus identifying the parents as
the main authority (53%). From one point of view the fact that the Latvian authorities are more diverse
means that they receive more comprehensive information as well, at the same time it is evident that the
statement that they do not have an authority at all and they think on their own is more frequent among the
Russian young people – 29% of Russians and 17% of Latvians respectively responded in this way.
The Vidzeme University Collage conducted a research69 in 2005 that analysed the participation of young
people in the elections of the local governments. The factors that encouraged young people to get
involved in the politics and become candidates in the lists of parties were analysed. The researchers
concluded that the main motives to candidate in the elections of the local governments and to get involved
in the politics are: a desire to work for the benefit of the society, to promote changes and development, to
secure representation of youth as a group of the society and acknowledgement of the working abilities of
the youth, desire to collaborate, to express own opinion and to influence decisions, opportunities of
carrier, opportunities to establish social contacts, as well as different personal advantages (self
acknowledgement, personal ambition, obtaining social status, etc.).
One of the forms of political collaboration is to collaborate in non-governmental or public organisations as
proved by the data of the research above mentioned than approximately 5% of youth are involved in
NGOs. The researches about the youth collaboration conducted before70 allow to explain those factors
that motivate young people to involve in non-governmental organisations. The main reasons to be
mentioned are motivator of personal benefit (opportunities to obtain contacts that might help in the future
life (47%, opportunities to make a carrier (37%)). An important issue is the opportunity to meet the
likeminded and find new friends (35%), as well as opportunity to change the existing situation in the
country, city or parish by collaborating (31%). In turn the main reasons, why young people do not get
involved in the work of NGOs are traditional: lack of time (35%), lack of interest (29%) and lack of
information (15%).
68
Research was conducted by the Department of Sociology and Communications of Riga Stradiņš University for the Secretariat of the
Minister for Special Assignments for Society Integration Affairs. Authors of the research: T. Lāce, A. Laķe, R. Rungule, S. Omārova and I.
Koroļeva.
69
„“Political Collaboration of Youth in Local Government Elections”, Valmiera, 2005. Research was conducted by the Vidzeme University
College for the secretariat of the Minister for Special Assignments for Society Integration Affairs. Authors of the research: D. Jansone, V.
Silkāne and J. Ikstens.
70
“Youth Identity Establishment and Collaboration. Overview of Research 2005”. Riga, 2005. The research was conducted by the Institute of
Philosophy and Sociology of the University of Latvia. The authors of the research are: R. Rungule, I. Koroļeva, S. Sniķere, I. Trapenciere, M.
Trapencieris, A. Aleksandrovs.
102

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
6. SEGMENTATION OF YOUTH ACTIVITIES – DESCRIPTION OF COLLABORATION FORMS
6.1. Methodology and Process of Segmentation
Segmentation was carried out using cluster method on data about youth participation in different activities
– free time, school and interest groups, cultural and entertaining, social and political activities. After data
processing it was possible to distinguish five statistical segments that group young people with very
similar participation forms into particular segment.
6.2. Overview on Segments
The segements are as follows: 1) passive and 2) active young people; and young people involved in 3)
social activities 4) political activities and in 5) school and interest activities. Each segment is charscterised
by a different social demographic profile, value orientation and interests outside the school.
34% of young people are passive in all types of Figure 30. Youth Activity Segments.
activities (see Figure 30). It doesn’t mean they never
participate anywhere, but the range of activities they Plurilaterally
active
do is very narrow (e.g. limited number of school or 17.4%
Passive
33.5%
cultural and entertaining events) and active
participation is not typical for this group of young
people.
17% of young people are active in all range of Involved in
Involved in social activities
activities – they spend free time in school, social and political 14.9%
political activities and they manage to be equally activities
Involved in
18.7%
successful in studies and in making use of their free school, interest
time. activities
15.5%
49% of young people are active in one of the
identified type of activities: 15% in social and public activities; 16% are active in school events and take
part in interest groups, but 19% of young people are interested in political activities.
6.3. Analytical Descriptions of Segments
6.3.1. Passive Youth
Socio-demographic Description
The passive youth segment is mostly represented by 15-16 and most often 17 years old pupils of
secondary schools, who describe their family as prosperous. There are comparatively more non-latvian
young people, who live outside Riga; as well as young people from bigger families (4 people and more).
Free Time Activities
Free time activities in general are very similar to activities favored by most of young people i.e. seldom
sporting or other active hobbies, but more such activities as watching TV, listening to music, using internet
and doing nothing. It is worth noticing that young people, who belong to this segment, are very active in
communication with their friends and gladly spend their free time together.
103

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
School/ High School Activities
Young people who belong to this segment usually don’t participate in school/ university activities or do any
organising for that. Overall 44% of those youngsters haven’t participated in any school/ university activity
within the last year. Those who have participated in some activities, most often have been taking part in
training Olympiads; have organised entertaining or cultural events or they are members of sports teams.
Interest Group Activities
Like participation in school/ university activities equally rare is participation in the out of school/ university
activities – overall 42% of young people in this segment don’t belong to any interest group or body. Those
who do participate somewhere, say it’s a sports team, a choir or a dance club.
Cultural and Entertainment Activities
Young people who belong to passive segment attend cultural and entertaining events, however in
comparison to other young people they do it much rarely. From cultural and entertaining events they
choose movies, sports competitions (as spectators), museums and theatre. But much less than other
young people they visit pop or classical music concerts, exhibitions and ballet. 4% of passive young
people haven’t been to any cultural or entertaining event during the last year.
Social and Public Activities
50% of passive young people haven’t been involved in any social or public activities during the last year.
¼ have participated in environmental restoration, but any other social activities are indicated by only 5%.
Political Activities
Young people in this segment are very negatively minded against politics and absolute majority (68%)
haven’t showed any political activity during the last four years. They haven’t even talked about political
issues to their relatives and friends. In general, discussions about political topics might be identified as the
only political activity among passive youth. Any other forms of political acitivity have been performed only
by very few people. By the side of social, cultural or free time activities in which passive youngsters show
some activity; politics seem to be of no interest.
Description of Interests
Passive youth comparatively rarely keep up with current events at school and NGOs and they don’t follow
developments in the municipality, country or EU level. Particualrly low interest they show about the work
of public and non-governmental organisations and school events. As a result awareness about different
topical issues and opportunities to participate inter alia is much less.
Information Availability about Participation Possibilities
As mentioned above, these young people are less interested in current events and therefore – they are
less informed. Data on information availability shows that passive youngsters are of the opinion that they
lack information on any kind of activities. Much often than the rest of sample passive youngsters have
pointed that they don’t have information about possibilities to participate in social, non-governmental and
political activities.
Still it must be pointed that lack of information is related to lack of interest in searching for such
information and actual unwillingness to be informed.
Trust in Institutions
There is no big difference between passive youth and other segments in trust issues regarding state,
municipal and non-governmental organisations. Thus the reason for youth passivity cannot be found
among such social factors as distrust in the educational system, politicians (Saeima The Latvian
Parliament, the government) or municipality. Even more – data show more than average trust in the
104

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
European Union, the Prime Minister, the Parliament and the educational system among passive
youngsters.
Description of Opportunities
Reasons for passive participation cannot be found also in limited opportunities, while passive young
people describe their opportunities being almost as wide as the rest of youth does. What differs is the
feeling of fewer opportunities to participate in political decision making, party and NGO work, though these
differences are not significant.
6.3.2. Youth Involved in Social Activities
Socio-demographic Description
Socialy active young people are most of all 15-17 years old but there are few 19-25 years old young
people as well. Male young people of Russian nationality; pupils of primary and secondary schools, who
live outside Riga and in families of 2-5 people, are more involved in social activities. In general socio-
demographic profile of this segment doesn’t differ much form the profile of passive segment, however
there is one significant difference – unlike passive segment they describe their family financial situation as
“not rich, not poor” or even “poor”.
Free Time Activities
Free time activities of these young people are quite similar to other young people. However there are
slightly bigger preference to doing sports, walking, attending events and concerts and to singing and
making music. Comparatively less interest these youngsters show about watching movies, swimming,
taking sunbath, relaxing at nature, and TV watching.
School/ High School Activities
Young people of this segment are very involved in school activities. More often than youth in general, they
participate in school olympiads; they organize entertaining and cultural events and they are members of
sport teams or other interest groups. However unlike the youth in general, socialy active young people are
less involved in social or political events at schools and universities, and they usually don’t take on
responsibilities to be the head of the class.
Interest Group Activities
Socially active young people however are not very involved in different groups of interest. Membership in
sport teams is the only group activity that is more typical for this segment in comparison to the youth in
general. Slightly more often these young people take part also in dance, drama, visual art, photo and fun
clubs.
Cultural and Entertainment Activities
Young people that fall in this segment have attended almost all inquired cultural and entertainment events
(e.g. sport competitions as spectators, museums, exhibitions and theatres) more frequently than the youth
in general.Only exception are classical music concerts and sport competitions (as participants).
Social and Public Activities
This segment is particularly characterised by activities in social and public field. Among most popular
participation forms are: taking care of environment; protecting youth interests; ensuring safety and order in
own locality and - improving situation between Latvians and foreigners. High activity this segment shows
also in voluntary work and help for oldsters. Still helping disable people and in animal protection was
mentioned comparatively rare.
105

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Political Activities
Unlike social activity, political activity is rather low; also if compared to the youth in general. 45% haven’t
participated in any political undertaking during last four years. But approximately 1/3 of these young
people have talked about political issues with their relatives and friends. Thus we may conclude that
politics is not the most relevant issue of interests for these young people.
Description of Interests
Socilay active young people more often than the youth altogether follow the news about local government
and school/ university events, but they are less interested in the work of government; social, no-
governmental organisations and particularly - EU.
Information Availability about Participation Possibilities
Perception of information availability among socialy active young people is quite similar to that of youth in
general. This segment shows just a slightly more negative tendency to think that information on
possibilities to participate in social, non-governmental and political organisations is insufficient. Still it has
to be taken into account that these people are less interested in politics thus acces to such information is
not an issue for them. On the other hand, information on possibilities to join youth organisations, as well
as different interest groups seems fairly accessible.
Trust in Institutions
Socialy active young people show the same trust in institutions as the youth in general. We may observe
somewhat higher trust in the education system, church, local government and youth organisations, but
less they trust the President of Latvia, the Bank of Latvia and the EU.
Description of Opportunities
Young people who belong to this segment assess their opportunities similarly as the youth altogether.
Only the chances to do most enjoyable sports and hobbies and chances to receive valuable heath care
they perceive as more available, but less – chances to participate in work of political parties and political
decision making.
6.3.3. Youth Involved in School, Interest Activities
Socio-demographic Description
Young people at the age between 17-18 years, and also quite often 15-16 years old young people
represent the segment of youth involved in school and interest activities. Among them there are more
girls, of Russian nationality, accordingly to their age group majority of them are pupils of secondary
school, residing outside Riga, young people from families with 4-5 persons and those who describe
financial situation of their family as not rich, not poor.
Free Time Activities
In their free time they enjoy doing sports, spending time with friends, using internet, chatting, attending
events and concerts, as well as watching TV. Very rarely youth involved in school and interest activities
relax at nature, go hiking.
School/ High School Activities
Of course, these young people have participated in some school/ university activities. More frequently
they have organised events (both entertaining and cultural), participated scholastic olympiads and are
members of sports teams. Also these young people quite often are heads of the class/ course, as well as
representatives of the pupil/ student self-government.
106

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Interest Group Activities
Majority of young people of this segment are involved in different interest groups – only 10% have
admitted that they haven’t participated in any interest group. More frequently these young people are
members of sports teams, bands, groups, choirs, drama or dance clubs. Young people involved in school
and interest activities quite seldom are members of photo clubs.
Cultural and Entertainment Activities
Similarly to youth altogether, representatives of this segment also have been active in attending cultural
and entertainment events. However features of this particular segment is observable – more frequently
than youth altogether, young people who are involved in school and interest activities participate in dance
events, sport competitions as participants and as spectators, attended country parks and trails, and
attended theatres, but rarely these young people entertained themselves in clubs.
Social and Public Activities
Representatives of this segment were more passive in taking part in social and public activities – overall
37% have admitted that they haven’t participated in any such activity during the last year. Small part of
these young people have participated in taking care of surrounding environment, but less than 10% of
young people involved in school, interest activities took part in other social activities.
Political Activities
These young people have been less involved in political activities than in social – overall 47% haven’t
participated in any political activities during the last four years. Most frequently the political activities these
young people get involved in are political discussions with their relatives and friends, and small part of
them have met representatives of the local government, the Parliament or the Government.
Description of Interests
Overall these young people are less interested in different current events, on local and global scale. They
have only slightly larger interest in events of their school/ university, while comparatively less interest – in
work of the local government and the State government.
Information Availability about Participation Possibilities
This segment describes information availability positively overall – particularly often these young people
admit that they have available information on possibilities to participate in activities of their school/
university, but they are slightly less informed about possibilities to participate in the work of political
organisations.
Trust in Institutions
While analysing data on trusting in institutions, it is noticeable that youth involved in school, interest
activities express lower trust than other young people, although difference is not significant. They
evaluated comparatively lower trust in the Parliament, labour unions, the President of Latvia, the EU,
Latvian army and the local government. And it must be emphasised that representatives of this segment
don’t trust in any institution more than all youth together.
Description of Opportunities
Youth involved in school and interest activities evaluate their opportunities quite positively. They evaluate
negatively only chances to participate in work of social and non-governmental, youth and political
organisations. Also lower they evaluate chances to take part in political decision-making. And it must be
mentioned that they see negatively the chances to receive valuable health care also. But they evaluated
chances to succeed in their life and to choose a most appealing profession positively.
107

