Thesis Volume 1: Here it is!

So here’s everything I’ve been working on for the past 3 years, compiled into this ‘little’ book. It marks the mid-way confirmation stage of my PhD, i.e. Volume 1 of my thesis. Volume 2 is coming in 3 years time. Hello 2014!

This volume includes writings on the field of study, contextual review and practice to date. There is no way I am going to describe what these contents involve because that could get a bit lengthy (a 30,000 words sort of lengthy), so I will tell the story through pictures of a few spreads instead. Enjoy!

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Lebanese Youth as Change-Makers

The term youth is very elusive and debatable. Some authors define it through biological markers bracketing it between the ages of puberty and parenthood (cited in Santrock, 1999, p.387), and others use specific cultural and social markers determining status (USaid, 2004). These are a few examples: For the United Kingdom Youth Parliament, youth comprise ages 11 to 18 (2010), for the United Nations General Assembly, it is 15 to 24 (2010), the Commonwealth Youth Programme, 15 to 29 (2010), and the Danish Youth Council, 15 to 34 (2010). This research defines youth through social markers depicting the minimum age as that of civic autonomy and independence, and the maximum as that of emotional, financial and social settlement. According to this definition, youth in Lebanon would belong to the age bracket of 18 to 30 years old. The autonomous age in Lebanon varies depending on religious sect, gender and civics, ranging from 14 to 21 years old, with 18 being the age of legal majority (Figure 1). On the other hand, the average age of marriage in Lebanon is 27.5 years for females and 31 years for males. This is based on Pan Arab Project for Child Development statistics in 1996 (cited in UNDP, 1998). For this reason, 30 years was chosen as the mean age across the two genders, before individuals settle into their social groups.

Despite the debatable age bracket of youth, a number of authors, governments and organisations agree that it is vital to include and engage youth in processes affecting their lifestyles, and that they play a crucial role in positively transforming conflict situations (Cited in Del Felice & Wisler, 2007, p.3). For example, the Home Office Community Cohesion strategy calls for establishing well resourced programmes that engage young people in decision-making processes affecting their communities (Cantle, 2001, p.30). Similarly, the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs warns that the constant exclusion of youth in dialogue and social planning contributes to the disintegration and alienation of these stakeholders, and drives their shift towards negative behaviours (Confesor cited in UNDESA, 2005, p.19). Youth should be today, more than ever, at the forefront of social, economic and political developments (UN, 2010).

However, Celina Del Felice and Andria Wisler identified that the potential of youth as change-makers and peace-builders has unfortunately been unexplored to its full capacity by both policy-makers and academics (2007). Correspondingly, Dr. Kaouaci and the United Nations refer to youth as the ‘invisible’ stakeholders (cited in UNDESA, 2005, pp.34, 38). This is how Siobhan McEvoy-Levy phrases this idea:

Neither children nor youth appear as important variables in the literature on peace processes. Nor, authors of important UN reports admit, have adolescents been separately or well considered… A neglect of adolescents and older young people is short-sighted and counterproductive in terms of peace building (McEvoy-Levy, 2001, pp.2-3).

Del Felice and Wisler argue that youth are often seen as either victims or perpetrators, rather than participants in peace-building, and therefore decisions impacting their lives are made for them rather than with them (2007, pp.8-12). A number of case studies such as the International Youth Parliament, Rosario’s Youth Center, the United Network of Young Peacebuilders, and Otpor, demonstrate that youth have succeeded in positively transforming conflict and segregated societies.

Youth’s transformation capacity is supported by a number of reasons, collated by Del Felice and Wisler after extensive observations of case studies and examples. The reasons are that youth are more open to change, they are future-oriented as they have not witnessed the wars and memories of their parents and older generations, they are idealistic and innovative in solving old problems in imaginative ways, they are courageous risk-takers, and they are knowledgeable and experienced in issues relating to their peers (2007, pp.24-25).

These reasons are highly relevant to the case study of Lebanon, as social segregation is a problem dating back at least to the 1970s, with all generations over 30 having actively and physically witnessed or participated in the violent conflict. Their vivid memories of the war and its direct impact on their lives renders this group incapable of tackling the matured problem of social segregation. This leaves youth the healthier group to target and engage for innovative solutions towards integration. According to McEvoy, “youth are the primary actors in grassroots community development/relations work; they are the frontlines of peace building” (2001, p.25). On youth in Lebanon, the United Nations write that “youth must constitute an important focus of development policy”, and that they must be prepared for “full participation in the political, economic and social life of the country” (1998, ch.4, p.58).

Youth in Lebanon form more than one fifth of the country’s population, with a more or less even distribution across different districts in the country (UNDP, 1998, ch.4, p.58). Their rush to higher education means that 96% of both males and females are literate (UNDP, 1998, ch.6, p.76) and that their age at first marriage has now become higher than in most countries of the world (UNDP, 1998, ch.4, p.59). These demographic and social transformations render 18 to 30 year old Lebanese men and women a substantial and valuable asset to target, engage and collaborate with, to develop social integration interventions in Lebanon.

