Environmental Participation among Youth: Challenges, issues and motivating factors.
SOCIOLOGY AND WELFARE
DEVELOPMENT
Edited by:
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin
Centre for Socioglobal Studies
Padjadjaran University
Foreword by:
Dr. Afriadi Sjahbana Hasibuan, MPA, M.Com (Ec)
Head of Research & Development
Ministry of Home Afairs, Republic of Indonesia
SOCIOLOGY AND WELFARE DEVELOPMENT
© 2015 Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin et. al.
First Published May, 2015
Published By
Centre for Socioglobal Studies
Padjadjaran University
In Cooperation With
Penerbit Samudra Biru (Member of IKAPI)
Jomblangan Gg. Ontoseno Blok B No 15 Rt 12/30
Banguntapan Bantul Yogyakarta Indonesia 55198
Telp. (0274) 9494 558
E-mail/FB: psambiru@gmail.com
ISBN: 978-602-9276-56-5
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or
reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic,
mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter
invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any
information storage or retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publishers.
ii
Sociology and Welfare Development
CONTENTS
Contents ...................................................................................
iii
List of Contributors .................................................................
v
Acknowledgement ....................................................................
ix
Foreword ..................................................................................
xi
Introduction .............................................................................
xiii
Welfare Development: Meanings, Issues and
Challenges
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin .................................
1
Poverty and Social Development
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin, Ali Maksum, Indri
Indarwati ........................................................
19
The Emergence of Jakarta-Bandung MegaUrban Region and Its Future Challenges
Agung Mahesa Himawan Dorodjatoen,
Forina Lestari and Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin ....
39
Development for Urban Poor Housing
Mohd Haizzan Yahaya, Muhamad Fadhil
Nurdin, Hery Wibowo and Mohd Tauik
Mohammad .....................................................
69
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Sociology and Welfare Development
iii
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Chapter 9
Chapter 10
iv
Baitul Mal wat Tamwil: a Sociological
and Social Welfare Movement ?
Hery Wibowo & Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin ........
Environmental Participation among Youth:
Challenges, Issues and Motivating Factors
Lim Jen Zen & Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin .........
79
97
Indonesian Workers Health Condition:
A Sociological Analysis
Bintarsih Sekarningrum, Desi Yunita
and Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin ........................... 125
he Delivery System of Education Programs
Mahathir Yahaya, Ali Maksum,
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin and Azlinda Azman ... 135
Child Brides, Not Our Pride:
Looking Into Child Marriage Incidences in
Malaysia
Mitshel Lino, Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin and
Azlinda Azman ................................................
143
Concluding Remarks
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin .................................. 151
Sociology and Welfare Development
LiSt of ContribUtorS
Agung Mahesa Himawan Dorodjatoen, is a PhD candidate at West
Australia University, Perth – Australia. He is a Planning Staf, Directorate
of Spatial Planning and Land Afairs, Indonesia National Development
Planning Agency (Bappenas). He is a Best Graduate Student in Regional
and Planning Department, Bandung Institute of Technology (2006)
and Utrecht Excellence Scholarships Awardee 2007-2009 on Research
Master Human Geography & Planning, Faculy of Geoscience, Utrecht
University.
Ali Maksum, is a Ph.D candidate at the Centre for Policy Research
and International Studies (CenPRIS), Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang.
His current project is about the Indonesia-Malaysia relations from
defensive realism perspective. He has written articles have been published
in such publisher as Kajian Malaysia: Journal of Malaysian Studies,
Springer (ISI), Indonesia national newspapers and conferences.
Azlinda Azman, Ph.D is an Associate Professor and Head of Social
Work Programme at the School of Social Sciences, Universiti Sains
Malaysia (USM), Penang, Malaysia. She is also the Convenor of the
AIDS Action and Research Group (AARG), USM. She was a Fulbright
Scholar and obtained her Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D) degree in Clinical
Social Work from New York University. Her ields of expertise include
social work education and practice, theory and methods in social work
and social work research. Her areas of research interest include poverty,
Sociology and Welfare Development
v
HIV/AIDS and drug related issues.
Bintarsih Sekarningrum, a leturer at Social Welfare Departement
in Social and Political Sciences Faculty, University of Padjadjaran. She
obtained Bachelor degree, master degree and Doctoral degree from
University of Padjadjaran. Some scientiic papers had been published
at national or international level. Currently, he is focusing on waste
management problem in society who life near the Cikapundung river at
Bandung City.
Desi Yunita, oicially join the Departemen of Sociology at Social
and Political Science Faculty University of Padjadjaran since 2014. She
got Magister degree in Sociology also from University of Padjadjaran and
focusing the research on development and environmental problem.
Forina Lestari, obtained B.Sc.Eng. (ITB, 2006), MSc in Housing,
School of Housing, Building and Planning, University of Science Malaysia
(USM, 2008). Lecturer at Indonesian Institute of Technology (ITI). She
has published a book: Alam Takambang Jadi Guru: Merajut Kearifan
Lokal dalam Penanggulangan Bencana di Sumatera. Consultant and
expertise at Directorate of Rural and Urban Afairs, Indonesia National
Development Planning Agency (Bappenas) and Directorate General of
Spatial Planning, Ministry of Public Works (2013), Directorate General
of Regional Development Assistance, Ministry of Home Afairs and
Expert, Deputy of the Area Development, Ministry of Public Housing
(2012), Expert Staf, Commission V (Infrastructure), he Indonesian
House of Representatives (DPR, 2011). Junior Expert, Directorate of
Rural and Urban Afairs, Indonesia National Development Planning
Agency (Bappenas, 2010).
Hery Wibowo, S.Psi, MM, PhD is a leturer at Departement of Social
Welfare Faculty of Social and Political Science, Padjadjaran University.
Indri Indarwati, is PhD candidate in Social Work at Universiti Sains
Malaysia (USM). Since 1999 she has been attached as a civil servant in
the Ministry of Social Afairs. Her research areas are study of social work,
gender and community development.
vi
Sociology and Welfare Development
Mitshel Lino is a Master of Social Sciences (Psychology) candidate
under the supervision of Assoc. Prof. Dr. Intan Hashimah Mohd
Hashim from the Department of Social Work, Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Her research interest surrounds the ield of Social Psychology. She was
a Graduate Assistant, serving as a Psychology tutor in the university.
She was invited to the Golden Key International Honour Society for
academic excellence and awarded Second Upper Class Honours from her
undergraduate. Her past researches included the area of Multicultural
Psychology and Child Marriage in Malaysia, collaboration project with
UNICEF.
Mohd. Haizzan Yahaya MSW is Ph.D scholars from University
Sains Malaysia. He is currently researching on Urban Poor Housing
and being supervised by. Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin, PhD and associate
professor Azlinda Azman, PhD
Mohd Tauik Mohammad is a Ph.D scholar at the Social Work
Programme, School of Social Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia. His
current Ph.D studies regarding on Specialization Social Work, Forensic
Social Work/Victims’ Studies/Restorative Justice, being supervised by
associate professor Azlinda Azman, PhD.
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin, MA and Ph.D. from University of
Malaya. He is a leturer at Departement of Social Welfare (1982-2011)
and Departement of Sociology (2011-present), Head Departement
of Sociology in Faculty of Social and Political Science, Padjadjaran
University (2014- present). Visiting Associate Professor at University
of Malaya (2008) and Visiting Associate Professor at Univerisiti Sains
Malaysia (2012- present).
Tia Devianty, S.IP., MPA, is a PhD candidates at Universitas
Padjadjaran, and a master’s degree graduate from Public Policy, Faculty
of Public Policy and Management, Flinders University, Australia. Now,
a lecturer at Ahmad Yani University, Bandung - from september 1996
– present Teaching, Researching, and Public Servicing. Current Researches
are mainly about Capacity Building For Decentralization (2008-now).
Sociology and Welfare Development
vii
Current Public Services are Facilitator, Comprehensive Maternal Village
Program in West Java, West Java Province Health Department (2006 –
2008), Facilitator for Sustainable Capacity Building for Decentralization
(SCBD) Project in Bau-bau City and Buton Regency (2008 – 2012),
District Advisory Team Capacity Building Program Minimum Service
Standard Basic Education at Sorong West Papua (2014-2016), tdevianty@
rocketmail.com.
Tofan Rakhmat Zaky, S.Ip MA is a researcher at the Department of
International and Strategic Studies, Universiti Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur.
He is activist in Art Movement in Malaysia.
viii
Sociology and Welfare Development
ACknowLedgement
Alhamdulillah. hanks to Allah SWT, whom with His willing
giving me the opportunity to complete this book entitled Sociology and
Welfare Development. he publication of this book would not have
been possible without the guidance and knowledge wich I have acquired
from my honourable professors; Professor A.D Saefullah - University of
Padjadjaran and Professor Abd. Hadi Zakaria - University of Malaya. I
would also like to dedicate this book to my beloved wife, Tuty Tohri and
our lovely children Tofan Rakhmat Zaky, Forina Lestari, Fitaha Aini and
Tamal Arief Ihsan - their support in my life.
he publication of this book would not be possible without the
assistance and cooperation that we have received over the years from
the many individuals and organization in various parts of the world.
In particular, we wish to thank our team, all authors - Department of
Sociology Padjadjaran University and Universiti Sains Malaysia. Specially
thanks especially to Ali Maksum for his excellent assistance during the
editorial process of this book. Dr. Arry Bainus the Dean of Faculty of
Social and Political Sciences, Padjadjaran University. All of my MastersPhD students and colleagues at Padjadjaran University as well as USM
whom I would like to thanked for providing continuous support towards
my success.
Wassalam.