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
6.3.4. Youth Involved in Political Activities
Socio-demographic Description
This segment is represented by mostly young people at the age between 19-25 years old, wherewith they
are students. Comparatively often they are men, Latvians, residing in Riga and who live alone or they are
from big families (5 or more persons), and those who describe their family financial provision as not rich,
and not poor.
Free Time Activities
They are more passive spending free time than youth altogether – comparatively often they choose to do
nothing. Young people involved in political activities comparatively often also read books, magazines,
listen to music, watch movies and make music.
School/ High School Activities
These young people are more passive also in school/ university activities – overall 38% haven’t
participated in any such activity during the last year. The only activity in which they have been more active
than youth overall is working in school/ university newspaper.
Interest Group Activities
44% of youth involved in the political activities are not members of any interest group. Those who
participate in any more frequently choose membership in a sport team, a band or a group, in other
activities they participate very rarely in comparison to other young people.
Cultural and Entertainment Activities
Cultural and entertainment consumption also gives evidence to the fact that the part of this segment lives
in Riga – youth involved in political activities attend exhibitions, entertainment clubs, theatres, museums,
concerts more frequently than youth altogether, but comparatively rarer – sport competitions, dance
events, ballet and circus.
Social and Public Activities
Representatives of this segment are more passive in social and public activities than youth altogether –
comparatively often youth involved in political activities took part in voluntary work, but they participated
considerably rarely in other activities. Comparatively the most rare activities were help for oldsters, as well
as ensuring security and order in own locality.
Political Activities
Contrary to all other young people, representatives of this segment are involved in some kind political
activity. Of course, the most frequent activity was participation in the elections (the Parliament, the local
government and referendum). At the same time these young people were more active in other activities
than others – they have often discussed politics with their relatives and friends, more often met
representatives of the Parliament or Government, frequently had discussions with politicians, and also
have participated in political discussions in the internet and have participated in the political
demonstrations.
Description of Interests
Of course, interests of these young people are characterised by their inurnment of actualities of the local
government, Government, the EU. At the same time, youth involved in political activities have slightly
lower interest in own school/ university actualities. It must be remarked, that these young people are very
interested in work of the government.
108

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Information Availability about Participation Possibilities
Overall youth involved in political activities value their possession of information as middling – of course,
although comparatively larger part of these young people give positive assessment to availability of
information about how to participate in the work of political, non-governmental and social organisation, still
other information (on possibilities to participate in the work of the local government, youth organisations,
also in own school/ university activities) availability is marked lower.
Trust in Institutions
An interesting fact is that these young people don’t have much trust in state and local government
institutions. Exception is only the President of Latvia, to whom they express their trust more frequently as
youth altogether. It is noticeable that youth involved in political activities comparatively rarer express their
trust to the system of education, church and the EU. It must be emphasised, that overall expressed
attitude of this segment towards the state institutions is neither positive, nor negative. Possibly that means
that activities of these young people cannot be connected with the positive attitude towards the state
power, but rather these activities should be evaluated as expression of the opinion of the civil society
(participation in elections as realisation of duty, expressing own political position, opinion as realisation of
own rights etc).
Description of Opportunities
Youth involved in political activities value their opportunities in studied aspects similarly as youth
altogether. Of course, differences are observable in those aspects connected with chances to participate
in different kind of political, non-governmental and social organisations – representatives of this segment
assess more that kind of opportunities than youth altogether. At the same time there are aspects that
these young people evaluated their opportunities lower than others – a chance to receive valuable health
care, to choose most appealing profession, and to do most enjoyable sports.
6.3.5. Plurelaterally Active Youth
Socio-demographic Description
Plurilaterally young people are mostly at the age between 19 and 25, but in this segment 18 years old
young people are also often included. More often they are girls, of Latvian nationality. As in the segment
of youth involved in political activities, there are also comparatively often university students. Often they
are from Riga, from families with 2-3 members or more than 5, and those who describe their family
financial provision as prosperous.
Free Time Activities
These young people are very active in their free time – they enjoy sports, rest in nature, walking, dancing
and playing music, singing. At the same time they gladly read books, magazines and watch movies. More
rare than others they use internet, listen to music or do nothing.
School/ High School Activities
Plurilaterally active young people are involved also in school/ university activities as well – they very often
participate in organising different entertainment and cultural, social and political events, participate in
scholastic olympiads, are members of pupil/ student councils and self-governments. Overall only 1% of
this segment doesn’t participate in any school/ university activities.
Interest Group Activities
Participation in the interest groups is also very active among these people – only 3% are not involved in
any of those. They are very active in dance clubs; also comparatively more often than youth altogether
these young people are members of sports teams, drama clubs, choirs, bands or groups, as well as photo
and visual art clubs.
109

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Cultural and Entertainment Activities
Of course, all plurilaterally active young people attend cultural and entertainment events. More often than
youth altogether they have attended exhibitions, museums, popular music concerts, theatres, as well as
country parks, trails, classical music concerts and dance events. Overall these young people are very
active in entertainment and culture consumption and have attended several events during the last year.
Social and Public Activities
As in other activities, representatives of this segment have been active in participating in social and public
activities – all plurilaterally active young people have been involved in at least one social or public activity.
Comparatively to youth altogether considerably more often plurilaterally active young people have
participated in voluntary work, in protection of youth interests, in improving situation between Latvians and
foreigners, as well as in helping young people and children that got into difficulties. But they participated
very actively also in all other activities that were enclosed in questionnaire.
Political Activities
All plurilaterally active young people were active also in political activities. Comparing to youth altogether,
representatives of this segment more frequently have met representatives of the local government. They
were very active also in discussing politics with relatives and friends. Very common political activity
among representatives of this segment was also meeting representatives of the Parliament or the
government and discussions with politicians. Interesting is that participation in elections and referendums
is slightly lower in this segment comparing to youth involved in political activities.
Description of Interests
Taking into account that these young people are active in free time, cultural, school, political and social
activities, they, of course, are very interested about actualities of their surroundings, as well as actualities
of state and world. Plurilaterally active people are more interested in non-governmental and social
organisation work, as well as actualities of own local government than all youth together.
Information Availability about Participation Possibilities
Representatives of this segment valued very positively information availability on participation possibilities.
Comparatively the most positive value was given to information availability about possibilities to
participate in work of NGOs and political organisations. More than a half of these young people think that
they are very well informed about possibilities to participate in the work of their local government.
Trust in Institutions
Although indicators of trust in different institutions don’t differ much from those of youth altogether, still
overall data shows that plurilaterally active young people have more positive attitude towards various
institutions and comparatively frequently they have expressed their trust almost to every institution
concerned in the research. Representatives of this segment expressed their trust to non-governmental
organisations and the local government comparatively more than others.
Description of Opportunities
Plurilaterally active young people evaluated their opportunities very optimistically – they assess their
chances higher in almost every aspect enclosed in the study than youth altogether. Only exception was a
chance to receive valuable health care, comparatively few plurilaterally active young people were sure
about that. It is noticeable that these young people are most certain about their chances to participate in
different institutions – youth, non-governmental, social and political organisations.
110

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
6.4. Graphical Description of Segments
% Figure 31. Socio-Demographic Description.
17.2
22.9
15-16 y ears 27.8 ALL
19.8
1.6
11.5 Passiv e
37.9
48.6 Inv olv ed in social activ ities
17 y ears 48.5
42.6
13.1
31.0 Inv olv ed in school, interest activ ities
AGE
23.0
22.0 Inv olv ed in political activ ities
18 y ears 17.5
27.7
23.8 Plurilaterally activ e
24.8
21.8
6.4
19-25 y ears 6.2
9.9
61.5
32.7
35.7
37.9
Male 38.5
31.3
38.8
GENDER
29.7
64.3
62.1
Female 61.5
68.7
61.2
70.3
69.7
67.0
64.9
NATIONALITY
Latv ian 59.4
82.0
75.2
30.3
33.0
Russian, other 35.1
40.6
18.0
24.8
2.8
2.8
Primary school 4.1
4.0
0.8
2.7
78.5
EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION
92.7
Secondary school 92.8
88.1
40.2
71.7
17.2
4.6
High school 2.1
7.9
53.3
23.9
0.8
0.0
Vocational school 0.0
0.0
3.3
0.9
0.8
0.0
Don't study 1.0
0.0
2.5
0.9
12.6
9.2
Riga 4.1
8.9
DOMICILE
23.8
17.7
87.4
90.8
Outside Riga 95.9
91.1
76.2
82.3
1.6
0.9
1 person 1.0
0.0
4.1
1.8
31.6
29.2
34.4
FAMILY SIZE
2-3 persons 31.3
31.4
34.2
55.9
58.0
4-5 persons 57.3
62.6
51.2
49.5
11.0
11.8
More than 5 7.3
6.1
13.2
14.4
51.7
57.3
Rich 49.5
46.4
FAMILY FINANCIAL
41.0
59.1
PROVISION
45.0
38.9
Not rich, not poor 46.3
50.5
56.6
38.2
3.3
3.8
Poor 4.2
3.1
2.5
2.7
111

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Figure 32. Description of Free Time Activities.
%
48.1
Spending time with friends 50.0
47.4
(talking, walking etc.) 52.5
42.6
46.9
34.7
27.1
Doing sports 36.1
46.5
34.4
38.1
23.0
24.3
Walking 26.8
21.8
22.1
19.5
ALL
16.6
17.9 Passive
Doing nothing 14.4
15.8
22.1 Involved in social activities
10.6
14.1 Involved in school, interest activities
9.6
Reading books, newspapers 15.5 Involved in political activities
12.9
19.7 Plurilaterally active
16.8
13.2
11.9
Relaxing at nature, hiking 11.3
8.9
12.3
22.1
10.4
11.5
Swimming, taking sunbaths 8.2
11.9
9.0
10.6
10.4
12.8
Using internet, chatting 10.3
12.9
7.4
7.1
10.0
7.3
Attending events, concerts 12.4
11.9
11.5
9.7
9.5
10.6
Listening music 9.3
8.9
11.5
6.2
9.1
6.9
Dancing 7.2
10.9
8.2
14.2
8.0
9.6
Watching TV 6.2
9.9
4.9
8.0
6.3
5.0
Watching movies 3.1
6.9
9.8
7.1
5.7
5.0
Travelling 6.2
5.9
8.2
3.5
4.9
1.4
Singing, making music 7.2
3.0
7.4
8.8
112

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
% Figure 33. Description of School/ High School Activities.
36.7
14.2
I have participated in organisation of entertaining events in school/ 45.4
high school 58.4
28.7
61.9
33.8
17.4
I have participated in olympiad (school, district, city etc.) 41.2
51.5
23.0
54.9
29.6
9.6
I have partipated in organisation of cultural events in school/high 36.1
school 46.5
18.0
60.2
18.3
10.1
27.8
I am a member of sports team of school/ high school 36.6
5.7
23.0
14.4
3.7
21.6
I am a member of amateur group of school/ high school 22.8
4.1
32.7
13.1
3.2
I have participated in organisation of social and/ or political events 10.3
in school/ high school 13.9
9.8
37.2
12.9
1.4
I am a representative of pupil/ student self-government, council 12.4
21.8
8.2
32.7
9.4 ALL
4.1
6.2 Passive
I am a head of class/ course 16.8
5.7 Involved in social activities
19.5
6.3 Involved in school, interest activities
1.8
I am a workman of school/ high schhol newspaper 5.2 Involved in political activities
6.9
9.0 Plurilaterally active
12.4
23.3
43.6
10.3
Haven’t participated 0.0
37.7
0.9
113

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Figure 34. Description of Interest Group Activities.
%
34.9
23.4
Sports team 47.4
48.5
22.1
47.8
17.8
10.1
Dance club 19.6
23.8
4.9
39.8
9.7
4.1
Drama club 11.3 ALL
15.8
2.5
21.2 Passive
15.2
10.6 Involved in social activities
Choir 15.5
20.8 Involved in school, interest activities
6.6
28.3 Involved in political activities
11.1
2.8 Plurilaterally active
Band, group 9.3
17.8
9.8
23.9
6.8
1.8
9.3
Visual art club 9.9
0.8
17.7
5.1
1.8
Photo club 7.2
4.0
1.6
14.2
6.6
4.1
Fan club 10.3
6.9
1.6
13.3
8.0
Other informal interest, friend 6.4
8.2
group 8.9
6.6
11.5
11.7
6.0
Other interest group 11.3
11.9
9.0
25.7
26.0
42.2
Haven’t participated 10.3
9.9
44.3
2.7
114

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Figure 35. Description of Cultural and Entertainment Activities.
%
67.3
60.1
Cinema 70.1
74.3
69.7
69.9
65.6
47.2
Museum 72.2
68.3
73.0
85.0
62.4
44.0
Theatre 68.0
69.3
71.3
77.0
57.1
50.9
Sport competition as spectator 66.0
65.3
53.3
58.4
57.0
40.8
Country park, trail 63.9
64.4
61.5
70.8
53.3
28.9
Exhibition 60.8
57.4
67.2
75.2
53.3
42.7
Events in club 58.8
49.5
63.1
61.9
44.2
27.1
Popular music concert 47.4
50.5
48.4
64.6
35.6
28.9
Sport competition as participant 34.0
52.5
32.0
38.9
35.0
Dance event (competition, 24.3
39.2
show) 53.5
23.8
47.8
15.5
6.9
Classical music concert 11.3
17.8
13.9
35.4
15.5
10.6 ALL
Circus 18.6
16.8
13.1 Passive
23.9
14.0 Involved in social activities
8.7
Opera 14.4 Involved in school, interest activities
12.9
15.6
23.0 Involved in political activities
8.3
3.7 Plurilaterally active
Ballet 9.3
8.9
5.7
18.6
1.5
4.1
Haven't attended 0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
115

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
% Figure 36. Description of Social and Public Activities.
35.9
25.7
Taking care of surrounding 66.0
environment 22.8
29.5
48.7
21.4
6.4
Voluntary work 33.0
8.9
22.1
50.4
20.4
2.8
Protecting youth interests 45.4
7.9
18.0
46.9
15.7
5.5
Support, help for oldsters 32.0
5.9
11.5
34.5
15.1
Ensuring safety and order in 6.4
36.1
own locality 6.9
9.0
27.4
13.2 ALL
4.6
Support, help for young people 22.7
5.9 Passive
and children in trouble 12.3
29.2 Involved in social activities
10.9
1.8 Involved in school, interest activities
Improving situation between 26.8
Latvians and foreigners 0.0 Involved in political activities
7.4
28.3 Plurilaterally active
8.8
5.5
Animal protection 11.3
4.0
6.6
19.5
6.3
1.4
Support, help for disabled 8.2
people 2.0
4.1
20.4
2.3
0.5
Support, help for poor countries 8.2
0.0
0.8
4.4
27.5
50.0
Haven’t participated 0.0
36.6
27.0
0.0
116

