page break

Jakarta Youth Conference

Spurred into action by student distent and demonstrations over the past decade, a number of Asian governments have introduced new programmes in the field of youth affairs. They range from the participation of youth in the decision making process to involvement in community development projects. Almost every country in Asia has set up a new programme of some kind for its discontented young people during the course of the last year. And yet, all of these efforts have been undertaken on an ad hoc basis, mainly to meet immediate demands, rather than in fulfilment of carefully thought-out policies.

In the complex effort to determine the most effective youth programmes, certain initiatives have brought dividends while others have clearly failed. With their limited resources, the nations of Asia can scarcely afford to rely upon trialand-error methods in working out their priorities and projects, especially in so new a field as youth affairs. As a way of benefiting from one another's experiences, top-ranking government officials, heads of universities and youth activists from 13 Asian countries gathered in Jakarta this spring to take part in the Asian Conference on Youth Policies. Sponsored jointly by the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture, and by the International Institute for Educational Studies (IIEE, Brussels, Belgium), the meeting provided a unique opportunity for all those directly involved in the youth field to hold free and frank discussions on the development of youth policies in the participating countries. The Conference recognised from the very outset that, in the absence of specific national policies, even the best ad hoc programmes would fail to provide durable answers to the problems at issue.

The participants agreed that the inability of society in general to integrate segments of its younger generation into the mainstream of national life has given rise to a situation where anti-Establishment agitation has now become one of the regular activities of a youth leader. If not, most youth leaders seem to feel, their leadership would be threatened. On the other hand, half-hearted attempts to involve young people in decision-making have benefited almost exclusively the educated youth, mostly students concentrated in the urban areas. To correct this imbalance, methods should be devised, first, to find out just what the aspirations of rural youth are, since they represent the large majority of the young, and, second, to assure their direct participation in the formulation of important decisions.

To give effect to a policy of participation, the government would have to set up administrative machinery at the national level which is both able and authorised to deal with all segments of the young population — students, rural youth, young workers, white—collar youth, and others. Several countries present at the Jakarta Conference — Thailand, India and Cambodia, to name three — reported that they had already created strong, high-level agencies to coordinate youth programmes which normally come under the supervision or direction of different government departments or ministries. In fact, Malaysia has gone one step further; about two years ago, it set up a separate ministry to deal entirely with youth affairs.

The Conference devoted a great deal of attention to projects which involve the young in tasks of national development. As some of the participants put it. "National development is inconceivable without the direct involvement of our young people." in this connection, there were those who argued that since students enjoy the benefits of their expensive educations — as well as relatively extensive leisure time — they should be given every opportunity to take part in national or community development tasks. Thus they would not only have a chance to help solve some of the problems of the poor and underprivileged, but also gain valuable education experiences. On the whole, such activities would bring the students closer to the realities of life and its hardships. In the context of the developing Asian nations, it was felt that student and youth organisations should place community development programmes high on their list of priorities.

The Jakarta Conference was also concerned with the increasingly critical problem of youth unemployment. It suggested that, in addition to traditional remedies, the governments should assist efforts by youth organisations to create more and better opportunities for self-employment among the young.

The need for closer regional cooperation in implementing youth programmes and policies was another point that came up for detailed debate. The Conference proposed that efforts be made to set up an Asian clearinghouse for youth policies and programmes. This would enable individual countries to learn from one another's mistakes and thus avoid repealing them. At the same time, information on successful programmes carried out in one country would encourage others to undertake similar action. Preliminary discussion of the possibility of establishing an Asian Youth Foundation has already received a generally favourable response. Because of its recognised expertise in youth matters and its wide contacts in the field, the International Institute for Educational Studies (IIEE) was asked to pursue further this and other ideas broached at the Jakarta Conference on Youth Policies.