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin
Sociology and Welfare Development
ix
x
Sociology and Welfare Development
foreword
Dr. Afriadi Sjahbana Hasibuan, MPA, M.Com (Ec)
Head of Research & Development
Ministry of Home Afairs, Republic of Indonesia
First of all, I am honored to write this foreword and to give my
warm endorsement to this book edited by my colleague Muhamad Fadhil
Nurdin, Ph.D. In my point of view, Indonesian harmony is urgent and
should be achieved soon. he government and all stakeholders are pushed
to react and formulate a strong policy to reach the national goals.
his book provides a comprehensive assessment regarding sociology
and welfare development discourses with a new paradigm and approaches
to build Indonesian future. his compilation chapter divided into ifteen
chapters, conclusion and also given constructive policy recommendations.
Although, all authors in this book are depart from various background
and issues, yet they produce and extent some challenges should become
serious attention especially the government. I can argue that this book is
very multidisciplinary and discussed from various angle.
Personally, as practitioner and based on my professional experiences,
I am strongly recommend this book to be read speciically by civil servant,
professional, academicians and those who engage in the social welfare
tasks. One of the important recomendation given by this book is a good
public policy totally need tough cooperation among individuals, groups,
and institutions. I am also impressed that this book which emphasized on
Sociology and Welfare Development
xi
welfare development discourses is smartly promoting the ideas of “spiritual
development” which in some extent isolated from main discussion. his
is important and also to alerting as well as to underscore that Indonesia
is a religious country.
Finally, I am pleased to congratulate to Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin,
PhD which successfully publish this book and demonstrated that he
is a productive scholar. As academician, lecturer and researcher he has
more than thirty years professional experiences in the ield of social and
political sciences in Indonesia as well as recognized in the broad. I hope,
the collaboration between the agency of research and development in
the Ministry of Home Afairs of the Republic Indonesia with the Centre
for Socioglobal Studies - Padjadjaran University become more efective,
fruitful and sustain in the future.
hank you and Wassalam.
Jakarta, 2014
xii
Sociology and Welfare Development
introdUCtion
in the name of god, the most gracioeus, the most merciful
his book provides a thematic issues and challenges in the new era,
sociology to develop human welfare. he main objective of the Sociology
and Welfare Development is to present an integrated analysis of how
the discipline of sociology can contribute to our wider understanding
of the variety of welfare development issues, practices and institutions
approachs, policies and philosophy wich exist in our society and countries.
his explanatory chapters expected to examine and understand as well as
ofer choices for human beings in the dinamics world to build a human
welfare.
his book depart from the point of view that sociology is as applied
social science can contribute to the development of human life through
many perspectives. he various theme have been selected are discussed
from philosophy to policy models. Each chapter attempt to understand
with a core idea namely welfare development.
In the irst chapter, the main theme related to welfare development
is regarding the global presence in knowledge body. In this chapter
demonstrate that there have gap and diferences between modern and
spiritual concept of welfare development. Chapter two focus on poverty
phenomena in Indonesia as a serious problem. Some have observed
that poor family are marginalized and obtain small attention, while
many also has seen that the problems are the policy makers. It has to
recognized that some assistants and stimulus packages has given by
government to the poor family. However, it has to recognized also that
there were existed some problems regarding inefective management,
Sociology and Welfare Development
xiii
policy implementation, bureaucracy and corruption. Yet, all indicates
that Indonesian government has taken a serious strategic action in order
to struggle to eradicate poverty as well as eradication policy against
chronic of corruption. Related with poverty phenomena, in the chapter
nine, concern on historical and inherited problems such as the disabled
people, the pursuit of full employment in urban areas and overstaing
in the public sector, were important causes for urban poverty. However,
these historical problems did not result in serious poverty under the well
planned economic system. he number of poor people inherited from
the previous period was also relatively small.
In the third chapter focus on human geography and planning as part
of human life. Sociologically, this study concludes that the relationships
between two adjacent metropolitan centres are two geographical
phenomena occurred in the Jakarta-Bandung Mega-Urban Region
(JBMUR). However, a rapid urbanization process has also been occurring
in the corridor area between both metropolitan centers. here are both
direct and indirect relations between these two geographical phenomena
which inally lead to the emergence of the Jakarta-Bandung mega-urban
region. In the fourth chapter, that in addition, the struggle of urban poor
communities in Malaysia for housing and land rights is closely related
to the development and history of the country. After the British colonial
period, Malaysia’s priority was to develop its economy by focusing on
the manufacturing and export industry in urban areas. his resulted
when people from rural areas migrating from village to the city, in search
of opportunities and to ill the workforce demand. Most of the urban
migrants would build their own house near the manufacturing factories,
because the surrounding lands were unoccupied and unused. With hard
work and their own resources they would clean the area (wilderness) and
build houses; this would encourage the development in the area and
hence they are known as urban pioneers.
In the ifth chapter the author analyzes the social-welfare fund
called Baitul Mal wat Tamwil (BMT). he authors believe that BMT in
particular and microinance institutions in general is one of the social
welfare movement, getting stronger if you see the development of BMT
in Indonesia, as have been reported by Reuters. he growth of Islamic
microinance institutions (LKMS) in Indonesia is increasingly signiicant.
he main objective of the micro and super micro which is generally being
located in rural areas, LKMS transformed into a small people mover a
tough economy. Currently, there are about three million customers who
xiv
Sociology and Welfare Development
obtained inancial assistant from micro LKMS or BMT.
Chapter six examines the environmental destruction of young
generation to protect and conserve the natural environment. As such,
the key actors in engaging youth participation in environmental action,
be it the government, non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) or
the community, should address the multi-dimensional issues that are
obstacles towards the involvement of the young and come up with
strategies to develop a more intrinsically-motivated participation.
Generally, environmental awareness among youth worldwide is at an
adequate level but it is the translation into action that is still lacking. A
review of the implementation strategies of current environmental action
programs involving youth should be done by the respective organizers
in order to create programs that are fun, hands-on and allows as well
as entrusts youth to apply their environmental knowledge and personal
skills to make key decisions for the future of then environment which
they shall inherit from the present. Hence, there is a need to move
beyond the present, traditional top-down institutionalized approach of
implementing programs towards a more dynamic and lexible approach
in which youth are viewed stakeholders, knowledge sharers and leaders,
and not mere passive participants who carry out the aims dictated by the
organizers.
concentrates on socio-cultural diferences between
hometown and destination areas of Indonesian migrant workers and the
impact towards their health condition. It involves the diferences physical
environment, social, and culture. he diferences of physical environment
involve climate change as well as socio-culture between hometown (Peteuy
Condong Village) and destination (Saudi Arabia). hese diferences
inluence towards the workers health condition related job. Social
diferences are related with social economic status between employers
and workers, that impact to the mental depression of the workers.
Culture diferences are cultures diferentiation between hometown and
destination country. Arabian cultures are introvert and over protected. It
emerge diiculties to access health services. While in the chapter eight,
discuss speciic theme about how to develop any rural community it can
be achieve through the dissemination on the importance of education to
all family members in the rural area. his method is expected to transform
the communities towards appreciating education better. he recognition
of society towards education only, is not enough to enhance the living
standards. Yet, it should be incorporated a the positive attitudes of the
Chapter seven
Sociology and Welfare Development
xv
rural community towards education as a strategy for improving life. At
the same time, the delivery system of the education programs must be
enhanced and it is all depend on the commitment of the school and
teachers of the rural schools as well.
Finally, the last chapter focus on the incidences of child marriage are
no longer pertinent only for less developed country; it actually happens
extensively in diferent parts of the world. Due to psychological and
biological immaturity, children are insuiciently mature to make an
informed decision about a life partner.
his book examines the welfare development issues in the broader
“sociology of welfare development” perspective. It is compiled from
travelers and knowledge experiences in international seminars, talks and
forum of researchers, supervisions and other discussion with my PhD and
Master students. hat experiences, together with their personal values and
interests extremely inluence to all authors in this book. Personally, I hope
that those who engage and read this book will obtain fruitful knowledge.
All errors are the author’s responsibility.
Wassalam.
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin
xvi
Sociology and Welfare Development
Chapter
6
Environmental
Participation among
Youth:
Challenges, issues and motivating
factors
Lim Jen Zen and Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin
Readers guide
Environmental sustainability is one such
key issue that is growing in concern amongst the
global youth community. he United Nations, in
2011, has propagated the need for youth to take
action on environmental problems via programs
or policy-making as environmental de-gradation
and resource depletion caused by human activity
will exacerbate poverty and inequality levels in
the future. his chapter studies investigates the
motivating factors for youth to participate in
environmental programs as well as challenges
and issues which prevent their involvement in
such programs. Youth are deined as aged 15
to 18, which is within the United Nations’
deinition of youth. he study reviews the
overarching concept of youth participation and
Environmental Participation among Youth
97
delves speciically into participation of the young in environmental programs
by reviewing cases of successful programs from around the world. he study
then identiies and analyses factors which motivate youth participation and
citizenship and challenges that prevent their involvement. hese factors
and challenges are then related with youth participation in environmental
conservation activities from the experiences of case studies from around the
world. he indings discuss the three categories of factors which motivate youth
based on the Centres of Excellence for Youth Engagement Youth Participation
Model, namely self, societal and system as well as issues which afect the
intensity of participation of youth in conserving the environment based on a
review of existing literature and case studies.
Introduction
Sustainable development has been normally presented as an interrelation of three components of the ecosystem, namely economy,
environment and society, in which the form of progress that takes place
has to be one in which each aspect does not compete against each other
but reconciles the conlict between social inclusiveness, economic growth
and resource protection and conservation (Barton, 2000: 8). In the pursuit
for material gains, natural environment have been sacriiced, resulting in
a worsening national and global environmental crisis, social problems
and institutional breakdowns (Robertson, 1997:14).
Being emblematic of the state of future society, youth has been
touted as the face of a nation’s changing economy, cultural and moral
ideals, class relations, nationalism and occupational formations. hey
are also expected to be the solution of a nation’s ills, devising answers
for critical social problems (Griin, 1997). Pertinent to the concept of
sustainable development is the safeguarding of existing resources for the
beneit of the future generations. As the future leaders, the youth are a
vital element of the community, in which their participation in sustainable
development programs is important to enhance their comprehension
and interest regarding the concept of sustainable development, as well
as to empower them to take charge in safeguarding the continuity of
sustainable development initiatives. Agenda 21 even dedicates a section
outlining the role of youth as a key player in initiatives to protect the
environment as well as support equitable economic and social progress.