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Figure 37. Description of Political Activities.
%
34.6
16.5
Discuss politics regularly with relatives, friends 33.0
26.7
52.5
58.4
18.6
2.3
Have met representatives of local government 6.2
8.9
37.7
48.7
18.3
4.1
Voted in Parliament elections 5.2
5.0
55.7
28.3
15.2
0.9
Voted in local government elections 4.1
3.0
51.6
23.9
12.1
1.8
Have met representatives of Parliament, government 1.0
8.9
26.2
29.2
10.0
0.9
Participated in referendum 0.0
4.0
32.8
16.8
9.7
1.4
Participated in discussions with politicians 0.0
2.0
26.2
23.0
8.4
2.8 ALL
Participate regularly in political discussions in internet 5.2
3.0
15.6 Passive
19.5
7.4 Involved in social activities
0.9
Have participated in political demonstrations 2.1
4.0 Involved in school, interest activities
13.9
20.4 Involved in political activities
5.7
Have written articles about politics for school/ high school or local 0.0 Plurilaterally active
1.0
newspaper 2.0
8.2
21.2
5.4
Have participated in political non-governmental or social 0.0
2.1
organisation 0.0
7.4
21.2
3.5
0.0
Have participated in political party 1.0
2.0
6.6
10.6
2.0
0.0
Have written articles about politics for state scale newspaper 0.0
0.0
2.5
8.8
36.9
68.3
Haven’t participated 45.4
46.5
0.0
0.0
117

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
% Figure 38. Description of Interests.
68.2
61.5
Events of own school/ 73.2
high school 70.3
68.0
75.2
44.1
36.2
Work of government of 38.1
Latvia 29.7
60.7
59.3
38.4 ALL
28.4
Work of own local 41.2
31.7 Passive
government
43.4
55.8 Involved in social activities
37.8
Work of different social and 25.7 Involved in school, interest
non-governmental 35.1
34.7 activities
organisations 42.6 Involved in political activities
61.1
33.3 Plurilaterally active
30.3
Events of European Union 20.6
31.7
39.3
45.1
% Figure 39. Description of Information Availability About Participation Possibilities.
91.1
88.5
Activities of own school/ high 90.7
school 97.0
89.3
92.9
82.8
82.1
Activities of youth interest 90.7
groups, clubs 82.2
73.8
87.6
70.4
66.1
Work of youth social 74.2
organisations 69.3
68.0
78.8
43.2
36.7
49.5
Work of own local government 45.5 ALL
37.7
54.0 Passive
41.6
28.4 Involved in social activities
Work of non-governmental and 38.1
social organisations 44.6 Involved in school, interest activities
51.6
56.6 Involved in political activities
26.6
22.9 Plurilaterally active
Work of religious organisations 30.9
27.7
24.6
31.0
20.9
12.4
Work of political organisations 15.5
14.9
34.4
32.7
118

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Figure 40. Description of Trusting in Institutions.
Average in scale 1'Have no trust ' to 5 'Have absolute trust'
3.48
3.31
3.65
Youth organisations 3.50
3.48
3.65
3.45
3.41
Bank of Latvia 3.39
3.31
3.57
3.58
3.35
3.22
President of Latvia 3.21
3.30
3.66
3.42
3.33
3.38
Education system 3.47
3.33
3.21
3.26
3.19
3.25
3.10
European Union 3.06
3.16
3.31
3.16
3.11
Church 3.34
3.23
3.01
3.20
3.15
3.13
Latvian army 3.27
3.01
3.29
3.09
3.12
3.00
3.22
Local government 3.03
3.18
3.29
3.04
2.98
State institutions 3.02
3.02
3.14
3.09
3.01
2.80
Non-governmental 3.07
organisations 2.93
3.20
3.23
2.98
2.98
Court system 3.07
2.97
2.95
2.97
2.98
2.95
Police 2.99
2.96
2.96
3.08
2.76
2.72
2.83
Labour union 2.61
2.87
2.79
ALL
2.67
2.71
2.64 Passive
Prime Minister 2.58
2.71 Involved in social activities
2.67
2.50 Involved in school, interest activities
2.52
2.54 Involved in political activities
Parliament 2.38
2.63 Plurilaterally active
2.39
119

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
% Figure 41. Description of Opportunities.
77.0
72.5
Chance to achiev e success 81.4
in life 75.2
77.9
82.3
72.5
66.5
Chance to fulfil ow n interests 79.4
69.3
72.1
81.4
71.3
68.8
Chance to choose most 74.2
appealing profession 72.3
67.2
77.0
70.4
73.9
Chance to do most 76.3
enjoy able sports 67.3
57.4
75.2
68.8
66.1
Chance to do most disirable 81.4
hobbies 64.4
63.1
73.5
67.4
63.3
Chance to achiev e financial 73.2
success in life 56.4
73.0
74.3
65.3
64.7
Chance to spend free time 69.1
as I w ish 65.3
61.5
67.3
64.7
61.0
Chance to get education as I 71.1
w ish 64.4
63.1
68.1
62.7
64.2
Chance to attend cultural 68.0
ev ents as I w ish 56.4
59.8
63.7
55.3
45.0
Chance to participate in 56.7
y outh organisation w ork 43.6
64.8
74.3
54.7
58.7
Chance to receiv e v aluable 68.0
health care 45.5
48.4
50.4
45.3
Chance to participate in 31.2
43.3
social and non-gov ernmental 35.6
organisation w ork 56.6
70.8
26.9
Chance to participate in 22.0
14.4 ALL
political organisation, party 15.8
w ork 40.2 Passive
42.5
Involved in social activities
19.7
16.5 Involved in school, interest activities
Chance to participate in 19.6
political decision making 13.9 Involved in political activities
20.5
30.1 Plurilaterally active
120

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
7. FACTORS AFFECTING ACTIVITY
7.1. Opinion of Youth on Factors that Contribute and Obstruct the Participation
Factors Contributing Participation
About 1/3 youth had difficulties to identify specific reasons that motivated their peers to participate (see
Figure 42) but the persons who mentioned particular arguments, most frequently referred the desire of
youth to change the existing situation, dissatisfaction with the existing situation (20%). It is necessary to
add that the youth very often comprehend any kind of activities (also social and public) as involvement in
politics, wherewith on the one hand giving them negative emotional background, on the other hand
demonstrating that there is no understanding on versatile possibilities of social and public activities among
the youth.
% Figure 42. In Youth Opinion, Reasons that Motivate to Participate in Social,
Public and Political Activities.
Desire to change existing situation, dissatisfaction
19.5
with existing situation
For learning something new, getting experience 18.4
For spending time excitimgly 16.7
For expressing own opinion 10.3
Interest on politics 10.1
Chance to meet new friends 9.2
Chance to earn 7.7
Influence of friends who already are involved in
5.2
such activities
Chance to be with like-minded fellows 4.5
Nothing to do else 4.1
Chance to help 4.1
Concern about society, Latvia, peers 4.0
Career opportunities 3.7
Other 16.9
Hard to say 31.8
18% have mentioned possibilities to get experience and to learn something new as an essential
motivation for the participation, but 17% pointed at the participation as an interesting possibility to spend
time. About 1/10 considers that the possibility to express their opinion and to meet new friends, as well as
their interest in politics (that once more confirms that the involvement is primarily associated with politics)
motivates their participation.
Different socio-demographic differences are observed (see Table 25). Participation as value of
entertainment, leisure time spending is observed among 15-16 years old young people, while 18-25 years
old young people comparatively more frequently see participation as social value – desire to change, help,
achieve, meet like-minded fellows. Latvian youth comparatively more often comprehend the participation
as entertainment and spending time, whilst the participation is more social action for the Russian youth.
Similar differences are also observed in regional cut: youth living in Riga comprehend the participation as
an interesting spending time, a chance to get new friends, as well as career opportunity, whilst the youth
living outside Riga motivate it more as a desire to change the existing situation and interest in politics.
121

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Table 25. In Youth Opinion, Reasons that Motivate to Participate in Social, Public and Political Activities
AGE NATIONALITY DOMICILE
Russian, Outside
15-16 17 18 19-25 Latvian Riga
% other Riga
Desire to change the existing situation, dissatisfaction
14.3 20.2 22.0 19.7 18.9 20.8 12.2 20.6
with the existing situation
For learning something new, getting experience 17.0 15.8 16.7 26.1 22.7 8.6 23.2 17.8
For spending time excitingly 22.3 16.6 12.0 17.6 20.7 7.6 25.6 15.5
For expressing own opinion 5.4 10.5 9.3 14.8 11.9 6.6 14.6 9.7
Interest on politics 8.9 9.3 9.3 13.4 10.8 8.6 9.8 10.2
Chance to meet new friends 8.9 6.5 6.7 16.9 11.2 4.6 17.1 8.1
Chance to earn 6.3 6.9 11.3 6.3 7.3 8.6 8.8
Influence of friends who already are involved in such
6.3 4.0 4.0 7.7 5.7 4.1 6.1 5.1
activities
Chance to be with like-minded fellows 2.7 1.6 4.0 11.3 4.8 3.6 11.0 3.5
Nothing to do else 3.6 4.9 4.0 3.5 3.7 5.1 6.1 3.9
Chance to help 5.4 2.4 4.7 5.6 5.1 2.0 3.7 4.2
Concern about society, Latvia, peers 5.4 2.4 3.3 6.3 4.4 3.0 2.4 4.2
Career opportunities 2.7 1.6 3.3 8.5 4.6 1.5 8.5 3.0
Other 17.9 15.4 16.0 19.7 20.3 9.1 23.2 16.0
TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
These data largely relate to the results of the survey conducted by the Institute of Philosophy and
Sociology of the University of Latvia in 200371. It was inquired about reasons for participation of youth
particularly in the youth organizations and the following main reasons were identified: broadening of view
and knowledge, possibility to meet like-minded fellows, possibility to obtain contacts, possibility for self-
acknowledgement, as well as a good way to spend free time.
Factors Obstructing Participation
The youth were asked to name also the reasons that obstruct the participation of youth at different
activities and there the opinion of youth is much more unified (see Figure 43): lack of interest (36%), lack
of information (27%) and lack Figure 43. In Youth Opinion, Reasons that Demotivate to Participate in Social,
%
of time (19%) are three main Public and Political Activities.
identified obstacle for
Lack of interest 35.5
participation.
Lack of information 26.9
It is interesting that a Lack of time 19.2
comparatively large part – 13% Laziness 12.7
of youth have mentioned
Fair to participate, to express own opinion 9.4
laziness of contemporaries as
an obstacle. Despite the fact Lack of faith to change something 6.5
that modern youth very Involved in other activities (clubs, discotheques etc.) 6.3
frequently is associated with
Distrust in organisations, activities 5.8
greater venture and
exploitation of possibilities, Have no chance to participate 4.1
though 9% of the respondents Shyness 3.4
consider that the youth pretty Other 19.0
often are afraid to participate
Hard to say 30.4
and to express their opinion.
71
„Role of Youth Public Organisations in Implementing State Youth Policy”, the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the University of
Latvia, Riga, 2003.
122

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Only after these factors follow the reasons like – distrust to organizations (6%), lack of faith that it is
possible to achieve something (7%), lack of possibilities (4%). 6% of youth have also mentioned such an
essential aspect as availability of other type of spending leisure time (music clubs, discotheques etc) that
is more attractive for the youth as political, social or public activities – social, public and political activities
compete with entertainment and cultural events on the leisure time of youth.
Few differences of the social-demographic groups are observed identifying obstacles for participation (see
Table 26): other possibilities to spend the leisure time are comparatively more frequently mentioned as an
obstacle in Riga, as well as a greater lack of faith to achieve something is expressed.
Table 26. In Youth Opinion, Reasons that Demotivate to Participate in Social, Public and Political Activities.
AGE NATIONALITY DOMECILE
Russian, Outside
15-16 17 18 19-25 Latvian Riga
% other Riga
Lack of interest 29.5 33.2 35.3 44.4 40.1 24.9 40.2 34.8
Lack of information 25.0 21.1 24.0 41.5 32.6 13.7 30.5 26.4
Lack of time 16.1 19.0 15.3 26.1 21.8 13.2 22.0 18.8
Laziness 11.6 11.3 14.0 14.8 16.1 5.1 17.1 12.1
Fair to participate, to express own opinion 4.5 11.7 9.3 9.2 11.2 5.1 12.2 9.0
Lack of faith that to achieve something 8.0 4.9 5.3 9.2 7.3 4.6 11.0 5.8
Involved in other activities (clubs,
5.4 6.9 2.7 9.9 7.7 3.0 13.4 5.3
discotheques etc)
Distrust to organizations, activities 0.0 4.5 10.7 7.7 7.3 2.5 6.1 5.8
Have no chance to participate 3.6 4.9 4.0 3.5 4.8 2.5 3.7 4.2
Shyness 5.4 2.0 4.7 2.8 3.7 2.5 1.2 3.7
Other 26.8 17.8 16.0 18.3 19.6 17.8 23.2 18.5
No answer 36.6 35.2 31.3 16.2 20.9 52.3 20.7 31.8
TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
The sociologist B.Zepa conclude in her research on political participation 72 that a low trust to own political
impact, dissatisfaction with the results of political activity, reduced assessment of own political awareness,
as well as lack of positive democratic experience remarkably impede the participation.
7.2. Opinion of Experts on Factors that Contribute and Obstruct the Participation
Factors Contributing Participation
Analyzing opinions of the interviewed experts, it is observed that they are similar to viewpoint of youth in
some aspects. Both youth, and experts indicate the following factors contributing the participation:
possibilities to affect the existing situation, to change things that do not satisfy youth, an exiting idea,
purposes of participation, possibilities to spend leisure time, as well as impact of friends. The experts also
mention various additional conditions that explain why the youth take part gladly at different initiatives.
An Interesting and Exiting Idea
Both the youth and experts indicate that ideas, purposes and directions of activity of the specific initiatives
and organizations are an essential motivation for participation. If they are exiting for the youth they take
part actively. Besides that they may seem exiting either in practical sense (issues that are actual for youth
are tackled) or in „decorative” sense (participation as stylish behavior, participation as a „scream” of vogue
etc). „The main idea is the principal interest. If he goes to that place and understands that the idea has
soil, then he stays there.” (YO) „They participate if it affects them personally. If it is not a pending matter
for then the youth are not able to mobilize themselves.” (PA).
72
B. Zepa (red.) „Political Collaboration Conductive Circumstances in Latvia”, Baltic Data House, Riga, 1999.
123

