Advertisement

Child and Youth Well-Being on the European Political Agenda

  • Leonie Backeberg
  • Britta Busse
Chapter
Part of the Children’s Well-Being: Indicators and Research book series (CHIR, volume 19)

Abstract

The term well-being is a comprehensive concept that has been interpreted in research as well as in politics with diverse emphasis. When handling a more or less open concept like this, different aspects and political levels need to be addressed in order to achieve a solid basis for policy-based actions. In this chapter, we shed light on current political agendas contributing to child and youth well-being in the European Union member states. We take into consideration existing laws and regulations as well as expert evaluations of their efficacy. We analyse notable differences when it comes to the establishment of child and youth well-being on different political levels (EU, state, regional level). We argue that working towards a common standard for child and youth well-being across the EU member states requires: i) A common understanding of what children’s and young people’s basic needs are, ii) That these basic needs should be covered in every EU country, iii) A monitoring system for understanding the implementation of these needs should be established. Therefore, we describe the state of the art of these prerequisites in the EU on the basis of a secondary-analysis of national laws, regulations and expert interviews from all EU member states. We seek to highlight encouraging as well as unfavourable aspects of the political advancement of children’s and young people’s well-being across the EU.

Keywords

Child well-being Evidence based policy Policy intervention European Union 

References

  1. Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Personality and subjective well-being. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener &, N. Schwarz (Eds.) (2003). Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 213–219). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  2. European Commission. (2006). Towards an EU strategy on the rights of the child. Communication from the Commission, COM 367 final.Google Scholar
  3. European Commission. (2010). Action plan on unaccompanied minors (2010–2014), SEC(2010)534. https://ec.europa.eu/anti-trafficking/sites/antitrafficking/files/action_plan_on_unacompanied_minors_en_1.pdf. Accessed 17 Dec 2017.
  4. European Commission. (2011). On EU indicators in the field of youth. Commission Staff Working Document, SEC 401 final.Google Scholar
  5. European Parliament. (2012). EU framework of law for children’s rights. Brussels: European Parliament.Google Scholar
  6. European Union. (2012). EU youth report 2012. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  7. European Union. (2015). EU youth report 2015. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  8. Eurostat (2014). Population (Demography, migration and projections). Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/population-demography-migration-projections/population-data/database. Accessed 17 Dec 2017.
  9. FRA (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights and Council of Europe). (2014). National policy framework (action plan or strategy). http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2015/mapping-child-protection-systems-eu/national-policy. Accessed 24 Apr 2017.
  10. FRA (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights and Council of Europe). (2015). Handbook on European law relating to the rights of the child. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  11. Hashem-Wangler, A., Busse, B., & Tholen, J. (2014). MYWeB report 2.8: European report on policy capture. Report for the MYWeB project.Google Scholar
  12. MacKay, M., & Vincenten, J. (2010). Action planning for child safety: 2010 update on the strategic and coordinated approach to reducing the number one cause of death for children in Europe – injury. Amsterdam: European Child Safety Alliance, EuroSafe. http://www.childsafetyeurope.org/actionplans/info/action-planning-for-child-safety-update.pdf. Accessed 17 Dec 2017.Google Scholar
  13. North, D. (1991). Institutions. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 97–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. OECD. (2014). Education policy outlook Denmark. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  15. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and Eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. The Council of the European Union. (1994). On the protection of young people at work. COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 94/33/EC. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:01994L0033-20140325&from=EN. Accessed 17 Dec 2017.
  18. The Council of the European Union. (2009). On a renewed framework for European cooperation in the youth field (2010–2018) .COUNCIL RESOLUTION (2009/C 311/01). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32009G1219(01)&from=EN. Accessed 17 Dec 2017.
  19. UNCRC. (1989). UN General Assembly, Convention on the Rights of the Child, 20 November 1989, United Nations, Treaty Series, Vol. 1577. https://downloads.unicef.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/UNCRC_united_nations_convention_on_the_rights_of_the_child.pdf?_ga=2.37879971.1401274608.1513353419-54837490.1489657220. Accessed 15 Dec 2017.
  20. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). (2014). UNDP youth strategy 2014–2017 – Empowered youth, sustainable future. New York: UNDP.Google Scholar
  21. Youth Policy Press. (2014). The state of youth policy in 2014. Berlin: Youth Policy Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute Labour and EconomyUniversity of BremenBremenGermany

Personalised recommendations