Paragraph 25.1 clearly stresses the importance of youth in governing
98
Sociology and Welfare Development
sustainable development by stating :
“… the involvement of today’s youth in environmental and
development decision-making and in the implementation
of programs is critical to the success of Agenda 21…their
intellectual contribution and ability to mobilize support…
bring unique perspectives that need to be taken into
account”1.
Even though they have been much touted as the leaders of today
and the future, the low level of youth participation in addressing
community and national socio-political issues, including climate change
and environmental pollution, and heritage conservation, somewhat
dismissed the notion. In the Merdeka Center Youth Survey, conducted
over a period of three years between 2006 and 2008, youth self-eicacy is
found to be consistently-low, with most youths believing that they have
little capability to transform society, despite the contrary depiction of
their high level of awareness towards social issues, including protection
of the environment. For example, while the environment was the third
biggest issue of primary concern towards youth, afecting 16 percent of
the respondents in the 2007 Merdeka Center Youth Survey (Merdeka
Center, 2007:13), again, youth displayed a lack of self-eicacy in
addressing development issues around them, with only 39 percent
believing they can solve problems within their respective communities. A
total of 21 percent of youth are involved in civic organizations, but half
of them were members of political organizations or government-initiated
movements such as Belia 4B, Majlis Belia Malaysia or Rakan Muda, with
only 5 percent being involved in community level associations (Merdeka
Center, 2007:1, 17, 19).
his research paper will seek to address the issue of youth participation
in sustainable development programs, particularly on environmental
conservation, by exploring the concept of participation and the challenges
towards youth participation in general before analysing the issues which
have hindered youth from environmental participation and inally,
surveying motivating factors of participation amongst the young.
1 United Nations. (n.d.). Children and youth in sustainable development. Retrieved 8 February 2011 from http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.Print.asp?documentid=52&articleid=73.
Environmental Participation among Youth
99
he Meaning of Participation
Before discussing the challenges of youth participation, it is
imperative to understand the meaning of participation as viewed from
multiple dimensions. First of all, Hart (1992:5) deined participation as
“the process of sharing decisions which afect one’s life and the life
of the community in which one lives. It is the means by which a
democracy is built and it is a standard against which democracies
should be measured. Participation is the fundamental right of
citizenship”.
However, Hart’s deinition can be perceived as being too wide.
Midleton (2006) in his deinition narrowed down youth participation as
“giving children and young people (usually up to the age of 18) a chance to
express their views on aspects of life that afect them”. More speciically, homas
and Percy-Smith (2010) deined youth participation as a complex concept
which involves active participation and decision making by the young at
diferent levels ranging from everyday events to speciic incidences. hey
also speciied participation as a foundation for the practice of citizenship.
In a review of 14 diferent meanings of youth participation, Farthing
(2012) discovered that ten of the deinitions described participation as
involving decision making while seven deinitions limited the process
towards issues which afect the young. Four of the deinitions postulated
the notion of “active involvement”. Hence, it can be summed up that
youth participation is the active engagement of the young to take action
on, including making decisions, on issues that afect them. As the future
leaders, environmental sustainability is certainly an agenda which will
leave a huge impact towards their lives and one which they need to take
pertinent action on.
However, in the context of this study, the deinition of participation
in sustainable development expands more than just the decision making
process. Adopting a more general perspective, participation is termed
according to Armitage (1988) which is “a process by which citizens act in
response to public concerns, voice their opinions about decisions which
afect them and take responsibility for changes to the community”.
he act of participation as deined in the context of this study can be
categorized into two main forms, namely social participation and
political participation. Participation can be achieved via diverse forms
100
Sociology and Welfare Development
from consultation, training, one-of events or projects to governance.
Participants sampled are not limited to merely the leaders, but will also
encompass other levels of involvement such as advisor, being part of a
committee as well as ordinary membership. Nevertheless, these concepts
are still endured to the concept of sustainable development. Nurse (2006)
the three pillars of sustainable development are showed as below graph.
Based on the Nurse’s guide the following sections will explore more
about the concept of participation on regards youth participation.
he Challenge of Youth Participation
“No one is born a good citizen; no nation is born a democracy.
Rather both are processes that evolve over a lifetime. Young people
must be included from birth. A nation that cuts itself from its
youth severs its lifeline”
- Koi Annan (in Ragan & McNulty, 2004:28)
his bold statement by the former Secretary General to the
United Nations’ accentuated the importance of youth as civic actors
of a nation. Even though the world population is nearing the last stage
of its demographic transition with the number of 15 to 24 year olds 2
2
he deinition of youth utilized by the UN in the UN World Population survey refers to people aged between 15 to 24 years.
Environmental Participation among Youth
101
declining, the number of youths in this age group is booming in the
developing regions of the Middle East, South and Southeast Asia and
Sub-Saharan Africa. Approximately 90 percent of world youth live in
developing nations (ILO, 2010:7) where the efects of environmental
degradation are strongly felt compared with developed countries as a
result of development pressures, resource limitations and weak national as
well as international political commitment and governance (O’ Connor
& Turnham, 1992). With the youth population in Africa and South Asia
continuing to increase exponentially between the year 2010 and 2015
(ILO, 2010:7), they are a strong force for civic engagement which can
assert their inluence and lead eforts towards safeguarding their natural
resources for the long-term. Being next in line to lead their communities,
the present youth cohort worldwide must develop their civic eicacy,
leadership capacity and worldview to face the challenges of globalization
and sustainability which they will carry upon their shoulders.
Despite the emerging pertinence of youth civic participation, the
capability and efectiveness of youth as civic actors’ remains contested.
heir lack of interest towards public afairs has cast a negative light on
their much espoused role as future leaders. A cross-cutting study by
the International Education Agency on civic engagement among 14
year-olds in 28 countries highlighted their moderate interest towards
politics and is not interested in any forms of civic-related activities such
as becoming organization members, petitioning or running for public
oices (Torney-Purta et.al., 2001). Empirical studies in developed
nations such as America (Putnam, 2000; Carprini, 2000.), Canada (Stolle
& Cruz (in Government of Canada, 2005:82-97)) and Spain (Blanch
(in Forbrig (ed.), 2005:63-5)) showed declining civic engagement
levels among youth. he consumerist-oriented society which eschewed
collectivity for individualization has been blamed for shaping cynicism
and disengagement among urban youth in developed nations (Beck &
Beck-Gernsheim (in Wood, 2010)).
Further compounding the disinterest amongst youth to be involved
in their communities are the narrow and negative opinions of adults
towards their characteristics. Youths are typecast as argumentative,
confused, ignorant and a threat to authority. his belief was widely held
by adults across the world, who also ampliied the age diferences by
viewing youth capabilities and opinions as always inferior compared to
theirs (Camino & Zeldin, 2002). Camino & Zeldin (2002) in his survey
of 700 adults in Washington D.C. and Wisconsin found more than half
102
Sociology and Welfare Development
of the respondents have little or no conidence in youths assuming civic
leadership. Such general assumptions of young adulthood as a period
marked by “heightened storm and stress” (Arnett, 1999) are adversative
towards civic democracy, especially in the realm of environmental
action.
Declining civic engagement among youth, however, is not
simplistically caused by the inluence of communal social capital alone.
Holland, Reynolds and Weller (in Hastings et.al., 2011) suggested youth
can develop their own social capital via new ways of engagement. He
theorized that it is more diicult to mobilize a group following their
inclusion into democratic politics via institutions as compared to before
their inclusion. Institutionalization has created a dependency between
the public and the institutions, in which the general public perceived
and left issues to be handled by the political institutions. At the same
time, bureaucratization and monopolization of community issue by the
institutions has also limited the involvement of the public in addressing
matters pertaining to their living environment.
Youth Participation in Environmental Programs
An abundance of international literature has highlighted the role
of youth in community development as well as how citizen groups,
governments and non-proit as well as non-governmental organizations
are providing opportunities to support it. Dodd (in Chawla, 2002)
acknowledged the growing global recognition of youth as a nascent force
in the development process, as how women are after the emergence of
the women’s rights movement, stating that: “Listening to smaller voices, by
which children are brought into the process of planning, implementation and
evaluation of endeavours undertaken in the interests of the whole community,
means embracing the interlinked concepts of gender and generation” (Dodd
(in Chawla, 2002)).
As a citizen, youth exercise their right for democracy not only
through political involvement, but also through conducting work for the
community through volunteering or through charity or neighborhood
bodies. Democracy per se can only be achieved when people, including
youth, wield their inluence on efecting change on problems that afect
them (Westheimer (in Peteru, 2006:69)). One of the key challenges
which required the attention and mobilization of youth civic engagement
Environmental Participation among Youth
103
is to create a sustainable living environment. Rapid physical development
spurred on by exponential economic growth in the world, and has
simultaneously resulted in the destruction of our natural environment.
Pollution and climate change has become pressing problems that will
create disastrous efects on the lives of the future generation, leading
to food shortages, lack of clean water, polluted atmosphere which will
only result in them being vulnerable to malnutrition and illness (United
Nations, 2010:1).
Existing experiences of youth involvement in environmental
protection, be it in decision making or action, adult-supported or
youth initiated, have proven their viability as a force that adds value
to the process for sustainable change. National and local governments,
intergovernmental agencies such as the UN and World Bank, as well
as the corporate sector and NGO’s are leveraging on youth as valuable
knowledge and skill resources, and have formed cohesive partnerships
with them to embark on new opportunities to further the agenda of
environmental conservation such as social and eco-based enterprise,
watchdog groups and community advisory roundtables (World Bank,
2006).