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Prospective Gains
Not only the idea is important for the youth but also actual gains which they obtain while participating. On
the one hand it is important to see the results of one’s work: „If a specific improvement is achieved in the
area interesting for youth while participating, it is certainly they are ready to participate in future, too”
(YAC). On the other hand, participation in different organizations provides also practical gains to the youth
themselves – possibilities to travel, to take part at different conferences, seminars, working groups, to get
acquainted with new friends and to make useful social contacts in further career. In the first case one
must talk more about emotional gains, in the second case – on material gains. Pedagogues and parents
often indicate that only material values prevail for the modern youth, though it must be taken into
consideration that most frequently the youth have no experience that would confirm that emotional gains
sometimes are more essential and also more pleasant than material ones. Consequently the experience
of participation is an essential contributor for involvement. These young people that have participated are
able to value it and to argument it for the passive youth.
Possibilities to Spend Leisure Time
One of the most important motivations is possibility to spend leisure time. If the particular initiative or
organization offers the ways of spending leisure time which to young people seem equally interesting with
entertaining activities, then the possibilities that young people will participate are rather large. At the same
time the experts indicate that the participation renders to young people a possibility to adapt oneself in
informal groups of like-minded fellows and to experience belonging to some interest groups that is a
significant factor of psychological comfort. „ The first thing is that they can divert themselves, they have
something to do – possibilities to participate, to get acquainted with the youth from other districts. Besides
there is a possibility to spend leisure time in another way, to obtain belonging to the group.” (YO) „The
primary thing is the leisure time, hangouts, outdoor activities, to be together with friends.” (YO)
Identification and Public Image of Organizations and Clubs
One of the most essential factors that influence the readiness of youth to participate is identification of
specific organizations, informal groups, initiatives and projects. The youth more willingly participate in the
activities about which they have heard something in mass media or from friends. Various experts have
pointed out that „if there is no identification and awareness, then, of course, the youth will be more inert
because getting involved in an unknown organization, he cannot boast to friends that he is a partner at
some known project” (YO). On the one hand it degrades to a certain level the significance and purposes
of participation because it makes the organizations to advertise themselves, to „sell” their ideas to attract
the youth to participate. Though on the other hand separate examples prove that it is possible to combine
successful public image and successful social work of the organization. As the most glaring example it
must be mentioned the public organization „Avantis”, which simultaneously has been able to make a
positive and identifiable public image and launched many projects for youth. Consequently the
organizations, youth clubs and separate initiatives and projects should take into consideration peculiarities
of perception of youth – the idea of participation must not only be useful but it has to be also presented
appropriately at the public space. Popularizing youth activities and possibilities of participation, it should
be taken into account that the youth get involved gladly if they consider some activity as modern, popular
and stylish. Therefore popularizing some activities one must take into consideration not only the
informative function (to inform youth) but also before mentioned aspect (activities have to correspond to
the values of youth). „The youth participate because they have heard something about the particular
organization; its public image has influence.” (YO) „Awareness, identification of organization and
successfully launched projects. If they have appeared in mass media, it attracts attention.” (PA)
124

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Support of Family
The interviewed experts, especially YAC and young employees, indicate that family has an important role
in the readiness of youth to participate - more the family supports active participation, the larger is the
possibility that youth will get involved. Teachers very often express opinion that the values and viewpoints
taught in the family define the interest of youth. Wherewith an essential aspect is not only activation and
involvement of youth but in secondary sense promotion of understanding of family and parents on gains
and advantages of the participation of youth. „We have dynasties of families – the older sister or brother
leaves the organization and the younger one comes in his/her place. If there are four children in a family
and the younger one is still small – in the sixth class, then other three ones are with us.” (YO))
Influence of Friends
Family is as important authority group as friends. The youth have the biggest motivation to participate in
case the informal youth leader, whose activities affect also the interests of other youth, participates at the
particular organization or project. A significant factor that promotes the participation of youth are also
friends and acquaintances who are already involved in the organization – if a young person has personal
communication with the organization from the story of friends about work of organization then there is a
bigger possibility that he will participate himself. Therefore exactly informal, personal contacts of young
people – one member of the organization involves the next ones, should be mentioned as one of the most
influential ways of attracting the youth. But also an obstacle should be taken into consideration regarding
this type of recruiting: attracting only his/her friends and acquaintances the organization may change into
a group of friends where the other youth have difficulties to participate. Youth themselves have indicated
in interviews and group discussions that „very often there are only one’s own people and who would like
to go and interfere them” (FGD, active), „I do not know any one at these organizations, it seems to me
that everybody has already become friends a long time ago and do not want to accept other ones” (FGD,
passive), „when I attended this club, everybody looked at me with suspicions, and did not aloud to
participate everywhere” (FGD, active).
Attitude of Adults
It is not an essential reason that would promote the wish of youth to participate, though it can significantly
impact the readiness to continue the participation. As the interviewed experts indicate it is important for
youth to see and feel that the adults who are involved in the specific activities perceive them as equals. It
refers to the specific activity of organization, as well as politicians in municipalities and also in government
to whom the youth address their requests. “If young person meets a person who understands and helps
then everything happens. If someone comes and says to you: “I have no time!” then you do not come for
the second time.” (YO) Secondly, it is important at what degree the youth have possibilities to fulfill their
ideas, to be actual copartners, not only performers of small works under the control of adults. “It is
essential for them to see that adults perceive them seriously, permits to participate themselves and to do
something, not only to control and push them.” (YAC)
Work Experience
It more refers to the voluntary work, though participation in different organizations is some kind of the first
work experience of young people where they learn definite social, also professional skills that may prove
useful in the further career. The experts indicate it as an essential motivation that could promote the
participation of youth in voluntary work or in the organizations that perform any social initiatives. Though it
is essentially to attain legal regulation in order it would be possible to declare the activities of youth as
work experience. Simultaneously these gains in a personal sense may be very significant factor of
attraction for youth. “We have to show to youth that the participation may give them an essential
experience that can be applied in the further working life, formation of career. Participation in different
organizations is not only an entertainment; it is a serious work that permits to learn some good skills,
which could even help to find a job. Unfortunately the youth do not perceive and value it that way.” (YO)
125

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Factors Obstructing Participation
Similarly as the factors contributing participation the opinion of experts and youth largely coincide in the
analyses of the factors obstructing participation – both youth themselves and the interviewed experts have
named as the most important reasons that impede the participation of youth the following: laziness, fear to
participate, fear to express own opinion, shyness.
Lack of Interest
Lack of interest is one of the most important obstacles of the development of participation – both the
interviewed experts and youth themselves indicate it, hereto in Riga and other biggest cities, as well as in
regions and in countryside. The wide range of entertainment offers (cinema, concerts, theaters,
entertainment parks) basically creates disinterest in Riga, while – social and financial problems of family in
countryside. At the same time other reasons should be mentioned which may create passive attitude of
youth to the participation – the experts frequently name as an important one the too large study load, the
too long school days (when lessons finish only after 16.00 p.m.) “We living at the countryside must also
follow how much time they actually have – if a pupil leaves the school at late afternoon, he has to get
home in another parish, then there is already evening and night and there is no time for other activities.”
(YAC) “ However it seems to me that the study load is to large for them and it kills interest to do
something in addition.” (SW) “Until five o’clock they study! They certainly want to sit quietly and to drink
tea, to talk about things that they are interested in, not to run from the school to some Europe’s day and to
leap again. I think that it is some kind of modern exhaustion. Children are exhausted, adults are
exhausted.” (YO) “The youth of Riga are choosy regarding different entertainments, they even do not
think that they could do something more reasonable than to entertain themselves.” (YO)
Lack of Information
Almost all the interviewed experts have indicated the fact that the youth often have no information about
things where and how they could get involved and it also directly impedes the actual readiness to do
something. “There is some system but the information is not channeled and the youth does not know.”
(PA) the information accessibility issue has to be mentioned as especially actual in regional cut – the
experts more often refer to the accessibility of information as an essential obstacle of participation outside
big cities. First, there is more limited accessibility to internet at regions and especially in countryside (not
all families have a computer with internet connection) that is the main information source for the modern
youth. Second, young people do not know what possibilities offer the closest cities and parishes; they are
only informed about the possibilities of participation of their domicile. „Different public organizations must
be drawn in a competition on distribution of information in the regions. Projects on the topic „Youth and
Their Possibilities” must be presented. This work is also done by public sectors but it is not sufficient.”
(YO)
The worker of the social risk groups also highlight the accessibility of information as an essential issue:
„Exactly the youth of social risk groups – they formally have accessibility to information but it does not
reach the final purpose, the youth himself, who wonders around the streets. The organizations that work
with children of risk groups lack staff – volunteers, who would be informants. The human resources are
required, who would work exactly on streets. A campaign was launched during the Soviet times when the
youth themselves walked down the streets and talked with so called juvenile delinquents and invited to
different activities. We need people who inform youth on the possibilities to spend time. They themselves
are not interesting about it because they think that they have not many possibilities.” (YO)
Likewise the experts indicate not only to the accessibility of information but also on its content – formal,
„dry” information is often accessible that does not create to youth neither view about the particular
possibilities nor wish to participate: „Maybe there is lack of information about the things each organization
is engaged. It is written „youth club” but what exactly the organization is occupied with it is not always
clear.” (YO) Consequently the information has to be where the youth is, not where the youth can found it.
126

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Information related to youth is mainly not accessible in Russian; therefore the Russian youth frequently
remain outside the information net.
As indicate the youth affairs coordinators the information on youth matters is immense in internet. There
are several internet portals that render similar information. Such fragmentation of information impacts the
level of awareness of youth on different matters related to youth issues. Besides the experts indicate that
representatives of different organizations mainly use these kinds of web pages (for example, NYCL web
page etc.), not the „line” youth. “Sometimes even we do not understand anything in these different web
pages, not speaking about young people. Beside that they do not have patience to search something – if
it is not at the first layout none will dig deeper.” (YAC)
Personal Features
The experts frequently indicate to the personal features of youth that impede their participation in some
activities. More often as the main reason why the youth are passive in different out-of-school activities is
indicated laziness (the youth themselves have recognized it). However more detailed reasons must be
searched there why the young people are lazy to do something because it has some psychological or
social reasons (for instance, the large study load that was already mentioned that results in wish of young
people not to participate actively anywhere but to stay at home and to rest doing nothing). Similarly the
interviewed experts indicate that frequently exaggerated shyness is characteristic for young people, even
fear to express own opinion in public, the possible condemnation of friends for getting involved in activities
that are not popular among them. “We make projects and there is a coordinator and this young person
says “I don’t know how” and that’s it. May be it is a fear of responsibility and it obstructs.” (YO) It must be
noted here that quite often interviewed experts mentioned that schools should be partly blamed about
that, because they give only formal education to young people, but they cannot comprehensively develop
young people as personalities – cannot give young people such social skills as self-confidence, readiness
to express own opinion, argument it and others. “Counting and reading is taught in schools, not
discussing, argumentation, working for aim – that was rather often secondary issue, wherewith young
people are so afraid.” (YO)
Influence of Family
Experts mention influence of family both as contributing, and obstructing factors. If support and example
of family contribute to activity of young people, than obstructing factors are disinterest of family on how
young people spend free time, family raised values that make them search for entertaining or asocial
activities than to spend their free time usefully. As one of the factors should be mentioned here parents’
busyness at work, as several experts mention: “parents quite often don’t have free time, than young
people grow on their own, without control, where they go and what they do” (YAC), “it influences that
parents are not often at home, there are no collective family events, no upbringing, and thus young
people go with those who shack around and do nothing, not with those who out of school time do
something really valuable” (SW), “support of parents is needed – both financial, and moral – but if there is
no support, then young person is depressed, indifferent, and there is alcohol, parties” (YO).
About influence of family has to be spoken particularly in the case of social risk children. In these cases
parents quite often are alcoholics, unemployed, who don’t take care about their offspring. As mention
social workers, these children are frequently depressed, upset, not rare for them are characteristic
different complexes that not only don’t allow them to participate in different activities, but also are an
obstacle for involvement in formal education process. Social risk group workers also mention that “there is
cases when parents don’t allow their children to come to us – they don’t know what institution we are, we
invite parents to come to us to look what is going on here, but they never have time for that” (YO).
127

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Attitude of Adults
Attitude of adults should be mention also as one of the essential factors. If activity influences skills to
communicate with young people as with equal, to collaborate them as partners, then the contrary
obstructs participation – deprecatory attitude towards young people, not taking into account youth opinion,
unwillingness to collaborate with young people. “If you trust them, they can do good things. We trust
young people some things. These are values, way of thinking. They need the feeling that they are trusted.
Distrust obstructs. Because you don’t cooperate with them in any way.” (PO) Several experts pointed to
this who work with different youth initiatives. As the most problematic is mentioned two adult groups:
representatives of local government and in general sense – representatives of state power, politicians.
“The project has to be written, and then it is quite often not supported, they “gut’ it and ask what there will
be so lasting. Sometimes I have a wish to say “Be glad that those children want to do something, that
they want seminars, that they go as volunteers to schools and spread further the information”.”. (YO)
“Young people receive politicians negatively, they don’t have a wish to go and speak, because they now
already that they won’t be listened. And even if they are, they won’t be taken into account. “ (YAC) Quite
often in interviews teachers are blamed for not understanding that it is important for young people not only
obtain formal education, but also be involved in no-formal education, in work of informal organisations.
Prospective Gains
For youth collaboration, they need to see concrete gains that gives collaboration – not only in material
sense, but emotional as well. One of the obstacles for developing activities is the fact that not all initiatives
are successful, not every project can be supported and implemented, and therefore young people are
quite often sure that their involvement won’t chance anything. That means – youth in Latvia has too less
positive examples that could confirm their possibilities to influence and change things and processes that
are not acceptable for them. Young people want to see a result, and result not process the most
essentially influence motivation to collaborate. Here once again should be reminded attitude factor of
adults.
Experts also mention that quite often for young people is important material gains and these young
people, to whom material, financial gains are most essential, rarely will be ready to involve themselves on
voluntary principle. However there should be again mentioned previously described factor: if young people
have no positive emotional experience in different activities, then they don’t have other point for
collaboration then material gain. “It is very hard to motivate young people to participate in activities that
don’t give them any benefit. We had discussions in seminars quite often about voluntary work, but it is not
very common.” (YO) It also appeared in focus group discussions within this study – if in general level
young people appreciate volunteer activities and assess that they would be ready to involve themselves
as well, then discussing more specifically it turned out that young people quite often have question why
they should do something for free: “talks about voluntary work doesn’t convince me, sometimes it seems
that children are only being used for doing adult work, but they make them believe that it is a big work and
important for young people themselves” (FGD, passive), “friends rarely come with me to any activity,
usually ask how much will be paid and don’t understand me why I go and do something for free” (FGD,
active). Parents, of course, have significant role in prevailing material values: “they are taught in families,
that they should ask payment for everything they do, that they should not do anything for free and involve
themselves anywhere, if there is no arranged payment. Of course, parents are like this because of their
lack of financial means, but young people thereby become too money oriented”(YAC).
Offer of Existing Activities
Of course, available opportunities are the most essential formal collaboration factor. If young people are
given opportunities, then there is at least formal background for collaboration. However experts quite often
stressed that there are quite limited opportunities in Latvia. Amount of different interest groups decreased
128

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
during 90s73, they became thematically homogeneous, wherewith not always corresponding to young
people interests. “Do young people have any opportunity? We have little opportunities in our city and
region – you can do sports, play in drama club or in band, or go to some organisations, but what should
do others who are interested for example, in photographing, knitting, crochet, or play with plasticine?”
(YAC).
Limitation of Target Group
Pupils of secondary schools quite often are not target group of interest educational groups and centres,
therefore there is no activity for them to be involved in this mode. More frequently these activities are
available for pupils from primary schools, while opportunities of young people from secondary schools and
especially high schools are limited to their initiatives. “I know that one my acquaintance wanted to join a
music interest group, but she wasn’t accepted because of age, but she was only 23 years old.” (FGD,
active) “Until 10th grade it is quite easy to find where to participate, but after that it is getting harder and
harder – everywhere you are looking they check if you correspond to their age group, and if there is only
pupils form primary school, then of course me with 20 years don’t fit there.” (FGD, active)
Public Image of Non-governmental and Political Organisations
Experts mentioned in interviews, that young people are often prejudice towards non-governmental and
social organisations, because it associates with politics, in turn politics and politicians have very negative
image in society. “Word politics in connection with youth is a very bad brand. If someone would want to
popularise it, then the name should be changed. What policy referring to youth? Youth policy, that could
be official name within the government, but as a brand it is awful.” (E) The NGOs that work in political not
in social field appear more in mass media, thus strengthening opinion of young people that main aim of
organisations is political work. Here it must be again mentioned – different social, non-governmental and
youth organisations don’t much popularise themselves up to now, therefore mess media, parents,
stereotypes of friends make opinion of young people not direct information about the work of this sector.
Few Youth Initiatives
One of the factors that obstructs wider young people collaboration is the fact that quite often youth
organisations and initiatives, projects are supervised by the adult person. However here it cannot be
declared as a problem that adult collaborate, but the fact that there is too little self-initiative of young
people in Latvia. Young people very rarely are ready and able to realise their ideas.
Administrative and Financial Limitations
As expert mention, there are a lot of bureaucratic limitations which young people are difficult to
understand and implement, therefore organised, formal youth collaboration in different NGOs is
inconvenient. On the other hand, that determines why adults have significant role in youth initiatives – for
young people it would be impossible to establish and create any organisation without help of adults. At the
same time interviewed experts still point at “there is everything complicated in our country, so it would be
less opportunities to do something by themselves – in every place there is some civil servant, some paper
should be obtained, everywhere you have to pay and you spend a lot of time on that, that is why no
normal young person won’t deal with it.” (YO)
Very significant is financing issue. For organisation itself and for realisation of projects. The most
problematic is the cases when young people need to find co-financing by themselves for implementing
activities (for instance, travelling abroad), but possibilities for young people to raise financing of
entrepreneurs and local governments are limited, that is why such overall positive activities are not
implemented. As one expert mentions: “one way could be, if for young people would be available co-
73
Central Statistical Bureau, in 1990 there were 6623 amateur interest groups in cultural and folk houses, in 1995 – 3202, in 2000 – 3539, in
2006– 3554. It must be added that there are not school interest groups counted. Data on 2006 shows that there were 588 interest groups that
are not connected with cultural and folk houses.
129

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
financing, some fund were youth organisations that have approved projects in EU project tenders could
apply for co-financing” (PA).
Infrastructure, Transport Problems
This factor is very important for those who live in countryside – quite often interest groups are established
in near parish or village, still transport problem (public transport drives seldom, parents not available to
drive young people with private transport) not allow young people to participate. One of the solutions here
is proposed to organise local government transport for young people of closest villages to drive them
where group classes take place, however, of course, it requires additional funding from local government,
and besides interested young people could be not enough for paying off these expenses.
Prejudice towards Youth of Social Risk Groups
Social risk group workers point at two problems that are actual to these young people: (1) prejudgments
towards these young people in the society and (2) lack of opportunities special for social risk groups. As
interviewed experts mention, collaboration of young people of social risk groups requires contribution of
time and financing forevery organisation and institution that want to work with these young people,
therefore most often desire and readiness to allow young people from social risk groups to collaborate
stays on only desire stage. Experts also mention that young people overall, and adults have stereotypes
that these young people are inferior (not always it so, for example, disability can be only physical, not
mental) and even dangerous (if speaking about young people who did something criminal, or street
children), therefore only few organisations are willing to collaborate. “Rarely youth organisations want to
involve children of social risk groups. They seem dangerous.” (YO) It is interesting that during the study
there could not be identified any case when collaboration between social risk group organisation and
youth organisation would take place. At the same time it should be mentioned, for instance, part of
activists working in the organisation for disabled people “Apeirons” are not handicapped people
themselves, that in turn show that young people individually gladly involve themselves in social risk
groups activities, while there is obstacles for development such cooperation in organisation level.
As mentioned above, second significant obstacle of young people of social risk group collaboration is lack
of opportunities: “Starting from June till September there need to be organised day camps, but there is no
camp leader. There are opportunities, but few. You can look at web page of the Education Department of
the Riga City Council – there are summer camps. But there are no free places anymore. Then there are
opportunities, but few. Or they don’t want that street children come.” (YO) “Work in social organisations is
connected with projects, that are tendered in different state institutions or funds, and if there is not
approved project for work with children of social risk groups, then there is no chance” (YO).
130

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
8. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ADVANCING YOUTH ACTIVITY
In this chapter, we have summarized recommendations that came from the all target groups involved in
the research as well as challenges defined by researchers as necessary to advance social and political
activity among youth. It should be pointed that some of below-mentioned recommendations are now being
implemented, however we remind them here, as these are essential issues that has been postponed so
far e.g. passing of the Youth Law, legal regulation of volunteer jobs and non-formal education, definition of
youth specialist’s position, funding etc.
Considering the above mentioned we have divided this chapter into several parts. First, it seemed eligible
to draw a bigger picture - a conceptual scheme for dealing with youth issues (as it is impossible to tear
youth policy off from the other spheres of politics, especially welfare policy). Secondly, we have listed the
issues that should be tackled in the nearest future and thirdly - we have named the main challenges for
the youth policy in order to encourage activity among youth. In other words, we do not propose a strategy
or action plan, but give the course for policy makers to encourage positive changes in youth activity.
8.1. Conceptual Set up for Youth Policy Implementation
Research results show that activity among youth largely depends on accessibility to various activities; on
financial and time resources as well as on social conditions in which young people live. Themselves they
speak about violence, addictions and health issues but experts point that youth policy should not be
separated from other spheres of politics, but included in its documents.
In this chapter, we have tried to show how youth policy fits within broader political context. One of the
major issues is social environment in which young people live – their everyday family and household
conditions. Social workers point that family’s situation is a strong (de)motivator to take part in any social
activities and research results show that it is especially true in relation to young people from social risk
families and for those living in countryside.
Among essential social issues that should be solved by the youth policies are: (1) everyday surroundings
and household conditions, (2) education and (3) employment. These issues young people point as
distressing, but friendly social conditions, accessible education and employment possibilities would create
positive background for any youth activities and interests.
There are four aspects of social conditions and family situation, which are important:
• Personal safety in the place of living ( e.g. for children form social risk families; also many pupils
in the survey has pointed that violence among young people is one of issues that should be
solved by the government)
• Addictions (e.g. alcohol, smoking, drugs are emphasized by many respondents as serious
problem which is also closely interlinked it to personal safety issues; moreover, respondents point
at modern addictions such as computers and gambling)
• Health (pressing problems are both - accessibility of youth-friendly healthcare and prevention
services as well further orientation towards prevention rather than consequences)
• Overall social economic situation in Latvia (that influence the life of respondents’ families (e.g.
many parents travel to foreign countries in search for employment) and thus their value system as
well as psychological development of children, possibilities and activity; similarly socioeconomic
situation has impact upon regional development).
131

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Regarding education conditions, three aspects are important:
• Tuition fee (especially respondents that live in regions are worried about increase in tuition fees
(including increase in costs that are necessary to obtain basic education) and state it as one of
the issues that should be solved by government either as reduction or cancellation of tuition fees),
• Accessibility of education (both as possibility to get education close to the place of living, choose
the school and specialization according to ones wishes and pay for it.),
• Eligibility between educational system and labor market needs (two major problems here are
education content and planning). As statistics indicate, young people make their educational
choices guided by short-term trends in labor market demand. Besides that, professional
orientation services are very weak and as a result – young people are often quite unprepared for
the labor market. On the other hand, they do not recognize that nowadays labor market is so
disintegrated and individualized that it is impossible to gain necessary professional skills only by
the means of formal education. Consequently, the issue about life-long education rises.
In the employment sphere, young people worry about three issues:
• Summer employment (in recent years issue about possibilities to have summer jobs is very
topical among young people but there are both legal and practical barriers (e.g. age limits,
working hours; demand for summer work places exceeds the labor supply etc.),
• Opportunities in the labor market (on the one hand, young people worry about their future
employment prospects (e.g. after graduation), on the other hand, here raises the issues about
working students and their capacity to study and work at the same time; and field practice
availability that would let young people to find out their professional interests, opportunities and
desires. But as volunteer work is still not legally regulated this is an important drawback for this
kind of employment),
• Carrier development (important aspects here are lack of coordination between educational and
labor market requirements; equal employment opportunities for young people living in regions
(now they are bound to migrate to cities to get the same opportunities); young people’s
preference to higher academic education although professional education becomes more and
more sought-after).
Above-mentioned are issues that are more important in social sphere and these should be solved to
ensure favorable background for youth activity promotion. Living in harmonious and safe environment
young people would be more motivated in participation and other creative initiatives.
8.2. Issues Requiring Immediate Solutions Through youth Policy
Before stating middle-term challenges, it is worth to summarize short –term objectives, that were set by
research target groups. Although majority of these below-listed tasks are being currently implemented,
however target groups perceive that the process is too long and ineffective.
„If the government can’t fulfill these very simple, easy but very essential at the same time tasks [youth
Law and legal regulation of volunteer work], how can we speak about any long term strategies?” (YO),
„while the Law is not accepted, what’s the point to do anything in the mean time?” (YAC). Thus, we may
conclude that youth policy entities are very concerned about legal regulations in various spheres that
would set its entities, their roles, functions and funding and thereby would foster its development.
Following target groups should be involved in solution of identified problems:
• Legislators and executives
Including the Ministry for Children and Family Affairs, Ministry of Education and Science, Ministry
of Economics, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Welfare, as well as the
Parliament.
132

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
• Educational institutions
Including higher and secondary education institutions.
• Local government institutions
Including municipalities, their coordinators of youth affairs, centre of youth initiative and
institutions of interest education, that are supported by local governments.
• Youth organizations
Including societies and foundations, where young people participate, as well whose target
audience is young people and their informal groups.
8.2.1. Recommendations to Overcome Barriers for Youth Activity
Developed legal base is one of important preconditions for youth to get adequate notice both on local and
national level. The Youth Law would define attitude towards the youth as well as set common goals for all
entities involved. Among major drawbacks for youth activity, we may identify mutually eliminating aspects,
such as lack of time and learning load on the one hand, and insufficient possibilities to join interesting
activities on the other hand.
To organize activities by themselves young people need not only enthusiasm and desire to do something
but also knowledge and skills, as well as support from adults. From the research, we may conclude that
usually young people (especially those from social risk groups) do not have support system that could
make them more active. But in case when young people want to organize some event their activity is
restrained by legal barriers (complicated procedure of coordination) and/ or distrust form adults that young
people might do something worthwhile.
Legislator and Executive Power
 By involving all entities of youth policy and especially the young people themselves (finding out
their experience, future visions, needs and desires), aim to develop such a policy that is
understood and supported by all parties concerned (state institutions, municipalities, youth
organizations and young people).
 Advance the process and achieve acceptance of the Youth Law.
 Reduce bureaucratic barriers for funding opportunities and ease reporting requirements for
projects that are organized by young people.
 Explanatory work about financing possibilities and documentation (seminars, consultations).
 Find possibility to financially support not only organisations, but directly initiatives, projects. Terms
of financial availability for non-formal youth communities and physical person must be worked out.
 Offer facilitations for projects of the youth organisations. Involve local governments in such
financing. Possibly, to work out national financing programme (as an example “The Culture
2007-2013”).
Municipalities
 Involve young people in decision-making process by organizing advisory council and/ or inviting
them to participate in work groups that deal with youth issues.
 Invite young people to express their ideas and opinions about future development of their
municipality and take them into account.
 Budget funding for youth activities.
 Establish youth initiative centers and support them.
Educational institutions
 Reduce study programs and study load within limits.
133

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
 Inform young people and their parents about possibilities to participate in spare time activities
(non-formal education; sports activities that are available in their locality) and benefits they got
from such activities.
Youth organizations
 Inform society about successfully implemented ideas that were initiated by young people, to
create positive image about them as of knowing and skillful members of society.
 Give support to young people that belong to social risk group by inviting them to take part in
different activities.
 Involve young people of different nationalities
 Exercise individual approach to inform young people abut different activities.
8.2.2. Recommendations for Cooperation and Partnership Patterns
Problems that are highlighted by this research show the need for system for youth policy implementation
that would define the policy goal, results that should be achieved as well as different levels of competency
and responsibility. Implementation of youth policy should be coordinated and aimed at cooperation among
all its agents including private sector that has shown very little interest in youth organizations so far.
Youth policy should be targeted, taking into account national plans for development and involving entities
that are more important. Youth policy should aim at young people, their personal development to foster
their skills for living, self-dependence and ability to take decisions and be in charge of themselves, of
people around them, society and their country.
Research shows that cooperation among the main entities is limited to exchange of information and in
most cases it one-way flow. As a result, these entities work alone, not knowing much about other
successful cases in other institutions or places in Latvia.
Legislator and Executive Power
 Involve all youth policy entities its implementation, creating mutual communication among
involved parties and receiving feedback.
 Define functions for youth policy entities.
 Define functions and duties for youth affairs coordinators.
 Improve exchange of information among different youth policy entities, especially about success
stories in youth policy implementation that would facilitate exchange of experience.
 Continue work with local youth affairs coordinators, supporting them with methodological
guidelines for work with young people.
 From one side, support mutual communication among young people themselves, and from other
side – support communication between youth and state. Direct communication forms, for
example, young people regular meetings with minister, e-government possibilities etc., give
assurance to young people that their opinion is listened and taken into account.
Municipalities
 Involve youth organizations and non-formal youth groups in decision making process, especially
regarding youth affairs and local development issues.
 Develop cooperation among different services and local institutions that deal with youth issues, to
ensure common approach in youth policy implementation on local level.
 Create horizontal cooperation between coordinators of youth affairs and youth initiative centres
with relevant institutions in other municipalities to ensure exchange of information and experience
as well as adoption of good practices.
134

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Educational institutions
 Provide students and pupils with information on activities and events that are organized by other
organizations.
Youth organizations
 Define their interests and opinion, take part in cooperation and advisory councils as well as in
State secretaries’ meetings and submit proposals in local and national level.
 Express their opinion and suggestions to MCFA on youth policy implementation
 Create partnership with organizations of similar goals and interests, to join resources for more
successful their implementation.
 Support cooperation between youth organisations of social risk groups and other non-
governmental and youth organisations.
8.2.3. Recommendations for Youth Policy Development within its Entities’ Competency
According to MCFA the main youth policy principles are: to stimulate integration; to provide young people
with understandable information; to provide their involvement in decision making processes; to ensure
mobility and international cooperation as well as equal opportunities and gender equality. These principles
should be followed in all youth policy spheres trough all its levels.
Research experts as more essential youth policy issues emphasize: elaboration and implementation of
youth information system; recognition of non-formal education; promotion of volunteer job; education of
youth specialists so that they could provide young people with necessary support and help as well as
inclusion of social risk groups and marginalized young people in society. Making and implementing youth
policy, it is important to consider European tendencies in youth policy development as well as other
relevant EU documents on non-formal education recognition tools and youth involvement in labor market.
Legislator and Executive Power
 Follow that youth interests are considered in employment, social integration, education, learning
and mobility policy making.
 Consider youth needs and interests in youth policy making and implementation and perceive
them as source for consultations.
 Define the term “youth” in the Youth Law.
 Develop common terminology for terms in youth affairs
 In youth policymaking and implementation, consider the priorities that are stated in the White
Book \"A New Impulse for European Youth\" and in the European Youth Pact.
 In cooperation with youth organizations, develop and introduce tools for non-formal education
skills recognition that are based upon relevant European experience and guidelines.
 Make a research on non-formal education’s investment in society and economics.
 Create youth information system that covers many topical issues (health, employment,
educational institutions, cultural and entertainment events, joining public sector and youth
organizations, volunteer jobs, and spare time activities).
 Popularize volunteer job among youth and adults, and especially among employers, to achieve its
recognition.
 Elaborate a program for youth specialists’ education.
 Elaborate programmes on addictions prevention on municipality level.
 Facilitate training among teachers and social workers for working with young people that belong
to social risk groups.
135

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
 Mark special funds for social risk groups that would let organizations and institutions that work
these groups be more focused in their plans and activities.
 Coordinate and facilitate cooperation among youth specialists that work with social risks groups.
 Facilitate short-term employment for young people (e.g. in summer), especially for social risk
groups.
 Support new families, especially with information on baby care and housing issues.
 Youth as separate target group must be included in documents of other spheres – welfare,
employment, health, transport etc.
Municipalities
 Develop and implement strategic documents (action plans, program) on work with youth within
municipality
 Broaden youth access to social and public activities
 Support development of sports infrastructure according to youth interests and needs.
 Diversify interest education classes
 Create and maintain support system for social risk groups and marginalized young people trough
local services (social service, youth health centre, family support centre and youth initiative
centre)
 Ensure individual consultations for social risk youth to facilitate their involvement in society.
 Recruiting specialists in youth affairs consider not only formal education, but also individual
qualities and ability to work with children.
 Ensure that coordinators of youth affairs work also with “not-organized” young people (that don’t
belong to any organization and don’t participate in self–government at school)
 Youth initiative centers pay particular attention to passive youth.
 Budget youth initiatives and projects.
Educational institutions
 Introduce non-formal educational methods in the training process, so that young people would
learn skills that are necessary for citizens in democratic society, shifting the focus from theoretical
lessons to action (e.g. elections of self-government)
 Perform civil education, encouraging young people to take initiative and involve them in the
school management.
Youth organizations
 Develop various approaches how to deal with different youth groups, especially with social risk
and marginalized youth; and share experiences in their usage.
 Facilitate more active cooperation between social risk youth and active young people (e.g.
organizing special events).
 Make people know about successful experience and thus increase visibility and recognition for
the youth sector.
 Involve young people of different nationalities.
8.3. Main Challenges in Youth Involvement Facilitation
Aligning previously mentioned legal issues; ensuring wholesome execution of already implemented youth
policy conditions as well as ensuring youth-friendly social environment, we may speak about involvement
facilitation challenges in a middle-term perspective.
136

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
In general, youth passive involvement in social and political activities is not just typical Latvian feature, but
it is also a problem in other countries. Many foreign studies on this issue show that social, political activity
looses its topicality among youth, but individual issues, carrier and entertainment becomes more
important. Also globalization tendencies have impact upon youth activity, namely – living in a global, open
society, without limiting territorial boundaries, local policies looses their role and young people don’t see
the point in dealing with local politicians; but possibility to influence international policymakers they
perceive as minimal. In Post-soviet countries, swift drop in political activity is explained by decrease in
national safety threats, namely – society in general and young people as a part of it do not feel threatened
in a democratic freedom sense; therefore, they pay more attention to individual issues and do not
maintain active political stance. Second reason for decrease in social and political activity is economic
development of countries and people’s welfare – the less the level of prosperity, the less political activity
of people.
Considering previously mentioned that would be utopian to think about total youth involvement in different
kinds of activities. More important would be to ensure youth involvement in issues that directly applies to
them. As it is shown by research data, quite big part of respondents keep track only of the most important
events in the locality, region or country. Besides young people are not very optimistic about their
possibilities to affect significant processes, which is another reasons for passivity. Consequently one of
challenges is to change youth’s (and society’s in general) confidence that they have just a static role in
policy implementation. As it research shows, quite often youth involvement is just formal - to demonstrate
authorities’ openness but not to give real possibilities to shape decisions. This is why youth involvement
should be practical and real - its quality is of the same importance as the range.
Involvement should be practiced both on local and national scale. (1) On municipality’s level (making
decisions on education, safety and social issues etc.); (2) discussing educational system (which is
perceived as one of the most problematic spheres regarding youth involvement, but which deals with such
issues as language of tuition, amount of subjects and tasks, educational quality, teachers’ professionalism
and their psychological training74. According to respondents, these are actual topics both on a school level
and system-wide); (3) participation on a national scale (e.g. here falls such issues as: learning youth
opinions and taking them into consideration).
Thus, we may define following challenges that are important for middle-term policies: (1) to involve young
people as collaborates, (2) to widen their opportunities, (3) to achieve equality in youth opportunities.
Young people as partners
Today young people are more like spectators – as some expert has worded it „young people are just a
target group for politicians. I have not ever heard that they were calling them ‘partners’” (YO). Thus, very
important challenge both on local and national level is to start perceiving young people not only as policy
objects but also as partners in policymaking. Of course, this needs interestedness from both parties, but a
good “signal” from politicians’ side would be „real activity, to show our young people, that they are taken
into account; that their opinions are considered” (YAC). Besides, it is important to listen to various youth
groups (experts are of the opinion that politicians consider only the active part of youth, but this is a clear
minority and consequently – it makes opposition and policy denial among the other young people). For
74
In addition, it should be mentioned that schools are the primary institutions where young people learn skills in democratic participation.
Authors of other studies, has pointed that it is important, whether schools facilitate civil participation, whether schools organize discussions
and allow pluralisms of opinions regarding ongoing processes in the country. As it is shown by data from the research that was carried out in
2004 (A. Geske, A. Grīnfelds, A. Kangro, R. Kiseļova, O. Tipāns. „Civil Education of Latvian Pupils in the Context of Social Integration in
1999.-2004.”), pupils are almost never involved in discussions about socio-political processes. Member of some NGO in the interview has
said that: „within educational policy nothing is done to activate the youth, but they spend there a half of their juvenescence! In Sweden for
example, they carry out anti-discrimination program and days of intercultural education. Schools ensure awakening of pupils’ interest in
political processes. In other words, youth policy should facilitate that young people would like to participate and that they would understand
what’s going on in the society. What do we have? Project weeks, breeding lessons and lessons in social sciences – that’s all!! The rest is
done through publics organizations.” (NVO)
137

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
example, in focus groups young people used to complain that nobody is trying to find out their opinion and
that - politicians are not reachable for discussions, as there are always some mediators– teachers,
politicians’ assistants or civil-servants. Thus, we may conclude that young people might like to have more
individual contact with politicians as well as greater sense of being involved and listened to e.g. even
through e-mails.
In general, there are two problematic issues regarding partnership with youth: (1) to what extent politicians
learn youth opinions (e.g. through surveys, discussions) and (2) to what extent those opinions are
considered? Now majority of young people and youths’ affair specialists are of the opinion that politicians’
activity in these issues is insufficient: „before planning any political activities, they should carry out at least
some survey on youth opinion, so that they would now, what young people are thinking and what do they
need. But our politicians ask only youth specialists, social workers or may be teachers, but I’ve never
heard them asking something to the very young people” (YO).
Besides surveys, another way to find out youth opinion would be to learn about their problems from the
people that work with young people on the daily basis i.e. from coordinators of youth affairs, teachers,
social workers etc. However, in this case young people do not get feedback from politicians, that their
opinions had been taken into account therefore as much important are face-to-face or direct virtual
communication possibilities with people that are making youth policy.
Of course, not all young people’s requirements and needs might be included in the list of real tasks;
therefore, it is important to communicate about such decisions and actions. Moreover, this should be done
both on local and national level by politicians as well as youth specialists. Positive effect would also give
not merely informative but strategic communication that would learn and analyze youth opinions; include
them into action programs and explain developed policies to all its entities. E-tools75 might be one of most
appropriate ways how to perform this bidirectional flow of information; however, it should be attractive
enough in order to awake youth’s interest.
Widening of youth opportunities
Youth involvement and participation might not be facilitated by rigour regulations, but rather providing
wider opportunities and supply that are more diverse. Research data show – although young people are
quite satisfied with their possibilities to spend spare time, however their options are usually limited to
sports, theatre and music. There are formal opportunities, but as often as not these do not meet varied
youth interests. Thus, that would be worth to learn young people’s wishes so that everybody could find
something for his interests rather than trying to turn all young people to few particular activities.
One way how to vary options for youth activities might be through studying and developing non-formal
youth cultures. Interviewed leaders from non-formal youth groups (e.g. musicians union “Tornis”, portal
„satori.lv”) admit that official state policy pays too less attention to the alternative youth cultures, which are
however very popular among young people (like hip hop; graffiti, pop-music etc.). If these activities were
somehow considered within the official youth policy, that would “show” young people that their interests
are supported from the government and thus the whole policy would seem more youth-friendly.76.
Equality in youth opportunities
75
As it is stated in the review „New media: a bridge between the government and the people” (published in „Government communication: The
Dutch experience.”, Netherlands Government Information Service, Ministry of General Affairs, 2005.), Internet in political communication is
used for 3 goals: (a) to ensure „transparency” of government’s work (b) to improve flow of information to different target groups (c) to ensure
people’s involvement and two-directional communication, that let politicians not only to send the information but also receive and gat the
feedback.
76
Representative of non-commercial publishing house „Tornis” as an example mentioned that in Norway state finances record studios and
musicians can make their records free of charge. Even if such practice can’t be borrowed in Latvia, however learning and inclusion of
alternative culture in the official public discourse might be realized in any other form (e.g. inviting representatives of alternative culture to take
part in discussions).
138

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Besides diversifying, also the access to different activity opportunities is important. Two main youth
groups that are less provided with access to various free time activities and social and political activities
are young people from social risk groups and those who live in regions, especially in countryside.
Regarding social risk groups, it is necessary to provide both – access to various activities, as well as
inclusion in activities together with other young people (e.g. facilitating cooperation between youth
organizations that work with social risk young people and other youth organizations).
Equally important group is young people that live in regions. As it is shown by various studies, their
possibilities are quite limited both in their nature (e.g. there are only few extracurricular hobby groups) and
practically (e.g. regarding possibilities to get at the place of activity (e.g. to hobby group in the nearest
town or to pay for participation).
By definition, young people are the age group from 15 - 25 years, however this group is not homogenous,
and there are problems regarding equality in opportunities for young people of different age. Differences
in values, interests and desires require that on the policy level young people of different age were
analyzed in more detail. One of advisable split between age groups would be 15-18 and 18-25. At the
age of 18 young people usually part from their families and formal educational institutions what causes
changes in their values and needs (e.g. increasing need for independence, orientation towards carrier
through studies and first work experience and possibly even founding of their own family). Consequently,
these two age groups have quite different value and need orientations that should be considered in
developing and implementing youth policy. Regarding equal opportunities very important is the issue
about access to the non-formal and interest education possibilities. Now, interest education is accessible
only until the age of 17-18, while 18-25 year old young people spend their spare time for entertainment.
***
139

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
ANNEX
140

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Annex 1 – List of Organisations and Institutions those Represtentatives were Interviewed (in
Latvian)
Attīstības izglītības organizācija „GLEN Latvija”
Bārbeles pagasta biedrība „Jaunatne Smaidam”
Biedrība Klubs „Māja”
Cēsu vakara vidusskola
Daugavpils pilsētas dome
Dienvidlatgales NVO atbalsta centrs
Gulbenes jauniešu klubs „Dēms”
Gulbenes pašvaldība
Internacionālais atturības klubs „Avante”
Invalīdu un viņa draugu apvienība „Apeirons”
Īpašu uzdevumu ministra sabiedrības integrācijas lietās sekretariāts
Jaunatnes starptautisko programmu aģentūra
Jēkabpils bērnu un jauniešu centrs
Jēkabpils jauniešu klubs „13. pirmdiena”
Jelgavas jaunatnes centrs „Junda”
Kuldīgas bērnu un jauniešu centrs
Latvijas Jaunatnes padome
Latvijas Nedzirdīgo jauniešu organizācija
Latvijas Pašvaldību savienība
Latvijas Pieredzes un izglītības centrs
Latvijas Studentu apvienība
Liepājas pilsētas dome
LR Bērnu un ģimenes lietu ministrija
LR Izglītības un zinātnes ministrija
Ogres Izglītības pārvalde
Ogres jauniešu klubs „Projektu darbnīca”
Ogres novada sociālais dienests
Partijas „Jaunais laiks” Jaunatnes nodaļa
Partijas „Tautas Partija” Jaunatnes organizācija
RD Izglītības, jaunatnes un sporta departaments, Bērnu un jaunatnes pārvalde, Jaunatnes atbalsta nodaļa
Rīgas Skolēnu dome
Satori (literatūras un filozofijas portāls)
SO „Avantis”
SO Mūziķu apvienība „Tornis”
Talsu bērnu un jauniešu centrs
Valmieras palīdzības birojs
Valsts Jaunatnes iniciatīvu centrs
141

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Annex 2 – Youth Value Dimension Survey Methodology
Methodology of the German youth survey was adopted in the research in order to analyse youth value
orientation. There were five value dimensions included in the questionnaire, i.e. independence and
individuality, humanity and tolerance, participation in modern society, orientation towards family,
orientation towards nature – each dimension is characterised by six value statements or indicators (in
questionnaire – Q14). Respondents valued each indicator in scale from 1 (has no significance) to 5 (very
significant).
In analyses of results average value of six indicators of each value dimension were summed up, thereby
getting average value of each value dimension. Since each value dimension consists of six value
statements, which respondents could value in scale form 1 to 5, then value dimensions minimal value
could not be less than 6 and maximum value could not be larger than 30. Average value of value
dimension is 18. Bigger is average value of the scale, more significant is this value to a person.
142

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Annex 3 – Questionnaire (in Latvian)
Jauniešu sociālās un politiskās darbības izpēte Latvijā
Jauniešu aptauja
Q1 Cik lielā mērā Tevi apmierina iespējas pavadīt brīvo laiku ārpus skolas/ augstskolas?
□ Nemaz neapmierina □ Drīzāk neapmierina □ Drīzāk apmierina □ Pilnībā apmierina
1 2 3 4
Ja novērtēji, ka Tevi neapmierina brīvā laika pavadīšanas iespējas (Q1 atzīmēji „Nemaz neapmierina” vai „Drīzāk neapmierina”), tad atbildi,
lūdzu, arī uz sekojošo (Q2) jautājumu, pēc tam turpini atbildēt uz pārējiem jautājumiem.
Ja novērtēji, ka Tevi apmierina brīvā laika pavadīšanas iespējas, pārej uzreiz pie jautājuma Q3 un turpini atbildēt uz pārējiem jautājumiem.
Q2 Uzraksti, lūdzu, kas tieši Tevi neapmierina?
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Q3 Ieraksti tās brīvā laika pavadīšanas iespējas, kādas Tu vēlētos lai Tev būtu pieejamas Tavā skolā, pagastā, pilsētā?
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Q4 Atzīmē to izteicienu, kuram Tu vislielākajā mērā piekrīti.
01 □ Savu brīvo laiku man vislabāk patīk pavadīt kopā ar citiem cilvēkiem
02 □ Lielāko daļu sava brīvā laika man patīk pavadīt kopā ar citiem cilvēkiem
03
□ Lielāko daļu sava brīvā laika man patīk pavadīt vienatnē
04
□ Savu brīvo laiku man vislabāk patīk pavadīt vienam/ vienai
Q5 Uzraksti, lūdzu, TRĪS LIETAS, ko Tev vislabāk patīk darīt brīvajā laikā!
1) .............................................................................................................................................................................................................
2) .............................................................................................................................................................................................................
3) .............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Q6 Ieraksti, lūdzu, TRĪS VIETAS, kur Tu vislabprātāk pavadi savu brīvo laiku!
1) .............................................................................................................................................................................................................
2) .............................................................................................................................................................................................................
3) .............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Q7 Novērtē, aptuveni cik daudz brīva laika Tev ir vienā dienā...
... darba dienās? ... brīvdienās?
1 2
01 Mazāk kā viena stunda □ □
02 1-3 stundas □ □
03 3-6 stundas □ □
04 Vairāk kā 6 stundas □ □
05 Nav brīva laika vispār □ □
Q8 Kurai jauniešu interešu grupai (piemēram, kāda mūzikas stila piekritējiem, sporta stila piekritējiem u.c.) Tu sevi
pieskaiti? Vari minēt arī vairākas atbildes!
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Q9 Kā Tu parasti uzzini par iespējām pavadīt savu brīvo laiku?
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Q10 Lūdzu, novērtē, cik lielā mērā Tu seko informācijai par...
Mani tas nemaz Ļoti maz par Sekoju tikai Regulāri
neinteresē to būtiskākajai sekoju visai
Atzīmē tikai vienu atbildi katrā rindiņā!
interesējos informācijai informācijai
1 2 3 4
01 ...savas skolas/ augstskolas aktualitātēm? □ □ □ □
02 ... savas pašvaldības darbību? □ □ □ □
03 ... Latvijas valsts valdības darbību? □ □ □ □
04 ... Eiropas Savienības aktualitātēm? □ □ □ □
05 ... dažādu sabiedrisko un nevalstisko organizāciju
□ □ □ □
darbību?
Q11 Vai Tev ir pieejama informācija par iespējām piedalīties...
JĀ NĒ
1 2
01 ...savas skolas/ augstskolas aktivitātēs? □ □
02 ... savas pašvaldības darbībā? □ □
03 ... nevalstisko un sabiedrisko organizāciju darbībā? □ □
04 ... reliģisko organizāciju darbībā? □ □
05 ... jaunatnes sabiedrisko organizāciju darbībā? □ □
06 ... jauniešu pulciņu, klubiņu, interešu grupu aktivitātēs? □ □
143

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
07 ... politisko organizāciju darbībā? □ □
Q12 Cik liela nozīme Tavā dzīvē ir ...
Vispār nav Neliela Ne ir, ne nav Liela Ļoti liela
Atzīmē tikai vienu atbildi katrā rindiņā! nozīmes nozīme nozīmes nozīme nozīme
1 2 3 4 5
01 ... reliģijai? □ □ □ □ □
02 ... draugiem? □ □ □ □ □
03 ...labdarībai? □ □ □ □ □
04 ... brīvajam laikam? □ □ □ □ □
05 ... ģimenei? □ □ □ □ □
06 ... mācībām/ studijām? □ □ □ □ □
07 ... politikai? □ □ □ □ □
08 ...brīvprātīgajam darbam? □ □ □ □ □
09 ... sportam? □ □ □ □ □
10 ... darbam? □ □ □ □ □
11 ... veselībai? □ □ □ □ □
Q13 Atzīmē, lūdzu, tos TRĪS darba aspektus, kuri Tev šķiet vissvarīgākie.
01 □ Sabiedrībā cienīts amats □ Atbildīgs darbs 11
02 □ Patīkami kolēģi □ Interesants darbs 12
03 13
04
□ Darbs bez stresa □ Darbs, kas atbilst manām spējām 14
05 □ Stabils darbs □ Ja Tev būtiskāki šķiet kādi citi darba aspekti, kas
06 □ Karjeras iespējas nav šeit minēti, ieraksti tos šeit:
07 □ Labs darba laiks ...........................................................................................
08 ...........................................................................................
□ Sociālās garantijas ...........................................................................................
09
10
□ Iespēja pilnveidoties ...........................................................................................
□ Garš atvaļinājums
□ Iespēja būt starp cilvēkiem
Q14 Katram cilvēkam ir atšķirīgi priekšstati par to, kas viņam ir būtisks dzīvē un kas – mazsvarīgs. Tabulā minētas vairākas
vērtības, ko citi cilvēki minējuši kā savā dzīvē būtiskas. Lūdzu, novērtē, cik būtisks Tev ir katrs no šiem faktoriem.
Nemaz Drīzāk Ne ir, ne Drīzāk ir Ir man
nav man nav man nav man man ļoti
Atzīmē tikai vienu atbildi katrā rindiņā!
būtisks būtisks būtisks būtisks būtisks
1 2 3 4 5
01 Domāt un rīkoties neatkarīgi no citiem □ □ □ □ □
02 Pašam izdomāt jaunas idejas □ □ □ □ □
03 Vienmēr pabeigt iesākto, neskatoties uz šķēršļiem □ □ □ □ □
04 Aizstāvēt savu viedokli pat tad, ja citi domā savādāk □ □ □ □ □
05 Nebaidīties no konfliktiem □ □ □ □ □
06 Spēt atteikties no kaut kā, pateikt nē □ □ □ □ □
07 Būt izpalīdzīgam, palīdzēt citiem cilvēkiem □ □ □ □ □
08 Dalīties ar citiem □ □ □ □ □
09 Pieņemt cilvēkus, kuri ir savādāki, atšķirīgi □ □ □ □ □
10 Pieņemt katru cilvēku tādu, kāds viņš ir □ □ □ □ □
11 Darīt kaut ko sabiedrības labā □ □ □ □ □
12 Iepazīt citas kultūras □ □ □ □ □
13 Interesēties par politiku □ □ □ □ □
14 Zināt vairākas svešvalodas □ □ □ □ □
15 Prast strādāt ar datoru □ □ □ □ □
16 Pārzināt jaunākās tehnoloģijas □ □ □ □ □
17 Ieņemt labu amatu □ □ □ □ □
18 Iegūt labu izglītību □ □ □ □ □
19 Dibināt, izveidot ģimeni □ □ □ □ □
20 Bērni □ □ □ □ □
21 Mājīgs dzīvoklis, māja □ □ □ □ □
22 Laimīga dzīve kopā ar partneri □ □ □ □ □
23 Nodrošināt saviem bērniem drošu nākotni □ □ □ □ □
144

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
24 Būt uzticīgam □ □ □ □ □
25 Iegūt profesiju, kurā var labi nopelnīt □ □ □ □ □
26 Iegūt prestižu profesiju □ □ □ □ □
27 Atrast stabilu darba vietu □ □ □ □ □
28 Veidot karjeru □ □ □ □ □
29 Nopelnīt daudz naudas □ □ □ □ □
30 Atrast interesantu darbu □ □ □ □ □
Q15 Cik lielā mērā Tevi apmierina...
Nemaz Drīzāk Drīzāk Pilnībā
Atzīmē tikai vienu atbildi katrā rindiņā! neapmierina neapmierina apmierina apmierina
1 2 3 4
01 ... mācību/ studiju kvalitāte Tavā skolā/ augstskolā? □ □ □ □
02 ... skolotāju/ pasniedzēju darbs Tavā skolā/ augstskolā? □ □ □ □
03 ...iespējas iesaistīties lēmumu pieņemšanā Tavā skolā/
□ □ □ □
augstskolā?
04 ... skolas/ augstskolas piedāvātās iespējas pavadīt brīvo
□ □ □ □
laiku ārpus mācībām/ studijām?
Q16 Atzīmē tās skolas/ augstskolas aktivitātes, kurās Tu personīgi esi piedalījies/-usies pēdējā gada laikā.
01 □ Esmu piedalījies skolas/ augstskolas izklaidējošu □ Esmu skolas/ Augstskolas avīzes darbinieks 08
pasākumu organizēšanā □ Esmu piedalījies mācību (skolas, rajona, pilsētas 09
02 □ Esmu klases/ Kursa vecākais/-kā u.tml.) olimpiādē
03 10
□ Esmu skolēnu/ Studentu padomes, pašpārvaldes □ Ja esi piedalījies/-usies vēl kādās citās skolas/
04 pārstāvis augstskolas aktivitātēs, ieraksti tās šeit:
□ Esmu skolas/ Augstskolas pašdarbības kolektīva ...........................................................................................
05 dalībnieks ...........................................................................................
□ Esmu skolas/ Augstskolas sporta kolektīva ...........................................................................................
06 dalībnieks ...........................................................................................
□ Esmu piedalījies skolas/ Augstskolas sociālu un/ vai ...........................................................................................
07 ...........................................................................................
politisku pasākumu organizēšanā ...........................................................................................
□ Esmu piedalījies skolas/ Augstskolas kultūras
pasākumu organizēšanā
Q17 Atzīmē tos pulciņus, kolektīvus un interešu grupas, kurās Tu šobrīd piedalies, darbojies (arī ārpus skolas/ augstskolas).
01 □ Sporta kolektīvs □ Ja piedalies vēl kādās citās interešu grupās, 10
02 □ Deju kolektīvs pulciņos vai kolektīvos, ieraksti tos šeit:
03 ...........................................................................................
04
□ Teātra kolektīvs
...........................................................................................
05 □ Koris ...........................................................................................
06 □ Ansamblis, grupa ...........................................................................................
07 □ Vizuālās mākslas kolektīvs, pulciņš ...........................................................................................
08 □ Foto pulciņš ...........................................................................................
09 ...........................................................................................
□ Kādas popa vai roka grupas fanu klubs
...........................................................................................
□ Neformālās interešu, draugu grupas (piemēram,
skeiteri, novusa spēlētāji, apģērbu modelēšana u.c.);
ieraksti, lūdzu, kādās tieši interešu grupās Tu
piedalies:
...............................................................................................
Q18 Atzīmē, lūdzu, tos kultūras un izklaides pasākumus, kurus esi apmeklējis/-usi pēdējā gada laikā.
01 □ Muzejs □ Balets 12
02 □ Teātris □ Deju pasākumi (sacensības, šovi) 13
03 14
04
□ Klasiskās mūzikas koncerts □ Pasākumi izklaides klubos 15
05 □ Populārās mūzikas koncerts □ Ja esi apmeklējis/-usi vēl kādus citus kultūras un
06 □ Izstāde izklaides pasākumus, ieraksti tos šeit:
07 □ Kino ...........................................................................................
08 ...........................................................................................
□ Cirks ...........................................................................................
09
10
□ Opera ...........................................................................................
11 □ Dabas parks, dabas takas
□ Sporta sacensības kā dalībnieks
□ Sporta sacensības kā skatītājs
Q19 Atzīmē, lūdzu, tās sociālās un sabiedriskās aktivitātes, kurās esi piedalījies/-usies pēdējā gada laikā.
145

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
01 □ Apkārtējās vides sakopšana □ Atbalsts, palīdzība jauniešiem un bērniem, kuri 09
02 □ Dzīvnieku aizsardzība nonākuši grūtībās
03 □ Brīvprātīgā darba veikšana 10
04
□ Jauniešu interešu aizstāvība
11
□ Atbalsts, palīdzība invalīdiem □ Ja esi piedalījies/-usies vēl kādās citās sociālās
05
□ Situācijas uzlabošana starp latviešiem un vai sabiedriskās aktivitātēs, ieraksti tās šeit:
06 cittautiešiem ...........................................................................................
...........................................................................................
□ Drošības un kārtības nodrošināšana savā dzīves
...........................................................................................
07 vietā
08 ...........................................................................................
□ Atbalsts, palīdzība veciem cilvēkiem
□ Atbalsts, palīdzība nabadzīgajām valstīm
Q20 Cik lielā mērā Tu uzticies sekojošām institūcijām?
Nemaz Drīzāk Ne uzticos, Drīzāk Pilnībā
Atzīmē tikai vienu atbildi katrā rindiņā! neuzticos neuzticos ne neuzticos uzticos uzticos
1 2 3 4 5
01 Arodbiedrībām □ □ □ □ □
02 Latvijas armijai □ □ □ □ □
03 Policijai □ □ □ □ □
04 Valsts iestādēm □ □ □ □ □
05 Baznīcai □ □ □ □ □
06 Valsts Prezidentei □ □ □ □ □
07 Saeimai □ □ □ □ □
08 Latvijas Bankai □ □ □ □ □
09 Eiropas Savienībai □ □ □ □ □
10 Tiesu sistēmai □ □ □ □ □
11 Izglītības sistēmai □ □ □ □ □
12 Ministru Prezidentam □ □ □ □ □
13 Jauniešu organizācijām □ □ □ □ □
14 Pašvaldībai □ □ □ □ □
15 Nevalstiskajām organizācijām □ □ □ □ □
Q21 Atzīmē, lūdzu, tās politiskās aktivitātes, kurās Tu personīgi esi piedalījies/-usies pēdējo četru gadu laikā.
01 □ Balsoju pašvaldību vēlēšanās □ Esmu piedalījies politiskos mītiņos, gājienos, 11
02 □ Balsoju Saeimas vēlēšanās demonstrācijās
03 □ Esmu darbojies ar politiku saistītā nevalstiskā vai 12
04
□ Piedalījos referendumā
□ Piedalījos diskusijās ar politiķiem sabiedriskā organizācijā
05 13
□ Regulāri diskutēju ar radiniekiem, draugiem par □ Regulāri piedalos politiskās diskusijās internetā 14
06 politiku □ Ja esi piedalījies/-usies vēl kādās citās politiskās
07 □ Esmu ticies ar pašvaldības pārstāvjiem aktivitātēs, ieraksti tās šeit:
...........................................................................................
□ Esmu ticies ar Saeimas, valdības pārstāvjiem
08 ...........................................................................................
09
□ Esmu piedalījies politiskās partijas darbībā ...........................................................................................
□ Esmu rakstījis rakstus par politiku skolas/ ...........................................................................................
augstskolas vai vietējā (pagasta, pilsētas, rajona) ...........................................................................................
10 avīzē ...........................................................................................
□ Esmu rakstījis rakstus par politiku ‘lielajos’ (valsts ...........................................................................................
mēroga) dienas laikrakstos
Q22 Lūdzu, ieraksti TRĪS galvenos iemeslus, kas, Tavuprāt, motivē jauniešus iesaistīties sabiedriskās, sociālās vai
politiskās aktivitātēs.
1) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................
2) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................
3) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Q23 Un šeit ieraksti TRĪS galvenos iemeslus, kas, Tavuprāt, kavē jauniešu iesaistīšanos sabiedriskās, sociālās vai politiskās
aktivitātēs.
1) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................
2) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................
3) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Q24 Novērtē, lūdzu, savas iespējas zemāk minētajos aspektos.
146

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
Nav nekādu Ir nelielas Ir lielas Ir visas Nevaru
Atzīmē tikai vienu atbildi katrā rindiņā! iespēju iespējas iespējas iespējas novērtēt
1 2 3 4 5
01 Iespējas nodarboties ar tiem hobijiem, vaļaspriekiem,
□ □ □ □ □
kuri man patīk
02 Iespējas sasniegt panākumus dzīvē □ □ □ □ □
03 Iespējas gūt materiālos, finansiālos panākumus dzīvē □ □ □ □ □
04 Iespējas realizēt savas intereses □ □ □ □ □
05 Iespējas pavadīt brīvo laiku tā, kā es to vēlos □ □ □ □ □
06 Iespējas iegūt tādu izglītību, kā es vēlos □ □ □ □ □
07 Iespējas apmeklēt kultūras pasākumus, kurus vēlos □ □ □ □ □
08 Iespējas iesaistīties sabiedrisko un nevalstisko
□ □ □ □ □
organizāciju darbībā
09 Iespējas iesaistīties politisko organizāciju, partiju darbībā □ □ □ □ □
10 Iespējas iesaistīties jauniešu organizāciju darbībā □ □ □ □ □
11 Iespējas izvēlēties profesiju, kura man pašam patīk □ □ □ □ □
12 Iespējas līdzdarboties politisko lēmumu pieņemšanā □ □ □ □ □
13 Iespējas nodarboties ar sporta veidiem, kuri man patīk □ □ □ □ □
14 Iespējas saņemt pilnvērtīgu veselības aprūpi □ □ □ □ □
Q25 Ieraksti, lūdzu, TRĪS galvenos jautājumus, kurus Latvijas valdībai būtu jārisina tieši jauniešu sfērā.
1) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................
2) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................
3) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Q26 Novērtē, cik lielā mērā Tu piekrīti sekojošiem izteicieniem.
Nemaz Drīzāk Drīzāk Pilnībā
Atzīmē tikai vienu atbildi katrā rindiņā! nepiekrītu nepiekrītu piekrītu piekrītu
1 2 3 4
01 Jaunieši nav pietiekami informēti par iespējām līdzdarboties ar jaunatnes
□ □ □ □
problēmām saistītu lēmumu pieņemšanā
02 Mana iesaistīšanās politiskās aktivitātēs neko nemainītu □ □ □ □
03 Jauniešiem apvienojoties noteikti ir iespējams sasniegt, panākt daudz vairāk □ □ □ □
04 Jauniešiem ir lielas iespējas ietekmēt ar jaunatnes problēmām saistītus
□ □ □ □
jautājumus savā pašvaldībā
05 Jauniešiem nav nekādas ietekmes uz politiķiem Saeimā un valdībā □ □ □ □
06 Jauniešiem ir lielas iespējas ietekmēt ar jaunatnes problēmām saistītus
□ □ □ □
jautājumus valstī
07 Es sevi uzskatu par Latvijas patriotu □ □ □ □
08 Jauniešiem, kas dzīvo ārpus Rīgas, ir ierobežotas iespējas iegūt labu
□ □ □ □
izglītību
09 Dzīvot Rīgā noteikti ir labāk kā jebkur citur Latvijā □ □ □ □
10 Pilsētu jauniešiem ir lielākas iespējas kā laukos dzīvojošajiem □ □ □ □
11 Jauniešiem, kas dzīvo ārpus Rīgas, ir ierobežotas iespējas atrast labu darbu □ □ □ □
12 Jauniešiem, kuru vecākiem ir daudz naudas, ir lielākas iespējas kā citiem □ □ □ □
13 Mani vecāki bieži diskutē par politiskiem un sociāliem jautājumiem □ □ □ □
14 Es uzskatu, ka politiķu pieņemtie lēmumi ļoti maz ietekmē manu ikdienu □ □ □ □
15 Pašvaldībai būtu vairāk uzmanības jāvelta jauniešu problēmu risināšanai □ □ □ □
16 Es atbalstu jauniešu iesaistīšanos politikā □ □ □ □
17 Jauniešiem ir pārāk maz zināšanu par savām tiesībām □ □ □ □
18 Politiķiem Saeimā būtu jāpievērš lielāka uzmanība jauniešu problēmām □ □ □ □
19 Nākotnē es gribētu dzīvot kādā citā valstī □ □ □ □
20 Labāka darba dēļ es labprāt pārceltos uz dzīvi citā pilsētā vai pagastā,
□ □ □ □
netālu no šī brīža dzīvesvietas
21 Labāka darba dēļ es labprāt pārceltos uz dzīvi citā pilsētā vai pagastā, arī ja
□ □ □ □
tas būtu tālu no šī brīža dzīvesvietas
22 Labāka darba dēļ es labprāt pārceltos uz dzīvi kādā citā valstī □ □ □ □
23 Galvenais ieguvums iesaistoties sabiedrisko un nevalstisko organizāciju
□ □ □ □
darbībā ir iespēja realizēt savas intereses
24 Galvenais ieguvums iesaistoties sabiedrisko un nevalstisko organizāciju
□ □ □ □
darbībā ir iespēja palīdzēt citiem
147

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
25 Daudzi mani draugi ir iesaistījušies kādās sabiedriskās vai nevalstiskās
□ □ □ □
organizācijās
26 Iesaistoties jaunatnes organizācijās, ir iespējams atrisināt dažādus
□ □ □ □
jauniešiem aktuālus jautājumus
27 Uzskatu, ka sabiedriskās un nevalstiskās organizācijas veic sabiedrībai ļoti
□ □ □ □
noderīgu darbu
28 Jaunatnes organizācijas spēj atrisināt daudzas jauniešiem būtiskas
□ □ □ □
problēmas
29 Es uzskatu, ka jauniešiem ir aktīvi jāiesaistās dažādās sociālās palīdzības
akcijās – jāpalīdz veciem cilvēkiem, invalīdiem un bērniem no nelabvēlīgām □ □ □ □
ģimenēm
30 Es nekad neko nedarītu bez maksas □ □ □ □
31 Es labprāt ziedotu savu brīvo laiku, lai bez maksas palīdzētu citiem
□ □ □ □
cilvēkiem (veiktu brīvprātīgo darbu)
32 Zinu, ka mani draugi un paziņas ir iesaistījušies brīvprātīgā darba veikšanā
□ □ □ □
(bez maksas palīdz)
33 Es regulāri sekoju savam veselības stāvoklim □ □ □ □
34 Uzskatu, ka man ir veselīgs dzīves veids □ □ □ □
35 Manuprāt, valsts spēj nodrošināt pilnvērtīgu veselības aprūpi visiem
□ □ □ □
iedzīvotājiem
36 Veselības aprūpes pakalpojumi mūsu valstī atbilst jauniešu vajadzībām □ □ □ □
37 Esmu drošs, ka slimības gadījumā saņemšu kvalitatīvu medicīnisko
□ □ □ □
palīdzību
Q27 Lūdzu, novērtē, kuram no sekojošiem izteicieniem par jaunatnes politiku Tu vislielākajā mērā piekrīti?
Atzīmē tikai vienu atbildi!
01 □ Esmu ļoti labi informēts par Latvijas jaunatnes politiku
02 □ Kaut ko esmu dzirdējis, lasījis par Latvijas jaunatnes politiku, bet īsti par to neko nezinu
03
04
□ Esmu informēts, ka Latvijā ir jaunatnes politika, bet vairāk par to neko nezinu
□ Nekad neko neesmu dzirdējis, lasījis par Latvijas jaunatnes politiku un neko par to nezinu
Q28 Ja kaut ko zini par Latvijas jaunatnes politiku, ieraksti šeit - tieši ko zini? Šeit vari rakstīt jebko, ko esi dzirdējis, lasījis
par jaunatnes politiku.
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Nobeigumā daži jautājumi par Tevi
D1 Ieraksti, lūdzu, kāds ir Tavs vecums?
..................... gadu
D2 Atzīmē savu dzimumu.
1 □ Vīrietis
2 □ Sieviete
D3 Atzīmē, lūdzu, savu tautību.
1 □ Latvietis
2 □ Krievs
3
□ Cita
D4 Kādā valodā Tu runā ikdienā ģimenē.
1 □ Latviešu
2 □ Krievu
3
□ Cita
D5 Atzīmē mācību iestādi, kurā šobrīd mācies/ studē.
1 □ Pamatskola (1.-9.klase) □ Ja mācies cita veida mācību iestādē, ieraksti šeit:
2 □ Vidusskola (10.-12.klase) ...............................................................................................
3 ...............................................................................................
□ Augstskola
D6 Kādu izglītību Tu plāno iegūt? Vari atzīmēt arī vairākas atbildes.
01 □ Pabeigta pamatskola □ Iegūts bakalaura grāds 06
02 □ Pabeigta vidusskola □ Iegūts maģistra grāds 07
03 08
04
□ Pabeigta profesionāli tehniskā skola □ Iegūts doktora grāds 09
05 □ Pabeigts tehnikums □ Nezinu, nevaru atbildēt
□ Iegūta augstākā profesionālā izglītība
D7 Cik cilvēku dzīvo Tavā ģimenē, ieskaitot Tevi pašu?
01 □ Viens □ Četri 04
02 □ Divi □ Pieci 05
03 06
□ Trīs □ Vairāk kā pieci
148

Laboratory of Analytical and Strategic Study Study on Youth Social and Political Activities in Latvia
D8 Kā Tu novērtētu savas ģimenes materiālo nodrošinātību?
01 □ Esam ļoti pārtikuši
02 □ Visdrīzāk esam pārtikuši
03
□ Neesam ne pārtikuši, ne trūcīgi
04
05 □ Visdrīzāk esam trūcīgi
□ Esam ļoti trūcīgi
D9 Ieraksti, lūdzu, kur Tu dzīvo (rajonu vai pilsētu)?
..................................................................................
Paldies Tev par atsaucību!
149