Reciprocal institutional visibility: Youth, peace and security and ‘inclusive’ agendas at the United Nations
| DOI | 10.1177/00108367211007873 |
| Published date | 01 March 2022 |
| Date | 01 March 2022 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367211007873
Cooperation and Conflict
2022, Vol. 57(1) 65 –83
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00108367211007873
journals.sagepub.com/home/cac
Reciprocal institutional
visibility: Youth, peace and
security and ‘inclusive’
agendas at the United Nations
Helen Berents and Caitlin Mollica
Abstract
Within the architecture of the United Nations (UN), formal recognition of the contributions
of historically marginalised individuals and communities to peacebuilding denotes a positive shift
in rhetoric and practice. Alongside broader institutional moves towards ‘sustaining peace’; the
emergence of a ‘Youth, Peace and Security’ agenda since 2015 formalises attention to youth
as positive contributors to peacebuilding and in responding to violence. This article situates
the Youth, Peace and Security agenda within broader institutional and academic attention on
‘inclusive peace’. It considers the ongoing challenges in legitimising youth inclusion; and positions
this emergent agenda in relation to the gains made by the Women, Peace and Security agenda,
and the establishment of the UN’s sustaining peace agenda. These explorations demonstrate the
value of considering the evolution of inclusive peace agendas together, while remaining mindful
of their distinctive characteristics, to better understand the potential of inclusive approaches to
peace. It argues that the Youth, Peace and Security agenda should be understood as a key element
of shifts in UN peacebuilding practice towards inclusivity that enable visibility and legitimacy to a
broader range of peace actors. We suggest that greater recognition of the contributions of youth
to the broader ‘inclusive and sustaining peace’ mandates is needed.
Keywords
Peace and security, peacebuilding, security, UN Security Council, youth, women
Introduction
This article examines the emergence of the Youth, Peace and Security (YPS) agenda
within the broader context of the institutional architecture associated with creating
inclusive peace and security mechanisms. It argues that the YPS agenda should be
understood as a key element of shifts in UN peacebuilding practice towards inclusivity
Corresponding author:
Helen Berents, School of Justice, Faculty of Creative Industries, Education and Social Justice, Queensland
University of Technology, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, QLD 4001, Australia.
Email: helen.berents@qut.edu.au
1007873CAC0010.1177/00108367211007873Cooperation and ConflictBerents and Mollica
research-article2021
Article
66 Cooperation and Conflict 57(1)
that facilitates visibility and legitimacy for a broader array of peace actors. Without
greater acknowledgement of the contributions of youth to the broader ‘inclusive and
sustaining peace’ mandates claims to inclusivity within the UN architecture remain
largely conceptual. Recognition of the contributions women and youth make to infor-
mal peace practices have become more commonplace as both demographics have
sought to increase the visibility of their experiences during violence and instability. In
contrast, their participation in the formal structures that institutionally recognise and
enable peacebuilding practices are more recent.
The UN’s engagement in peacekeeping and peacebuilding practices has evolved from
a non-interventionist holding of the line between belligerent forces to a complex, multi-
institutional industry that includes a wide range of interventionist activities designed to
support and strengthen institutions and communities and respond to emergency needs.
This evolution reflects shifting norms about best practice within the UN architecture
which prioritise responsive and inclusive approaches to insecurity and building peace.
The emergence of holistic approaches to peace echo developments within the peace and
conflict field more broadly, which recognise expansive notions of who participates in
peacebuilding. At the centre of these shifts is the emergent perception that local knowl-
edge and situated expertise about solutions to violence produce more durable peace and
stability. Existing efforts to harness local buy-in through an inclusive peace agenda pri-
oritise the voices of women, civil society and local elites. More recently, formal practices
have sought to capitalise on the rapidly evolving YPS agenda to lend legitimacy to the
inclusive mandates of this formal peacebuilding architecture. Yet, the opening of these
institutional spaces to facilitate inclusive peace remains sporadic and inconsistent par-
ticularly with respect to decision-making and implementation.
The unanimous passage of the 2015 UN Security Council Resolution 2250 on Youth,
Peace and Security (YPS) places youth and youth-led efforts firmly within the broader
peace and security discourse (UN Security Council (UNSC), 2015). The resolution com-
pels international actors (donors and institutions), states and youth groups to work
together on the development of holistic approaches to sustainable peace. This evolution
of the peacebuilding agenda to acknowledge the unique impact of conflict on youth, and
their capacity to participate in peace and security practices also coincided with the 15th
anniversary of UN Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security (WPS), and the
release of the global impact report on WPS, which evaluated ‘best practices’ and chal-
lenges associated with the development of a gender inclusive peacebuilding mandate
(Coomaraswamy, 2015). Two subsequent YPS resolutions 2419 (2018) and 2535 (2020)
have also continued to expand the formal institutional architecture for youth inclusive
peace. The concurrent evolution of these ‘inclusive’ agendas has produced a set of inter-
related frameworks for the international community to employ in their pursuit of sustain-
able peace. While the inclusive mandates of these agendas are becoming increasingly
visible within the formal structures of the UN, the shifts that facilitated these develop-
ments have been slow, partial, and hard-won. Efforts to substantively centre youth par-
ticipation and the YPS agenda have evolved despite structural and normative barriers
that continue to relegate their voices to the margins.
Alongside efforts to implement and engage with these inclusive peace and security
agendas, there was growing consensus across the UN that the formal peace architecture
To continue reading
Request your trial