Issues of Youth Participation in Environmental Programs
In terms of youth participation in environmental programs, studies
from Abdul Latif Ahmad et.al. (2012), Tan & Norzaini (2011) &
Samsulkamil (2008), highlighted that a strong awareness of environmental
problems and their causes exist, among both university students (Abdul
Latif Ahmad, 2012) and secondary school children (Samsulkamil, 2008).
However, while most youth do generally participate in environmentaloriented sustainable development activities via both physical and online
platforms, their involvement is passive and inconsistent. In a study on
youth perception and participation in environmental citizenship among
Malaysian youths in Klang Valley, Abdul Latif Ahmad (2012) found
that youth in his focus group interviews were mostly passively forwarding
messages and calls for environmental action via social interaction sites such
as Facebook and Twitter to their friends. Some were initially involved in
large-scale projects held in the Klang Valley such as Earth Hour and the
Go Green Project. Alas, their involvement was only during the year when
these projects were initiated and were not continued in the following
104
Sociology and Welfare Development
years. Most youth were also found to be apathetic towards encouraging
pro-environmental behavior among their peers for fearing it will disrupt
ties among peers and being viewed as busybodies. It is also found that
youth are generally inactive in participating in environmental programs
due to a lack of concern and knowledge of such activities, as well as a
pessimistic view that their simple actions would not make an impact
towards environmental conservation (Abdul Latif Ahmad, 2012).
he results of Abdul Latif ’s research were concurrent with that of
Aini M.S., Nurizan Y. & Fakh’rul-Razi A. (2007), which indicated a low
level of participation in environmental action among secondary school
students aged between 15 and 17 in Johor Bahru. While an overwhelming
majority of 93 percent of the students were aware of environmental
issues, such as forest destruction, indiscriminate toxic disposal and ozone
depletion, the level of participation in environmental activities such as
campaigns, nature clubs and community work is rather low, with only
6 percent having been a member of nature organizations such as World
Wildlife Fund (WWF), Friends of the Earth and Nature Lovers’ Club.
Likewise, a study conducted by Othman et.al. (2004) on environmental
consumer practices among secondary schooling youth in Klang Valley,
Malacca and Sarawak also indicated low levels of commitment among
the young to improve their environment.
Table 1.1
Level of Youth Involvement in Nature Related Activities
Mode of Involvement
Mean Scores
I watch documentary ilms about the
environment
3.44
I read environmental-related articles in
magazines, books
3.00
I participate in environmental campaigns
in schools
2.40
I plant trees and vegetables at home
2.14
I am involved in beautifying the school
garden
2.05
I participate in environmental seminars
and exhibitions
2.02
Environmental Participation among Youth
105
I surf the net for environmental
information
2.01
I participate in environmental activities
(e.g. cleaning)
1.91
Overall mean
2.37
Total Respondents = 306
Scale: 1 = never or once a year 2 = at least once a year 3= several times a
year
4= at least once a month
Source: Aini M.S., Nurizan Y. & Fakh’rul-Razi A. (2007)
Similarly, in Scotland, a survey of youths aged 16 to 24 has in 2000
has found that the consideration of environmental problems as a pertinent
issue is lesser amongst people from this age cohort. Negative perception
from adults, a political system which alienated youth and do not hear
their voices and a lack of information about participation opportunities
have appeared to be the reason behind this apathy in taking action on
environmental problems. Many youth are succumbed to social pressures,
such as attaining popularity, excelling in examinations and being good
at sports while viewing civic involvement as “uncool”. he duration of
a program is also impactful towards sustained youth involvement in
protecting their environment. A large number of programs are of a shortterm basis and youth who are only involved in environmental programs
for a short duration of less than 18 weeks usually demonstrate a lack of
interest and will drop out of such programs (Schusler & Krasny, n.d.).
he relationship between individual, society and institutions may
also impact pro-environmental behavior amongst youth. As evident in
the study by Blake (1999) on the value-action gap within participants of
the UK Going for Green Sustainable Communities Project, individuality,
practicality and responsibility are identiied as three barriers towards
participation. With regard to individuality, this is the individual’s view
on environmental action. Individuals may be lazy or not keen to ind
out more about environmental action opportunities around them.
Practicality refers to the ability to access opportunities for participation.
On occasions, constraints of time, conlicting duties or the inability to ind
106
Sociology and Welfare Development
a centre or organization which carries out environmental action in their
neighborhood may become a hindrance towards further involvement in
environmental work. Responsibility refers to whether a program has direct
impact towards youth. he young are not keen on programs which are
conducted by people or authorities which they do not trust. hey believe
that governments do not listen to them and would not take authoritative
action on any of the environmental problems they have raised (Abdul
Latif Ahmad, 2012).
Factors Motivating Youth Participation in Environmental
Programs
As the threat of rapid physical progress began to impinge on the
sustainability of the natural environment of a city, there is a growing
need for the young to assume the mantle of leaders who spearhead
initiatives and invigorate community awareness on the importance to take
accountability for the conservation of our limited resources. If judged by
the sheer size of the global youth population, they constitute a strong base
of human capital that is major stakeholders in the development of their
communities. he United Nations (2010:6) has presented granting youth
participation in development as an investment which strengthens their
ability to meet their own needs, reduces their vulnerability to economic,
political and social instabilities, promotes sustainability of development
strategies and facilitates entry into target groups as well as builds social
capital.
Studies on youth participation in environmental action view
the factors motivating involvement in protection of the environment
mainly from two viewpoints, namely their formative experiences and
contemporary factors (Chawla & Cushing, 2007).
Prior Formative Experiences in Environmental Action
Studies on formative experiences are centered mainly on childhood
experiences, such as outdoor play, exposure to environmental threats,
environmental education and time spent with others in nature, which
become sources for environmental action, or inaction (Arnold, Cohen
& Warner, 2009; Wells & Lekies, 2006). However, while explaining
participation in environmental activities based on life experience factors
Environmental Participation among Youth
107
have been criticized for being retrospective without taking into account
contemporary experiences (Scott (in Chawla & Cushing, 2007)), it has
to be noted that the relevance of past experiences have been a pertinent
factor towards driving youth and adult participation in the environment,
as evident through similar indings in studies on youth participation in
the environment (Wells & Lekies, 2006; Sia, Hungerford & Tomera,
1986).
Contemporary Factors
Besides childhood experiences, the decision of a youth to take active
part in environmental protection has also been attributed to several
contemporary factors which may impact levels of participation, such as
gender, socioeconomic levels and environmental knowledge (Chawla &
Cushing, 2007). Women might possess less knowledge of the environment
but are more emotionally concerned about its destruction compared to
men (Roper Starch Worldwide, 1999). People of lower income groups
tend to participate in ecological protection-related actions only if it
beneited them economically (Roper Starch Worldwide, 1994).
he aspect of knowledge as a motivating factor for environmental
participation, however, is contested as Kempton et.al. (1995) have
founded that having environmental knowledge alone does not lead to proenvironmental behavior per se. Jensen (2002) chose to difer and asserted
that while formal knowledge via subjects in the school syllabus might not
be a motivating force for pro-environmental behavior due to the lack of
application of knowledge. Instead, knowledge that is engagement-oriented
would encourage youth to be more active in protecting the environment.
Kuhlemeier, Van den Bergh and Largeweij (1999) reasserted the importance
of knowledge in predicting environmental action, through their indings
that student with stronger knowledge tend to display pro-environmental
attitudes, while Bogner (1999) and Matthies (2005) have found through
their surveys of child and youth participants in environmental camps in
England and Switzerland respectively that acquired knowledge through
such experiential learning programs have resulted in students displaying
a more pro-environmental behavior between four to six weeks after the
end of the programs.
108
Sociology and Welfare Development
he Role of Internal and External Factors in Motivating
Participation
he decision of youths to engage, or not, in an environmental
action initiative is also inspired by circumstances from both external and
internal factors. Studies regarding youth engagement in ields connected
to sustainability, such as environmental awareness and conservation, rural
and urban community development, politics and volunteer work, have
suggested a multiplicity of factors, both internal and external, which
promoted the involvement of the younger generation, such as incentives
(Collins, Bronte-Tinkew & Burkhauser, 2008), peer inluence (Brander
& Rivera-Caudill, 2008; Cano & Bankston, 1992), government policies
(Etra et.al., 2010:7) and demographic predictors such as ethnicity, gender,
household income and level of education (Borden et.al., 2006; Fahmy,
2004).
External Factors
An action stemming from an external factor, or extrinsic motivation,
is usually performed in order to achieve an ulterior motive other than
that of the program itself or when inluenced by socioeconomic or
environmental factors (Ryan & Deci, 2000). However, contrary to
popular notions that such form of participation is non-autonomous,
certain forms of intentional behaviour born out of an aim to attain a
reward or personal gain can also be included in the extrinsic motivation
classiication (Ryan & Deci (in Brander, 2008:27-8). For example, when
a student participates on his own accord in a clean-up campaign in order
to attain higher co-curricular assessment grades, he has a higher level
of autonomy in participating as opposed to another who was forced
to attend by his teacher, even though both are extrinsically-motivated
involvements. Hence, participation inspired by external factors can
impact a person’s behaviour and interest towards the program in difering
levels, depending on the level of internalization of the behaviour within
the individual. he below diagram is self-determination theory developed
by Ryan & Deci (2000).
Environmental Participation among Youth
109
Source: Ryan and Deci (2000), adapted.
Use of incentives
he use of incentives to attract youth to participate in a civic program
might sustain their interest and participation, thus indirectly forming their
sense of ownership towards the program. Continuous participation as an
indirect result from the motivation of incentives could also strengthen the
learning culture among the youth participants, which can spur academic
achievements in schools or higher learning institutions (Collins, BronteTinkew & Birkhauser, 2008). Incentives ofered to youth participants in
a community engagement program may range from inancial incentives,
food, prizes and ield trips (Collins, Bronte-Tinkew & Birkhauser, 2008).