References:

Cantle, T. (2001) Community Cohesion: A Report of the Independent Review Team. UK: Home Office.

Commonwealth Secretariat (2010) What is CYP? Commonwealth Youth Programme. [Internet] Available from: <http://www.thecommonwealth.org/Internal/152816/152828/what_is_cyp/> [Accessed 29 October 2010].

Danish Youth Council (2010) About DUF. [Internet] Available from: <http://duf.dk/home/about_duf/> [Accessed 29 October 2010].

Del Felice, C. & Wisler, A. (2007) The Unexplored Power and Potential of Youth as Peace-Builders. Peace Conflict & Development, vol. 11, November. [Internet] Available from: <http://www.peacestudiesjournal.org.uk> [Accessed 27 November 2008].

McEvoy-Levy, S. (2001) Youth as Social and Political Agents: Issues in Post Settlement Peace Building. Kroc Institute Occasional Paper, No. 21:OP:2, December. Research Initiative on the Resolution of Ethnic Conflict (RIREC).

The UN Refugee Agency (2007) Lebanon: Age of majority, particularly for females; paternal custody rights over female children. Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. [Internet] Available from: <http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/469cd6b31c.html> [Accessed 14 November 2010].

The UN Refugee Agency (2010) Women’s Rights in the Middle East and North Africa 2010 – Lebanon. Freedom House. [Internet] Available from: <http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4b99012177.html> [Accessed 14 November 2010].

US Agency for International Development (USaid) (2004) Youth and Conflict: A Toolkit for Intervention. Office of Conflict Management and Mitigation. [Internet] Available from: <http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/crosscutting_programs/conflict/publications/docs/CMM_Youth_and_Conflict_Toolkit_April_2005.pdf> [Accessed 16 January 2011].

UK Youth Parliament (2010) About Us. [Internet] Available from: <http://www.ukyouthparliament.org.uk/4655/index.html> [Accessed 29 October 2010].

United Nations (2010) Youth and the United Nations. [Internet] Available from: <http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unyin/mdgs.htm> [Accessed 29 October 2010].

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2005) Final Report of the Expert Group Meeting on Dialogue in the Social Integration Process: Building peaceful social relations—by, for and with people. 21-23 November. New York: Division for Social Policy and Development.

United Nations Development Programme (1998) The Demography of Youth, ch. 4. [Internet] Available from: <www.undp.org.lb/programme/governance/advocacy/nhdr/…/chptr4.pdf> [Accessed 29 October 2010].

United Nations Development Programme (1998) Youth and Education, ch. 6. [Internet] Available from: <www.undp.org.lb/programme/governance/advocacy/nhdr/…/chptr6.pdf> [Accessed 16 January 2011].

Thesis Outline… Version 2

As my research developed, its structure evolved as well, to an extent where I felt that the previous research outline I had set last year was not articulating the progression accurately enough. I had a cluster of new thoughts, methods, and areas that I knew the research should address, but they didn’t seem to have a place within the previous thesis structure.

Amidst this confusion, I decided to write down every single thing that came to mind on a post it note, so basically putting my mind down on paper. Then I started to shuffle the post-it notes around and organise them into the headings, subheadings, and hierarchies of a research structure:

This helped me produce the thesis outline below, and assign a word count for every section. I realised that the outline does not necessarily run in a linear format, and as a result, the thesis’ flow will be cross-referencing different sections constantly:

I then used the literature and practice review list I had compiled to date, and dissected it under the different sections. I believe this will be very useful when I am writing up each part of the thesis, as I will know which literature I need to refer to:

Ironically, when I was sharing my Thesis Outline… Version 2 with my colleague, Sheila Pontis who’s in her last research year, she laughed and said: “Oh your outline will change many many more times!”. So I’m expecting many many more versions to come!

Note: I will be restructuring the categories of the blog to work better with the current research structure.

PhD Thesis Chapter Outline

I got the hint – from my supervisors and many PhD guide books – that it can never be too early to write a thesis outline, even though I am only 6 months into a 6 year research.

The challenging aspect of attempting to write a PhD thesis chapter outline this early is that none of the content has happened (yet), so the structure seems like a ‘proposal’ of what the thesis outline ‘will be’. Drafting it can also get quite messy:

On the other hand, The advantage of writing the outline this early is that it focuses the research into the chapters and sub-sections of the thesis. This makes it easier to judge whether a piece of research is revelant or irrelevant to the PhD scope, and if relevant, the outline establishes where it should be situated within the thesis. Based on this, I will attempt to place a chapter/section number at the beginning of every post to label how it fits within the thesis. This is the first draft of the outline, and it will be revisited and reviewed frequently throughout the progress: