Fulbright Foreign Student Program - AMIDEAST
of Tunisian nationality and must be a resident in Tunisia at the time of application; Cannot be a
Kennedy-Lugar Youth Exchange and Study (YES - AMIDEAST
sites › filesPDF
Kennedy-Lugar Youth Exchange and Study (YES) - AMIDEAST
sites › filesPDF
YES - USEmbassygov
Public Affairs Section, U S Embassy Tunis, Les Berges du Lac, 1053 TUNIS, Exchange and Study (YES) Program pour 2016-2017 des trois dernières années; certificat d'inscription à l'école
Mes Valeurs Clés :
uploadPDF
CURRICULUM VITAE - Femise
16: Assistant Professor of Economics and Quantitative Methods High School Manar) • Training course of Business English in AMIDEAST Tunisia ( 5th level), June-July, 2011
[PDF] amor youssef sciences physiques
[PDF] amortissement constant calcul
[PDF] amortissement différé définition tunisie
[PDF] amortissement et provision exercice corrigé pdf
[PDF] amos bordeaux prix
[PDF] amos business school classement
[PDF] amos prix année
[PDF] amos prix de la formation
[PDF] amos sport business school avis
[PDF] amphi chartreuse grenoble
[PDF] amphi iut chartreuse grenoble
[PDF] amphitrite mohammedia
[PDF] amphitrite skhirat brunch
[PDF] amphitrite skhirat deal
EdData II
Task Order 15: Data for Education
Programming in Asia and the Middle
East (DEP/AME)
Youth Voice and Community
Engagement across Tunisia: A
Review of the Literature
EdData II Technical and Managerial Assistance, Task Number 15Contract Number AID-EHC-E-00-04-00004
Task Number AID-OAA-BC-11-00001
Revised November 23, 2016
This report was produced by AMIDEAST Tunisia on behalf of RTI International for review by the United States Agency for International Development.Task Order 15: Data for Education
Programming in Asia and the Middle
East (DEP/AME)
Youth Voice and Community
Engagement across Tunisia: A
Review of the Literature
Prepared for
Christine Capacci-Carneal, Senior Education Advisor, Middle East Bureau Mitch Kirby, Senior Education Advisor, Asia Bureau Data for Education Programming/Asia and Middle EastUSAID / Washington
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20523
Prepared by
AMIDEAST Tunisia on behalf of RTI International
RTI International
3040 Cornwallis Road
Post Office Box 12194
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2194
condition by turning knowledge into practice. Our staff of more than 3,700 provides research and technical
services to governments and businesses in more than 75 countries in the areas of health and pharmaceuticals, education and training, surveys and statistics, advanced technology, international development, economic and social policy, energy and the environment, and laboratory and chemistry services. For more information, visit www.rti.org. RTI International is a registered trademark and a trade name of Research Triangle Institute. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States GovernmentEdData II Task Order 15 (DEP-AME)
Youth Voice and Community Engagement across Tunisia: Literature Review Page iTable of Contents
Abbreviations and Acronyms .................................................................................................. ii
Background and Approach .......................................................................................................1
Political Voice and Participation ..............................................................................................1
Historical Context ................................................................................................................1
Formal Political Participation: Voting ..................................................................................2
Formal Political Participation: Involvement with Political Parties .........................................4
Faith in Democracy ..............................................................................................................6
Faith in Public Institutions ....................................................................................................6
.......................................................................................... 10Informal Avenues of Participation ...................................................................................... 11
Social Media ...................................................................................................................... 11
Violence as a Means of Expression .................................................................................... 12
Community Engagement / Civic Participation ...................................................................... 12
Historical Context .............................................................................................................. 12
A New Beginning............................................................................................................... 13
Regional Disparities ........................................................................................................... 13
Youth Perceptions of CSOs ................................................................................................ 14
Youth Participation in CSOs .............................................................................................. 15
Funding and Sustainability ................................................................................................. 15
Other Barriers to Civic and Political Participation ............................................................... 15
Unemployment ................................................................................................................... 15
Education ........................................................................................................................... 16
Corruption .......................................................................................................................... 17
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 18
Reference List .......................................................................................................................... 20
EdData II Task Order 15 (DEP-AME)
Youth Voice and Community Engagement across Tunisia: Literature Review Page iiAbbreviations and Acronyms
ANETI National Agency for Employment and IndependenceCSO Civil society organization
GNRD Global Network for Rights and Development
ILO International Labour Organization
IRI International Republican Institute
NDI National Democratic Institute
NGO Non-governmental organization
OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and DevelopmentMENA Middle East & North Africa
POMED Project on Middle East Democracy
RCD Democratic Constitutional Rally
SFCG Search for Common Ground
SIPHR Swedish Institute for Peace and Human RightsUNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural OrganizationUNFPA United Nations Population Fund
USAID United States Agency for International DevelopmentYLC Youth Leader Council
EdData II Task Order 15 (DEP-AME)
Youth Voice and Community Engagement across Tunisia: Literature Review Page 1Background and Approach
September 2016, AMIDEAST began a qualitative assessment of Tunisian youth perceptions toward civic participation and political engagement. The objective was to highlight youth experiences regarding the barriers and assets to youth political voice and participation, and civic engagement. The assessment approved and funded by USAID included two main activities: the completion of 21 focus groups across the country, and a review of the relevant literature. Thispaper reflects a synthesis of the literature on Tunisian youth, and particularly their political voice
and activities (both formal and informal) and their engagement with civil society. As the review and focus groups took place, themes such as unemployment, education, and corruption emerged as being indirectly relevant. The scope of the review was thus expanded to capture existing knowledge on these themes. Databases including ERIC, JSTOR, Academic OneFile, Gale, ProQuest, and EBSCOhost were searched for reports or academic articles on youth voice and civic or political participation in Tunisia. ResearchGate.net and Google Scholar were also used. The websites of international organizations like the World Bank, ILO, UNDP, UNFPA, OECD, UNESCO, and InternationalCrisis Group were searched for reports written during or after the Revolution. Government
documents were obtained from the Ministry of Education. (Other government websites were searched, but yielded no meaningful literature). Internal university libraries in Tunis and the National Library were consulted onsite. When a helpful source was identified, its bibliography was searched as well. Finally, members of the research team reached out to their contacts, both those in the academic world and members of civil society groups working on youth or democracy issues. This outreach produced some useful unpublished reports and papers. In order to be included in the literature review, a report or study needed to have been published during or after the Jasmine Revolution of 2011. Sources needed to be relevant to the statedobjectives of the study. In other words, they needed to be directly or indirectly related to Tunisian
youth voice, civic engagement, or political participation. A source needed to include original data or an analysis that integrated multiple sources of data. Purely analytical reports were deemed credible if they were either published by known institutions or peer-reviewed journals, or included citations that verified their claims.Political Voice and Participation
Historical Context
Both formal and informal political participation among youth was very low before the Jasmine Revolution. Political and civic participation was closely monitored by the Ben Ali regime (Khatib,EdData II Task Order 15 (DEP-AME)
Youth Voice and Community Engagement across Tunisia: Literature Review Page 22013). Freedom of association was severely limited and civil society organizations (CSOs)
working on political issues could not legally register. Opposition parties were not allowed to hold public meetings or openly criticize the government. Access to the Internet and to information in general was limited and monitored (Breuer & Groshek, 2013; Euromed, 2012; Honwana, 2011). In October 2011, Breuer & Groshek aimed to determine the extent to which young Tunisians were helping to build a participatory political culture. They conducted 16 semi-structured interviews with Tunisian bloggers and online activists, which helped them formulate a 34-question web survey that was taken by 610 Tunisian Facebook users. The sample skewed heavily toward theyoung, the Internet-savvy, the highly educated, and the politically engaged, yet Breuer and
Groshek found that 58.8 percent
collecting signatures for a petition before the Revolution nine months earlier. 55.3 percent had never considered writing a letter to a newspaper or a government official. 49.5 percent had never considered working with or starting a citizen initiative (Breuer & Groshek, 2013). Youth were the main drivers of the Jasmine Revolution, but they largely became disengaged after the Revolution because they did not have the leadership skills, the social and political networks, or the knowledge and experience necessary to have their voices heard in the formal political process during the post-Revolution transition period. There was a lack of formal opportunities for youth to express themselves, which often lead to frustration, and in some cases radicalization. Inthe early transition period, youth were ignorant about and suspicious of civil society and
government alike (Fourati, Ipp, and Prado, 2014).Formal Political Participation: Voting
In March 2011, the National Democratic Institute (NDI) conducted the first qualitative study on post-Revolution. The final report (Collins, 2011) was based on ten focus groups held in nine cities in Tunisia. The cities (Tunis, Bizerte, Sousse, Kairouan, Sidi Bouzid, Sfax, Gabes, Nabeul, and Le Kef) were chosen based on their roles in the Revolution and in order to represent geographical diversity. There were seven to ten men and women between the ages of 25 and 35 in each focus group. At the time, the young participants almost unanimously expressed hope for the future and aspired to play of expression. They felt that the country was headed in the right direction. They were particularly excited about the prospect of voting in a free election, which they had never seen before. They rated voting as the most important means of participating in the democratic process. Most had never voted before because they knew that past elections were not free and fair. But in March2011, they saw voting as an obligation, and as necessary to ensure that their goals during the
Revolution were realized (Collins, 2011).
Despite these positive early signs, when were
held 7 months later, in October 2011, youth turnout was much lower than expected: only 48 percent of Tunisians between the ages of 18 and 33 voted (compared with 68 percent of Tunisians between48 and 63) (Lefevre, 2015). Young women were the least likely to vote; focus groups conducted
by NDI in 2012 revealed that women aged 18-25 were the only group in which over half ofEdData II Task Order 15 (DEP-AME)
Youth Voice and Community Engagement across Tunisia: Literature Review Page 3 participants had neglected to vote, mostly due to confusion with the process of registering and/or voting, or with the multitude of parties and candidates, and their positions (Ben Yahia & Borovsky,2012). Equally disheartening of
those who voted in the 2011 election, 14 percent said they would not vote again (IRI, 2013). In 2013, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) conducted a nationwide survey The report used surveys delivered to samples representative of the Tunisian youth population to inquire about on the constitutional process, government corruption, and political participation. Youth from all regions and socio-economic backgrounds considered voting to be the most effective means of changing society (64.1 percent), followed by activism through an NGO (37.1 percent) and activism in political parties (21.3 percent). But a year later, in the 2014 national parliamentary election, youth turnout was even lower than it was in 2011: only 20 percent of youth actually voted (GNRD & SIPHR, 2014), representing only10 percent of voters (ILO, 2014).
In 2015, a Tunisian CSO called IWatch documented the views of Tunisian youth on democracy and the extent of their involvement in local governance. It was carried out in Mednine, Gafsa, Bizerte, Kairouan, Sousse, Sidi Bouzid, Kef, and Zaghouan. Of those youth surveyed, 38 percent intended to vote in the upcoming 2016 election, 31 percent said they would boycott, and 31 percent had not yet decided. Youth aged between 30 and 35 were more likely to be registered and to intend to vote than younger groups. When asked in a survey conducted by the International Republican Institute (IRI) in 2015 how likely they would be to vote in the 2016 municipal and governorate elections, 58 percent of 18-34 year olds said they would be very or somewhat likely to vote. 41 percent said they were unlikely or somewhat unlikely to vote. In contrast, those in older demographic groups were 67-75 percent likely to vote (IRI, 2015). There are a number of explanations for low voter turnout in the literature. In a report following their observation mission to the 2014 parliamentary elections, the Global Network for Rights and Development & the Swedish Institute for Peace and Human Rights blamed the social and outh for their low turnout. Poor economic conditions and high youth unemployment were frequently mentioned by participants. In another study (Petterson, 2016). Silveira (2015), reported that young people blamed their low voter turnout on the lack of reliable information on the parties and candidates and on their distrust of political parties.In November 2015, IRI , with a total of
1,207 randomly selected Tunisians, using face-to-face interviews. There was a proportional
division by governorate, age group, and gender based on the most recent available data fromWhen asked about the main barriers to young
political participation, the most common answers were lack of training and coaching (31 percent), lack of money (31 percent), lack of opportunity (30 percent), and lack of support (29 percent). 17 percent said a lack of education. Importantly, only 16 percent felt there was a lack of desire toEdData II Task Order 15 (DEP-AME)
Youth Voice and Community Engagement across Tunisia: Literature Review Page 4 participate amongst youth. The data for this question was disaggregated by age and interestingly, the responses of 18-34 year olds were basically the same as the responses of the population at large: Lack of money was the most popular response (32 percent) with lack of training and coaching (30 percent), lack of opportunity (28 percent) and lack of support (28 percent) not far behind. Again, 17 percent said a lack of education. 