Ofering monetary incentives have been found efective in motivating
youth, especially teenagers, to be engaged in a civic project (Institute of
Educational Sciences (in Collins, Bronte-Tinkew & Birk
DEVELOPMENT
Edited by:
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin
Centre for Socioglobal Studies
Padjadjaran University
Foreword by:
Dr. Afriadi Sjahbana Hasibuan, MPA, M.Com (Ec)
Head of Research & Development
Ministry of Home Afairs, Republic of Indonesia
SOCIOLOGY AND WELFARE DEVELOPMENT
© 2015 Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin et. al.
First Published May, 2015
Published By
Centre for Socioglobal Studies
Padjadjaran University
In Cooperation With
Penerbit Samudra Biru (Member of IKAPI)
Jomblangan Gg. Ontoseno Blok B No 15 Rt 12/30
Banguntapan Bantul Yogyakarta Indonesia 55198
Telp. (0274) 9494 558
E-mail/FB: psambiru@gmail.com
ISBN: 978-602-9276-56-5
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or
reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic,
mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter
invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any
information storage or retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publishers.
ii
Sociology and Welfare Development
CONTENTS
Contents ...................................................................................
iii
List of Contributors .................................................................
v
Acknowledgement ....................................................................
ix
Foreword ..................................................................................
xi
Introduction .............................................................................
xiii
Welfare Development: Meanings, Issues and
Challenges
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin .................................
1
Poverty and Social Development
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin, Ali Maksum, Indri
Indarwati ........................................................
19
The Emergence of Jakarta-Bandung MegaUrban Region and Its Future Challenges
Agung Mahesa Himawan Dorodjatoen,
Forina Lestari and Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin ....
39
Development for Urban Poor Housing
Mohd Haizzan Yahaya, Muhamad Fadhil
Nurdin, Hery Wibowo and Mohd Tauik
Mohammad .....................................................
69
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Sociology and Welfare Development
iii
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Chapter 9
Chapter 10
iv
Baitul Mal wat Tamwil: a Sociological
and Social Welfare Movement ?
Hery Wibowo & Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin ........
Environmental Participation among Youth:
Challenges, Issues and Motivating Factors
Lim Jen Zen & Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin .........
79
97
Indonesian Workers Health Condition:
A Sociological Analysis
Bintarsih Sekarningrum, Desi Yunita
and Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin ........................... 125
he Delivery System of Education Programs
Mahathir Yahaya, Ali Maksum,
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin and Azlinda Azman ... 135
Child Brides, Not Our Pride:
Looking Into Child Marriage Incidences in
Malaysia
Mitshel Lino, Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin and
Azlinda Azman ................................................
143
Concluding Remarks
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin .................................. 151
Sociology and Welfare Development
LiSt of ContribUtorS
Agung Mahesa Himawan Dorodjatoen, is a PhD candidate at West
Australia University, Perth – Australia. He is a Planning Staf, Directorate
of Spatial Planning and Land Afairs, Indonesia National Development
Planning Agency (Bappenas). He is a Best Graduate Student in Regional
and Planning Department, Bandung Institute of Technology (2006)
and Utrecht Excellence Scholarships Awardee 2007-2009 on Research
Master Human Geography & Planning, Faculy of Geoscience, Utrecht
University.
Ali Maksum, is a Ph.D candidate at the Centre for Policy Research
and International Studies (CenPRIS), Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang.
His current project is about the Indonesia-Malaysia relations from
defensive realism perspective. He has written articles have been published
in such publisher as Kajian Malaysia: Journal of Malaysian Studies,
Springer (ISI), Indonesia national newspapers and conferences.
Azlinda Azman, Ph.D is an Associate Professor and Head of Social
Work Programme at the School of Social Sciences, Universiti Sains
Malaysia (USM), Penang, Malaysia. She is also the Convenor of the
AIDS Action and Research Group (AARG), USM. She was a Fulbright
Scholar and obtained her Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D) degree in Clinical
Social Work from New York University. Her ields of expertise include
social work education and practice, theory and methods in social work
and social work research. Her areas of research interest include poverty,
Sociology and Welfare Development
v
HIV/AIDS and drug related issues.
Bintarsih Sekarningrum, a leturer at Social Welfare Departement
in Social and Political Sciences Faculty, University of Padjadjaran. She
obtained Bachelor degree, master degree and Doctoral degree from
University of Padjadjaran. Some scientiic papers had been published
at national or international level. Currently, he is focusing on waste
management problem in society who life near the Cikapundung river at
Bandung City.
Desi Yunita, oicially join the Departemen of Sociology at Social
and Political Science Faculty University of Padjadjaran since 2014. She
got Magister degree in Sociology also from University of Padjadjaran and
focusing the research on development and environmental problem.
Forina Lestari, obtained B.Sc.Eng. (ITB, 2006), MSc in Housing,
School of Housing, Building and Planning, University of Science Malaysia
(USM, 2008). Lecturer at Indonesian Institute of Technology (ITI). She
has published a book: Alam Takambang Jadi Guru: Merajut Kearifan
Lokal dalam Penanggulangan Bencana di Sumatera. Consultant and
expertise at Directorate of Rural and Urban Afairs, Indonesia National
Development Planning Agency (Bappenas) and Directorate General of
Spatial Planning, Ministry of Public Works (2013), Directorate General
of Regional Development Assistance, Ministry of Home Afairs and
Expert, Deputy of the Area Development, Ministry of Public Housing
(2012), Expert Staf, Commission V (Infrastructure), he Indonesian
House of Representatives (DPR, 2011). Junior Expert, Directorate of
Rural and Urban Afairs, Indonesia National Development Planning
Agency (Bappenas, 2010).
Hery Wibowo, S.Psi, MM, PhD is a leturer at Departement of Social
Welfare Faculty of Social and Political Science, Padjadjaran University.
Indri Indarwati, is PhD candidate in Social Work at Universiti Sains
Malaysia (USM). Since 1999 she has been attached as a civil servant in
the Ministry of Social Afairs. Her research areas are study of social work,
gender and community development.
vi
Sociology and Welfare Development
Mitshel Lino is a Master of Social Sciences (Psychology) candidate
under the supervision of Assoc. Prof. Dr. Intan Hashimah Mohd
Hashim from the Department of Social Work, Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Her research interest surrounds the ield of Social Psychology. She was
a Graduate Assistant, serving as a Psychology tutor in the university.
She was invited to the Golden Key International Honour Society for
academic excellence and awarded Second Upper Class Honours from her
undergraduate. Her past researches included the area of Multicultural
Psychology and Child Marriage in Malaysia, collaboration project with
UNICEF.
Mohd. Haizzan Yahaya MSW is Ph.D scholars from University
Sains Malaysia. He is currently researching on Urban Poor Housing
and being supervised by. Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin, PhD and associate
professor Azlinda Azman, PhD
Mohd Tauik Mohammad is a Ph.D scholar at the Social Work
Programme, School of Social Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia. His
current Ph.D studies regarding on Specialization Social Work, Forensic
Social Work/Victims’ Studies/Restorative Justice, being supervised by
associate professor Azlinda Azman, PhD.
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin, MA and Ph.D. from University of
Malaya. He is a leturer at Departement of Social Welfare (1982-2011)
and Departement of Sociology (2011-present), Head Departement
of Sociology in Faculty of Social and Political Science, Padjadjaran
University (2014- present). Visiting Associate Professor at University
of Malaya (2008) and Visiting Associate Professor at Univerisiti Sains
Malaysia (2012- present).
Tia Devianty, S.IP., MPA, is a PhD candidates at Universitas
Padjadjaran, and a master’s degree graduate from Public Policy, Faculty
of Public Policy and Management, Flinders University, Australia. Now,
a lecturer at Ahmad Yani University, Bandung - from september 1996
– present Teaching, Researching, and Public Servicing. Current Researches
are mainly about Capacity Building For Decentralization (2008-now).
Sociology and Welfare Development
vii
Current Public Services are Facilitator, Comprehensive Maternal Village
Program in West Java, West Java Province Health Department (2006 –
2008), Facilitator for Sustainable Capacity Building for Decentralization
(SCBD) Project in Bau-bau City and Buton Regency (2008 – 2012),
District Advisory Team Capacity Building Program Minimum Service
Standard Basic Education at Sorong West Papua (2014-2016), tdevianty@
rocketmail.com.
Tofan Rakhmat Zaky, S.Ip MA is a researcher at the Department of
International and Strategic Studies, Universiti Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur.
He is activist in Art Movement in Malaysia.
viii
Sociology and Welfare Development
ACknowLedgement
Alhamdulillah. hanks to Allah SWT, whom with His willing
giving me the opportunity to complete this book entitled Sociology and
Welfare Development. he publication of this book would not have
been possible without the guidance and knowledge wich I have acquired
from my honourable professors; Professor A.D Saefullah - University of
Padjadjaran and Professor Abd. Hadi Zakaria - University of Malaya. I
would also like to dedicate this book to my beloved wife, Tuty Tohri and
our lovely children Tofan Rakhmat Zaky, Forina Lestari, Fitaha Aini and
Tamal Arief Ihsan - their support in my life.
he publication of this book would not be possible without the
assistance and cooperation that we have received over the years from
the many individuals and organization in various parts of the world.
In particular, we wish to thank our team, all authors - Department of
Sociology Padjadjaran University and Universiti Sains Malaysia. Specially
thanks especially to Ali Maksum for his excellent assistance during the
editorial process of this book. Dr. Arry Bainus the Dean of Faculty of
Social and Political Sciences, Padjadjaran University. All of my MastersPhD students and colleagues at Padjadjaran University as well as USM
whom I would like to thanked for providing continuous support towards
my success.
Wassalam.
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin
Sociology and Welfare Development
ix
x
Sociology and Welfare Development
foreword
Dr. Afriadi Sjahbana Hasibuan, MPA, M.Com (Ec)
Head of Research & Development
Ministry of Home Afairs, Republic of Indonesia
First of all, I am honored to write this foreword and to give my
warm endorsement to this book edited by my colleague Muhamad Fadhil
Nurdin, Ph.D. In my point of view, Indonesian harmony is urgent and
should be achieved soon. he government and all stakeholders are pushed
to react and formulate a strong policy to reach the national goals.
his book provides a comprehensive assessment regarding sociology
and welfare development discourses with a new paradigm and approaches
to build Indonesian future. his compilation chapter divided into ifteen
chapters, conclusion and also given constructive policy recommendations.
