Engaging the Next Generation in Digital Policy

The digital landscape continues to evolve at an unprecedented pace, reshaping how societies communicate, conduct business, and exchange ideas. Yet despite this rapid transformation, many governance discussions that determine internet standards and policies occur largely without meaningful participation from those who will inherit and live within these digital systems for decades to come. The absence of younger perspectives in internet governance forums represents a significant gap that demands urgent attention and systematic solutions.

As internet governance becomes increasingly complex and consequential, the question of who participates in these critical discussions takes on heightened importance. Young people—from high school students to early-career professionals—possess distinctive viewpoints shaped by their digital native status, diverse international backgrounds, and novel approaches to problem-solving. Yet structural barriers, limited awareness, and traditional institutional frameworks often exclude or marginalize these voices when decisions are being made about cybersecurity standards, data privacy protections, digital inclusion initiatives, and numerous other policies that will directly affect their futures.

Understanding the Contemporary Internet Governance Landscape

Internet governance encompasses the development, implementation, and enforcement of shared principles, norms, rules, and decision-making processes that shape how the internet operates and evolves. This multifaceted domain involves coordination among governments, private sector entities, civil society organizations, academic institutions, and technical communities. Unlike many traditional policy areas with clearly defined hierarchies, internet governance operates through a distributed, collaborative model that theoretically welcomes diverse stakeholder participation.

The Internet Governance Forum (IGF), established in 2006, represents one of the most important platforms for these multistakeholder discussions. The IGF convenes representatives from across sectors annually and facilitates countless regional, national, and local discussions on pressing internet policy matters. However, the composition of these forums has historically skewed toward established professionals, institutional representatives, and individuals with existing policy expertise or organizational backing.

The Case for Meaningful Youth Participation

There are several compelling reasons why expanding youth engagement in internet governance should be a priority:

• Digital Fluency: Young people have grown up navigating digital platforms and understand intimately how internet technologies function in daily life, granting them practical insights that may elude those less immersed in digital environments.
• Long-term Stakeholder Status: Unlike some current decision-makers who may retire within decades, young participants will live for half a century or more under the governance frameworks being established today, giving them a vested interest in sustainable solutions.
• Innovation and Creativity: Research consistently demonstrates that younger populations approach complex problems with fresh perspectives, often identifying creative solutions that more experienced professionals might overlook.
• Demographic Representation: Global youth comprise nearly 40% of the world population, yet their representation in governance spaces rarely reflects this demographic reality.
• Cultural and Contextual Diversity: Young people from different regions, socioeconomic backgrounds, and communities bring essential contextual knowledge about how internet policies affect diverse populations globally.

Barriers Preventing Youth Entry into Governance Discussions

Despite the clear benefits of youth participation, numerous structural and practical obstacles prevent younger people from engaging meaningfully in internet governance forums:

Financial and Logistical Constraints

International governance forums often require travel to distant locations, accommodation, and associated expenses that individual young people rarely cover independently. While scholarship programs exist, they remain limited and highly competitive. Many youth lack institutional sponsorship or organizational backing that would facilitate their participation.

Awareness and Access Gaps

Information about governance forums, application processes, and participation opportunities circulates primarily through established professional networks and institutional channels that young people may not access. Social media and direct outreach through educational institutions represent underutilized pathways for raising awareness.

Perceived Expertise Requirements

Many young people assume that participation requires advanced technical knowledge or formal policy credentials, creating psychological barriers even when structural obstacles do not exist. The prevalence of highly technical discussions can be intimidating for newcomers regardless of age.

Limited Mentorship Infrastructure

Existing governance communities lack systematic mechanisms for welcoming, orienting, and mentoring new participants. Without dedicated support structures, young people struggle to understand forum dynamics, identify where their contributions matter most, and develop the networks necessary for sustained engagement.

Scheduling Conflicts with Education and Employment

Many governance forums occur during periods when students face academic commitments or young professionals manage work responsibilities, making attendance logistically difficult without formal institutional support.

Innovative Models for Creating Youth Pathways

Recognizing these barriers, several initiatives have emerged to create more welcoming entry points for younger participants:

Youth-Focused Forum Sessions

Dedicated sessions within larger governance conferences specifically designed for emerging leaders create lower-stakes environments where young people can learn governance processes, build networks, and develop confidence before participating in broader discussions.

Regional and Local Engagement Opportunities

National, regional, and community-level internet governance forums offer more accessible alternatives to major international conferences. These distributed models reduce travel requirements and allow young people to engage with issues directly relevant to their immediate contexts.

Digital Participation Mechanisms

Expanded online participation options, including virtual attendance, remote discussion forums, and asynchronous contribution methods, eliminate geographical barriers and accommodate those with schedule constraints.

Capacity Building Programs

Structured educational initiatives combining technical training, policy education, and practical experience prepare young people for meaningful participation. These programs often pair emerging leaders with experienced mentors and provide ongoing support throughout governance engagement.

Youth Coalition Networks

Dedicated organizations focused on youth internet governance interests create internal support structures, share resources, coordinate activities, and collectively amplify youth voices in broader forums.

Essential Skills and Knowledge for Youth Participants

Effective youth participation in governance discussions requires developing specific competencies:

Strategies for Institutional Support and Commitment

For youth engagement initiatives to succeed, established governance institutions and organizations must make concrete commitments:

• Dedicated Funding: Allocating resources specifically for youth participation—including travel scholarships, mentorship stipends, and capacity building programs—demonstrates institutional commitment.
• Structured Onboarding: Creating formalized orientation processes, providing governance primers, and assigning mentors helps newcomers navigate complex forums effectively.
• Reserved Participation Slots: Setting aside speaking opportunities, panel positions, and leadership roles specifically for young participants ensures their voices are heard in important discussions.
• Flexible Participation Formats: Offering multiple ways to engage—from in-person attendance to remote participation to asynchronous contributions—accommodates diverse circumstances.
• Feedback and Evaluation: Regularly assessing youth engagement outcomes and incorporating feedback from young participants helps refine initiatives continuously.
• Employment and Networking Opportunities: Facilitating connections between young participants and potential employers, collaborators, and mentors extends impact beyond individual forums.

Success Stories and Emerging Leaders

Several regions and initiatives have successfully expanded youth participation in internet governance. Youth IGF platforms now operate across Africa, Europe, Asia-Pacific, and the Americas, each adapting participation models to regional contexts while maintaining commitment to youth inclusion. Alumni of these programs have gone on to establish local internet governance forums, join policy working groups, influence international discussions, and develop innovative solutions to digital challenges.

These examples demonstrate that when structured pathways exist and institutional support is provided, young people contribute meaningfully to governance discussions, bringing perspectives that lead to more inclusive and sustainable policy outcomes.

Looking Toward Inclusive Digital Governance

The future of internet governance depends on creating truly inclusive spaces where diverse voices—particularly those of young people—participate actively in shaping digital policy. This requires sustained commitment from established governance institutions, dedicated resources for capacity building, and willingness to adapt traditional frameworks to welcome newcomers.

Young people are not passive recipients of internet governance decisions—they are stakeholders, innovators, and leaders whose engagement strengthens governance processes and outcomes. By systematically removing barriers to participation, providing necessary support structures, and valuing youth contributions, the governance community can build a more representative, responsive, and effective system for managing internet development.

The question is not whether young people should participate in internet governance discussions, but how quickly institutions can adapt to ensure their meaningful, sustained, and valued engagement in this critical domain.