14 percent said a lack of desire to participate (IRI, 2015). Formal Political Participation: Involvement with Political Parties Because Tunisian youth felt that none of the political parties represented them or addressed their needs, and because they generally had a negative view of partisan politics (which they associated with corruption and abuse of power) and were suspicious of institutional avenues for political expression, many deliberately chose not to participate in the formal political process early on (Honwana, 2011). They were wary of lending their support to political parties, which had been co- opted by the state under Ben Ali. suspicious of all political parties and actors who joined the first transitional government. They were reluctant to formally join any party, campaign for any party or candidate, or to run for office themselves. There was no party or individual that held widespread legitimacy among them (Collins, 2011). Party affiliation was especially low among young women, as they were not perceived as welcoming spaces (Ben Yahia & Bonnefoy, 2012). In 2015, IWatch found that 53 percent of youth reported being interested in national political affairs, despite an overwhelming mistrust in politicians. But only 6 percent were members ofpolitical parties, and only 3 percent were active in their parties. The percentage of those not at all
interested in political activities was 77 percent. About 70 percent of those polled could not define participatory democracy33 percent had never even heard of it. Only 2.7 percent of youth were involved with political parties by 2014 (ILO, 2014). According to Silveira (2015), many of the young people who had joined parties in the immediate aftermath of the Revolution quickly grew disillusioned by the non-collaborative approach that older party leaders took with them, and withdrew their membership. Young people were not given decision- making roles within parties because they lacked political experience, but they also were not given meaningful opportunities to gain experience.2013 case studies of the Islamist Ennahda party and the center-left Ettajid, Ettakatol, and
Massar parties mostly supported this. In contrast to the bulk of the literature, Laiq found that youth
did play a role in forming the new political parties registered post-Revolution, and even had a hand -established parties, like Ettajdid and Ennahda. She found that the majority of political parties in Tunisia had youth wings or quotas for youth in their central committees. In many cases these were hard-won victories, with youth campaigning hard from within the party for structural changes that would allow them proper representation. While party structures were rigid, Laiq did not find any structural barriers that were unique to youth. Infact, she argued that the rigidity of party structures could potentially help youth to advance faster
within party structures because there were clear processes and procedures to follow in order toEdData II Task Order 15 (DEP-AME)
Youth Voice and Community Engagement across Tunisia: Literature Review Page 5 However, Laiq agreed with the bulk of the literature that found that youth had not integrated into youth from both Islamist and secular parties tended to think that the party structure was rigged in favor of the older political elites and that decisions were made in a top-down fashion that did not allow for youth voices to be heard. A member of Ettakatol said that the priorities of the older generation almost always won out over the priorities of the younger generation whenever they were not aligned. A member of Massar said that after Ennahda won the majority of votes in 2011, younger members of Massar demonstrations. In contrast, older members had more faith in the Ennahda government and wanted to pursue diplomatic solutions to problems. The young Massar activist who was interviewed saw Within those parties that lacked structural support for youth voices, young activists were choosingnot to engage in institutional avenues for participation such as party congresses or policy
development. Instead, they were using the party brand to create grassroots networks, or campaign for issues that were important to them. Ettajdid, a secular, center-left party that was, did not have a youth wing. One young Ettajdid activist posited that her party (like other parties that existed under the Ben Ali regime) was closed to new ideas when compared to new parties or parties like Ennahda, which were operating in exile pre-Revolution. She wanted her party to be more active and to publish policy positions and official statements on the key issues of the day, but she found the older generation who was calling the shots to be less proactive. She felt that the Ben Ali days hadquotesdbs_dbs48.pdfusesText_48