Although, all authors in this book are depart from various background
and issues, yet they produce and extent some challenges should become
serious attention especially the government. I can argue that this book is
very multidisciplinary and discussed from various angle.
Personally, as practitioner and based on my professional experiences,
I am strongly recommend this book to be read speciically by civil servant,
professional, academicians and those who engage in the social welfare
tasks. One of the important recomendation given by this book is a good
public policy totally need tough cooperation among individuals, groups,
and institutions. I am also impressed that this book which emphasized on
Sociology and Welfare Development
xi
welfare development discourses is smartly promoting the ideas of “spiritual
development” which in some extent isolated from main discussion. his
is important and also to alerting as well as to underscore that Indonesia
is a religious country.
Finally, I am pleased to congratulate to Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin,
PhD which successfully publish this book and demonstrated that he
is a productive scholar. As academician, lecturer and researcher he has
more than thirty years professional experiences in the ield of social and
political sciences in Indonesia as well as recognized in the broad. I hope,
the collaboration between the agency of research and development in
the Ministry of Home Afairs of the Republic Indonesia with the Centre
for Socioglobal Studies - Padjadjaran University become more efective,
fruitful and sustain in the future.
hank you and Wassalam.
Jakarta, 2014
xii
Sociology and Welfare Development
introdUCtion
in the name of god, the most gracioeus, the most merciful
his book provides a thematic issues and challenges in the new era,
sociology to develop human welfare. he main objective of the Sociology
and Welfare Development is to present an integrated analysis of how
the discipline of sociology can contribute to our wider understanding
of the variety of welfare development issues, practices and institutions
approachs, policies and philosophy wich exist in our society and countries.
his explanatory chapters expected to examine and understand as well as
ofer choices for human beings in the dinamics world to build a human
welfare.
his book depart from the point of view that sociology is as applied
social science can contribute to the development of human life through
many perspectives. he various theme have been selected are discussed
from philosophy to policy models. Each chapter attempt to understand
with a core idea namely welfare development.
In the irst chapter, the main theme related to welfare development
is regarding the global presence in knowledge body. In this chapter
demonstrate that there have gap and diferences between modern and
spiritual concept of welfare development. Chapter two focus on poverty
phenomena in Indonesia as a serious problem. Some have observed
that poor family are marginalized and obtain small attention, while
many also has seen that the problems are the policy makers. It has to
recognized that some assistants and stimulus packages has given by
government to the poor family. However, it has to recognized also that
there were existed some problems regarding inefective management,
Sociology and Welfare Development
xiii
policy implementation, bureaucracy and corruption. Yet, all indicates
that Indonesian government has taken a serious strategic action in order
to struggle to eradicate poverty as well as eradication policy against
chronic of corruption. Related with poverty phenomena, in the chapter
nine, concern on historical and inherited problems such as the disabled
people, the pursuit of full employment in urban areas and overstaing
in the public sector, were important causes for urban poverty. However,
these historical problems did not result in serious poverty under the well
planned economic system. he number of poor people inherited from
the previous period was also relatively small.
In the third chapter focus on human geography and planning as part
of human life. Sociologically, this study concludes that the relationships
between two adjacent metropolitan centres are two geographical
phenomena occurred in the Jakarta-Bandung Mega-Urban Region
(JBMUR). However, a rapid urbanization process has also been occurring
in the corridor area between both metropolitan centers. here are both
direct and indirect relations between these two geographical phenomena
which inally lead to the emergence of the Jakarta-Bandung mega-urban
region. In the fourth chapter, that in addition, the struggle of urban poor
communities in Malaysia for housing and land rights is closely related
to the development and history of the country. After the British colonial
period, Malaysia’s priority was to develop its economy by focusing on
the manufacturing and export industry in urban areas. his resulted
when people from rural areas migrating from village to the city, in search
of opportunities and to ill the workforce demand. Most of the urban
migrants would build their own house near the manufacturing factories,
because the surrounding lands were unoccupied and unused. With hard
work and their own resources they would clean the area (wilderness) and
build houses; this would encourage the development in the area and
hence they are known as urban pioneers.
In the ifth chapter the author analyzes the social-welfare fund
called Baitul Mal wat Tamwil (BMT). he authors believe that BMT in
particular and microinance institutions in general is one of the social
welfare movement, getting stronger if you see the development of BMT
in Indonesia, as have been reported by Reuters. he growth of Islamic
microinance institutions (LKMS) in Indonesia is increasingly signiicant.
he main objective of the micro and super micro which is generally being
located in rural areas, LKMS transformed into a small people mover a
tough economy. Currently, there are about three million customers who
xiv
Sociology and Welfare Development
obtained inancial assistant from micro LKMS or BMT.
Chapter six examines the environmental destruction of young
generation to protect and conserve the natural environment. As such,
the key actors in engaging youth participation in environmental action,
be it the government, non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) or
the community, should address the multi-dimensional issues that are
obstacles towards the involvement of the young and come up with
strategies to develop a more intrinsically-motivated participation.
Generally, environmental awareness among youth worldwide is at an
adequate level but it is the translation into action that is still lacking. A
review of the implementation strategies of current environmental action
programs involving youth should be done by the respective organizers
in order to create programs that are fun, hands-on and allows as well
as entrusts youth to apply their environmental knowledge and personal
skills to make key decisions for the future of then environment which
they shall inherit from the present. Hence, there is a need to move
beyond the present, traditional top-down institutionalized approach of
implementing programs towards a more dynamic and lexible approach
in which youth are viewed stakeholders, knowledge sharers and leaders,
and not mere passive participants who carry out the aims dictated by the
organizers.
concentrates on socio-cultural diferences between
hometown and destination areas of Indonesian migrant workers and the
impact towards their health condition. It involves the diferences physical
environment, social, and culture. he diferences of physical environment
involve climate change as well as socio-culture between hometown (Peteuy
Condong Village) and destination (Saudi Arabia). hese diferences
inluence towards the workers health condition related job. Social
diferences are related with social economic status between employers
and workers, that impact to the mental depression of the workers.
Culture diferences are cultures diferentiation between hometown and
destination country. Arabian cultures are introvert and over protected. It
emerge diiculties to access health services. While in the chapter eight,
discuss speciic theme about how to develop any rural community it can
be achieve through the dissemination on the importance of education to
all family members in the rural area. his method is expected to transform
the communities towards appreciating education better. he recognition
of society towards education only, is not enough to enhance the living
standards. Yet, it should be incorporated a the positive attitudes of the
Chapter seven
Sociology and Welfare Development
xv
rural community towards education as a strategy for improving life. At
the same time, the delivery system of the education programs must be
enhanced and it is all depend on the commitment of the school and
teachers of the rural schools as well.
Finally, the last chapter focus on the incidences of child marriage are
no longer pertinent only for less developed country; it actually happens
extensively in diferent parts of the world. Due to psychological and
biological immaturity, children are insuiciently mature to make an
informed decision about a life partner.
his book examines the welfare development issues in the broader
“sociology of welfare development” perspective. It is compiled from
travelers and knowledge experiences in international seminars, talks and
forum of researchers, supervisions and other discussion with my PhD and
Master students. hat experiences, together with their personal values and
interests extremely inluence to all authors in this book. Personally, I hope
that those who engage and read this book will obtain fruitful knowledge.
All errors are the author’s responsibility.
Wassalam.
Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin
xvi
Sociology and Welfare Development
Chapter
6
Environmental
Participation among
Youth:
Challenges, issues and motivating
factors
Lim Jen Zen and Muhamad Fadhil Nurdin
Readers guide
Environmental sustainability is one such
key issue that is growing in concern amongst the
global youth community. he United Nations, in
2011, has propagated the need for youth to take
action on environmental problems via programs
or policy-making as environmental de-gradation
and resource depletion caused by human activity
will exacerbate poverty and inequality levels in
the future. his chapter studies investigates the
motivating factors for youth to participate in
environmental programs as well as challenges
and issues which prevent their involvement in
such programs. Youth are deined as aged 15
to 18, which is within the United Nations’
deinition of youth. he study reviews the
overarching concept of youth participation and
Environmental Participation among Youth
97
delves speciically into participation of the young in environmental programs
by reviewing cases of successful programs from around the world. he study
then identiies and analyses factors which motivate youth participation and
citizenship and challenges that prevent their involvement. hese factors
and challenges are then related with youth participation in environmental
conservation activities from the experiences of case studies from around the
world. he indings discuss the three categories of factors which motivate youth
based on the Centres of Excellence for Youth Engagement Youth Participation
Model, namely self, societal and system as well as issues which afect the
intensity of participation of youth in conserving the environment based on a
review of existing literature and case studies.
Introduction
Sustainable development has been normally presented as an interrelation of three components of the ecosystem, namely economy,
environment and society, in which the form of progress that takes place
has to be one in which each aspect does not compete against each other
but reconciles the conlict between social inclusiveness, economic growth
and resource protection and conservation (Barton, 2000: 8). In the pursuit
for material gains, natural environment have been sacriiced, resulting in
a worsening national and global environmental crisis, social problems
and institutional breakdowns (Robertson, 1997:14).
Being emblematic of the state of future society, youth has been
touted as the face of a nation’s changing economy, cultural and moral
ideals, class relations, nationalism and occupational formations. hey
are also expected to be the solution of a nation’s ills, devising answers
for critical social problems (Griin, 1997). Pertinent to the concept of
sustainable development is the safeguarding of existing resources for the
beneit of the future generations. As the future leaders, the youth are a
vital element of the community, in which their participation in sustainable
development programs is important to enhance their comprehension
and interest regarding the concept of sustainable development, as well
as to empower them to take charge in safeguarding the continuity of
sustainable development initiatives. Agenda 21 even dedicates a section
outlining the role of youth as a key player in initiatives to protect the
environment as well as support equitable economic and social progress.
Paragraph 25.1 clearly stresses the importance of youth in governing
98
Sociology and Welfare Development
sustainable development by stating :
“… the involvement of today’s youth in environmental and
development decision-making and in the implementation
of programs is critical to the success of Agenda 21…their
intellectual contribution and ability to mobilize support…
bring unique perspectives that need to be taken into
account”1.
Even though they have been much touted as the leaders of today
and the future, the low level of youth participation in addressing
community and national socio-political issues, including climate change
and environmental pollution, and heritage conservation, somewhat
dismissed the notion. In the Merdeka Center Youth Survey, conducted
over a period of three years between 2006 and 2008, youth self-eicacy is
found to be consistently-low, with most youths believing that they have
little capability to transform society, despite the contrary depiction of
their high level of awareness towards social issues, including protection
of the environment. For example, while the environment was the third
biggest issue of primary concern towards youth, afecting 16 percent of
the respondents in the 2007 Merdeka Center Youth Survey (Merdeka
Center, 2007:13), again, youth displayed a lack of self-eicacy in
addressing development issues around them, with only 39 percent
believing they can solve problems within their respective communities. A
total of 21 percent of youth are involved in civic organizations, but half
of them were members of political organizations or government-initiated
movements such as Belia 4B, Majlis Belia Malaysia or Rakan Muda, with
only 5 percent being involved in community level associations (Merdeka
Center, 2007:1, 17, 19).
his research paper will seek to address the issue of youth participation
in sustainable development programs, particularly on environmental
conservation, by exploring the concept of participation and the challenges
towards youth participation in general before analysing the issues which
have hindered youth from environmental participation and inally,
surveying motivating factors of participation amongst the young.
1 United Nations. (n.d.). Children and youth in sustainable development. Retrieved 8 February 2011 from http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.Print.asp?documentid=52&articleid=73.
Environmental Participation among Youth
99
he Meaning of Participation
Before discussing the challenges of youth participation, it is
imperative to understand the meaning of participation as viewed from
multiple dimensions. First of all, Hart (1992:5) deined participation as
“the process of sharing decisions which afect one’s life and the life
of the community in which one lives. It is the means by which a
democracy is built and it is a standard against which democracies
should be measured. Participation is the fundamental right of
citizenship”.
However, Hart’s deinition can be perceived as being too wide.
Midleton (2006) in his deinition narrowed down youth participation as
“giving children and young people (usually up to the age of 18) a chance to
express their views on aspects of life that afect them”. More speciically, homas
and Percy-Smith (2010) deined youth participation as a complex concept
which involves active participation and decision making by the young at
diferent levels ranging from everyday events to speciic incidences. hey
also speciied participation as a foundation for the practice of citizenship.
In a review of 14 diferent meanings of youth participation, Farthing
(2012) discovered that ten of the deinitions described participation as
involving decision making while seven deinitions limited the process
towards issues which afect the young. Four of the deinitions postulated
the notion of “active involvement”. Hence, it can be summed up that
youth participation is the active engagement of the young to take action
on, including making decisions, on issues that afect them. As the future
leaders, environmental sustainability is certainly an agenda which will
leave a huge impact towards their lives and one which they need to take
pertinent action on.
However, in the context of this study, the deinition of participation
in sustainable development expands more than just the decision making
process. Adopting a more general perspective, participation is termed
according to Armitage (1988) which is “a process by which citizens act in
response to public concerns, voice their opinions about decisions which
afect them and take responsibility for changes to the community”.
he act of participation as deined in the context of this study can be
categorized into two main forms, namely social participation and
political participation. Participation can be achieved via diverse forms
100
Sociology and Welfare Development
from consultation, training, one-of events or projects to governance.
Participants sampled are not limited to merely the leaders, but will also
encompass other levels of involvement such as advisor, being part of a
committee as well as ordinary membership. Nevertheless, these concepts
are still endured to the concept of sustainable development. Nurse (2006)
the three pillars of sustainable development are showed as below graph.
Based on the Nurse’s guide the following sections will explore more
about the concept of participation on regards youth participation.
he Challenge of Youth Participation
“No one is born a good citizen; no nation is born a democracy.
Rather both are processes that evolve over a lifetime. Young people
must be included from birth. A nation that cuts itself from its
youth severs its lifeline”
- Koi Annan (in Ragan & McNulty, 2004:28)
his bold statement by the former Secretary General to the
United Nations’ accentuated the importance of youth as civic actors
of a nation. Even though the world population is nearing the last stage
of its demographic transition with the number of 15 to 24 year olds 2
2
he deinition of youth utilized by the UN in the UN World Population survey refers to people aged between 15 to 24 years.
Environmental Participation among Youth
101
declining, the number of youths in this age group is booming in the
developing regions of the Middle East, South and Southeast Asia and
Sub-Saharan Africa. Approximately 90 percent of world youth live in
developing nations (ILO, 2010:7) where the efects of environmental
degradation are strongly felt compared with developed countries as a
result of development pressures, resource limitations and weak national as
well as international political commitment and governance (O’ Connor
& Turnham, 1992). With the youth population in Africa and South Asia
continuing to increase exponentially between the year 2010 and 2015
(ILO, 2010:7), they are a strong force for civic engagement which can
assert their inluence and lead eforts towards safeguarding their natural
resources for the long-term. Being next in line to lead their communities,
the present youth cohort worldwide must develop their civic eicacy,
leadership capacity and worldview to face the challenges of globalization
and sustainability which they will carry upon their shoulders.
Despite the emerging pertinence of youth civic participation, the
capability and efectiveness of youth as civic actors’ remains contested.
heir lack of interest towards public afairs has cast a negative light on
their much espoused role as future leaders. A cross-cutting study by
the International Education Agency on civic engagement among 14
year-olds in 28 countries highlighted their moderate interest towards
politics and is not interested in any forms of civic-related activities such
as becoming organization members, petitioning or running for public
oices (Torney-Purta et.al., 2001). Empirical studies in developed
nations such as America (Putnam, 2000; Carprini, 2000.), Canada (Stolle
& Cruz (in Government of Canada, 2005:82-97)) and Spain (Blanch
(in Forbrig (ed.), 2005:63-5)) showed declining civic engagement
levels among youth. he consumerist-oriented society which eschewed
collectivity for individualization has been blamed for shaping cynicism
and disengagement among urban youth in developed nations (Beck &
Beck-Gernsheim (in Wood, 2010)).
Further compounding the disinterest amongst youth to be involved
in their communities are the narrow and negative opinions of adults
towards their characteristics. Youths are typecast as argumentative,
confused, ignorant and a threat to authority. his belief was widely held
by adults across the world, who also ampliied the age diferences by
viewing youth capabilities and opinions as always inferior compared to
theirs (Camino & Zeldin, 2002). Camino & Zeldin (2002) in his survey
of 700 adults in Washington D.C. and Wisconsin found more than half
102
Sociology and Welfare Development
of the respondents have little or no conidence in youths assuming civic
leadership. Such general assumptions of young adulthood as a period
marked by “heightened storm and stress” (Arnett, 1999) are adversative
towards civic democracy, especially in the realm of environmental
action.
Declining civic engagement among youth, however, is not
simplistically caused by the inluence of communal social capital alone.
Holland, Reynolds and Weller (in Hastings et.al., 2011) suggested youth
can develop their own social capital via new ways of engagement. He
theorized that it is more diicult to mobilize a group following their
inclusion into democratic politics via institutions as compared to before
their inclusion. Institutionalization has created a dependency between
the public and the institutions, in which the general public perceived
and left issues to be handled by the political institutions. At the same
time, bureaucratization and monopolization of community issue by the
institutions has also limited the involvement of the public in addressing
matters pertaining to their living environment.
Youth Participation in Environmental Programs
An abundance of international literature has highlighted the role
of youth in community development as well as how citizen groups,
governments and non-proit as well as non-governmental organizations
are providing opportunities to support it. Dodd (in Chawla, 2002)
acknowledged the growing global recognition of youth as a nascent force
in the development process, as how women are after the emergence of
the women’s rights movement, stating that: “Listening to smaller voices, by
which children are brought into the process of planning, implementation and
evaluation of endeavours undertaken in the interests of the whole community,
means embracing the interlinked concepts of gender and generation” (Dodd
(in Chawla, 2002)).
As a citizen, youth exercise their right for democracy not only
through political involvement, but also through conducting work for the
community through volunteering or through charity or neighborhood
bodies. Democracy per se can only be achieved when people, including
youth, wield their inluence on efecting change on problems that afect
them (Westheimer (in Peteru, 2006:69)). One of the key challenges
which required the attention and mobilization of youth civic engagement
Environmental Participation among Youth
103
is to create a sustainable living environment. Rapid physical development
spurred on by exponential economic growth in the world, and has
simultaneously resulted in the destruction of our natural environment.
Pollution and climate change has become pressing problems that will
create disastrous efects on the lives of the future generation, leading
to food shortages, lack of clean water, polluted atmosphere which will
only result in them being vulnerable to malnutrition and illness (United
Nations, 2010:1).
Existing experiences of youth involvement in environmental
protection, be it in decision making or action, adult-supported or
youth initiated, have proven their viability as a force that adds value
to the process for sustainable change. National and local governments,
intergovernmental agencies such as the UN and World Bank, as well
as the corporate sector and NGO’s are leveraging on youth as valuable
knowledge and skill resources, and have formed cohesive partnerships
with them to embark on new opportunities to further the agenda of
environmental conservation such as social and eco-based enterprise,
watchdog groups and community advisory roundtables (World Bank,
2006).
Issues of Youth Participation in Environmental Programs
In terms of youth participation in environmental programs, studies
from Abdul Latif Ahmad et.al. (2012), Tan & Norzaini (2011) &
Samsulkamil (2008), highlighted that a strong awareness of environmental
problems and their causes exist, among both university students (Abdul
Latif Ahmad, 2012) and secondary school children (Samsulkamil, 2008).
However, while most youth do generally participate in environmentaloriented sustainable development activities via both physical and online
platforms, their involvement is passive and inconsistent. In a study on
youth perception and participation in environmental citizenship among
Malaysian youths in Klang Valley, Abdul Latif Ahmad (2012) found
that youth in his focus group interviews were mostly passively forwarding
messages and calls for environmental action via social interaction sites such
as Facebook and Twitter to their friends. Some were initially involved in
large-scale projects held in the Klang Valley such as Earth Hour and the
Go Green Project. Alas, their involvement was only during the year when
these projects were initiated and were not continued in the following
104
Sociology and Welfare Development
years. Most youth were also found to be apathetic towards encouraging
pro-environmental behavior among their peers for fearing it will disrupt
ties among peers and being viewed as busybodies. It is also found that
youth are generally inactive in participating in environmental programs
due to a lack of concern and knowledge of such activities, as well as a
pessimistic view that their simple actions would not make an impact
towards environmental conservation (Abdul Latif Ahmad, 2012).
he results of Abdul Latif ’s research were concurrent with that of
Aini M.S., Nurizan Y. & Fakh’rul-Razi A. (2007), which indicated a low
level of participation in environmental action among secondary school
students aged between 15 and 17 in Johor Bahru. While an overwhelming
majority of 93 percent of the students were aware of environmental
issues, such as forest destruction, indiscriminate toxic disposal and ozone
depletion, the level of participation in environmental activities such as
campaigns, nature clubs and community work is rather low, with only
6 percent having been a member of nature organizations such as World
Wildlife Fund (WWF), Friends of the Earth and Nature Lovers’ Club.
Likewise, a study conducted by Othman et.al. (2004) on environmental
consumer practices among secondary schooling youth in Klang Valley,
Malacca and Sarawak also indicated low levels of commitment among
the young to improve their environment.
Table 1.1
Level of Youth Involvement in Nature Related Activities
Mode of Involvement
Mean Scores
I watch documentary ilms about the
environment
3.44
I read environmental-related articles in
magazines, books
3.00
I participate in environmental campaigns
in schools
2.40
I plant trees and vegetables at home
2.14
I am involved in beautifying the school
garden
2.05
I participate in environmental seminars
and exhibitions
2.02
Environmental Participation among Youth
105
I surf the net for environmental
information
2.01
I participate in environmental activities
(e.g. cleaning)
1.91
Overall mean
2.37
Total Respondents = 306
Scale: 1 = never or once a year 2 = at least once a year 3= several times a
year
4= at least once a month
Source: Aini M.S., Nurizan Y. & Fakh’rul-Razi A. (2007)
Similarly, in Scotland, a survey of youths aged 16 to 24 has in 2000
has found that the consideration of environmental problems as a pertinent
issue is lesser amongst people from this age cohort. Negative perception
from adults, a political system which alienated youth and do not hear
their voices and a lack of information about participation opportunities
have appeared to be the reason behind this apathy in taking action on
environmental problems. Many youth are succumbed to social pressures,
such as attaining popularity, excelling in examinations and being good
at sports while viewing civic involvement as “uncool”. he duration of
a program is also impactful towards sustained youth involvement in
protecting their environment. A large number of programs are of a shortterm basis and youth who are only involved in environmental programs
for a short duration of less than 18 weeks usually demonstrate a lack of
interest and will drop out of such programs (Schusler & Krasny, n.d.).
he relationship between individual, society and institutions may
also impact pro-environmental behavior amongst youth. As evident in
the study by Blake (1999) on the value-action gap within participants of
the UK Going for Green Sustainable Communities Project, individuality,
practicality and responsibility are identiied as three barriers towards
participation. With regard to individuality, this is the individual’s view
on environmental action. Individuals may be lazy or not keen to ind
out more about environmental action opportunities around them.
Practicality refers to the ability to access opportunities for participation.
On occasions, constraints of time, conlicting duties or the inability to ind
106
Sociology and Welfare Development
a centre or organization which carries out environmental action in their
neighborhood may become a hindrance towards further involvement in
environmental work. Responsibility refers to whether a program has direct
impact towards youth. he young are not keen on programs which are
conducted by people or authorities which they do not trust. hey believe
that governments do not listen to them and would not take authoritative
action on any of the environmental problems they have raised (Abdul
Latif Ahmad, 2012).
Factors Motivating Youth Participation in Environmental
Programs
As the threat of rapid physical progress began to impinge on the
sustainability of the natural environment of a city, there is a growing
need for the young to assume the mantle of leaders who spearhead
initiatives and invigorate community awareness on the importance to take
accountability for the conservation of our limited resources. If judged by
the sheer size of the global youth population, they constitute a strong base
of human capital that is major stakeholders in the development of their
communities. he United Nations (2010:6) has presented granting youth
participation in development as an investment which strengthens their
ability to meet their own needs, reduces their vulnerability to economic,
political and social instabilities, promotes sustainability of development
strategies and facilitates entry into target groups as well as builds social
capital.
Studies on youth participation in environmental action view
the factors motivating involvement in protection of the environment
mainly from two viewpoints, namely their formative experiences and
contemporary factors (Chawla & Cushing, 2007).
Prior Formative Experiences in Environmental Action
Studies on formative experiences are centered mainly on childhood
experiences, such as outdoor play, exposure to environmental threats,
environmental education and time spent with others in nature, which
become sources for environmental action, or inaction (Arnold, Cohen
& Warner, 2009; Wells & Lekies, 2006). However, while explaining
participation in environmental activities based on life experience factors
Environmental Participation among Youth
107
have been criticized for being retrospective without taking into account
contemporary experiences (Scott (in Chawla & Cushing, 2007)), it has
to be noted that the relevance of past experiences have been a pertinent
factor towards driving youth and adult participation in the environment,
as evident through similar indings in studies on youth participation in
the environment (Wells & Lekies, 2006; Sia, Hungerford & Tomera,
1986).
Contemporary Factors
Besides childhood experiences, the decision of a youth to take active
part in environmental protection has also been attributed to several
contemporary factors which may impact levels of participation, such as
gender, socioeconomic levels and environmental knowledge (Chawla &
Cushing, 2007). Women might possess less knowledge of the environment
but are more emotionally concerned about its destruction compared to
men (Roper Starch Worldwide, 1999). People of lower income groups
tend to participate in ecological protection-related actions only if it
beneited them economically (Roper Starch Worldwide, 1994).
he aspect of knowledge as a motivating factor for environmental
participation, however, is contested as Kempton et.al. (1995) have
founded that having environmental knowledge alone does not lead to proenvironmental behavior per se. Jensen (2002) chose to difer and asserted
that while formal knowledge via subjects in the school syllabus might not
be a motivating force for pro-environmental behavior due to the lack of
application of knowledge. Instead, knowledge that is engagement-oriented
would encourage youth to be more active in protecting the environment.
Kuhlemeier, Van den Bergh and Largeweij (1999) reasserted the importance
of knowledge in predicting environmental action, through their indings
that student with stronger knowledge tend to display pro-environmental
attitudes, while Bogner (1999) and Matthies (2005) have found through
their surveys of child and youth participants in environmental camps in
England and Switzerland respectively that acquired knowledge through
such experiential learning programs have resulted in students displaying
a more pro-environmental behavior between four to six weeks after the
end of the programs.
108
Sociology and Welfare Development
he Role of Internal and External Factors in Motivating
Participation
he decision of youths to engage, or not, in an environmental
action initiative is also inspired by circumstances from both external and
internal factors. Studies regarding youth engagement in ields connected
to sustainability, such as environmental awareness and conservation, rural
and urban community development, politics and volunteer work, have
suggested a multiplicity of factors, both internal and external, which
promoted the involvement of the younger generation, such as incentives
(Collins, Bronte-Tinkew & Burkhauser, 2008), peer inluence (Brander
& Rivera-Caudill, 2008; Cano & Bankston, 1992), government policies
(Etra et.al., 2010:7) and demographic predictors such as ethnicity, gender,
household income and level of education (Borden et.al., 2006; Fahmy,
2004).
External Factors
An action stemming from an external factor, or extrinsic motivation,
is usually performed in order to achieve an ulterior motive other than
that of the program itself or when inluenced by socioeconomic or
environmental factors (Ryan & Deci, 2000). However, contrary to
popular notions that such form of participation is non-autonomous,
certain forms of intentional behaviour born out of an aim to attain a
reward or personal gain can also be included in the extrinsic motivation
classiication (Ryan & Deci (in Brander, 2008:27-8). For example, when
a student participates on his own accord in a clean-up campaign in order
to attain higher co-curricular assessment grades, he has a higher level
of autonomy in participating as opposed to another who was forced
to attend by his teacher, even though both are extrinsically-motivated
involvements. Hence, participation inspired by external factors can
impact a person’s behaviour and interest towards the program in difering
levels, depending on the level of internalization of the behaviour within
the individual. he below diagram is self-determination theory developed
by Ryan & Deci (2000).
Environmental Participation among Youth
109
Source: Ryan and Deci (2000), adapted.
Use of incentives
he use of incentives to attract youth to participate in a civic program
might sustain their interest and participation, thus indirectly forming their
sense of ownership towards the program. Continuous participation as an
indirect result from the motivation of incentives could also strengthen the
learning culture among the youth participants, which can spur academic
achievements in schools or higher learning institutions (Collins, BronteTinkew & Birkhauser, 2008). Incentives ofered to youth participants in
a community engagement program may range from inancial incentives,
food, prizes and ield trips (Collins, Bronte-Tinkew & Birkhauser, 2008).
Ofering monetary incentives have been found efective in motivating
youth, especially teenagers, to be engaged in a civic project (Institute of
Educational Sciences (in Collins, Bronte-Tinkew & Birk