"Local government officials are cautiously optimistic about the future of economic growth, according to a new survey released Monday by the Washington-based International City/County Management Association (ICMA) and the National League of Cities (NLC). The Economic Development 2009 Survey found that 74 percent of the respondents believe their local government's economic base would see slow to moderate growth over the next five years."

Things are a bit different across the pond. A decade ago the United Kingdom instituted a new way to bring youth and government together: the UK Youth Parliament (YP). The YP holds one session a year and each session is staffed by a retinue of youth 11 – 18 years old elected by their peers in local elections across the country. Voter turnout for each of the last two elections has been over 500,000 and they elected a body of 600 representatives.

What do they do? Exactly what parliament does: they meet and discuss issues important to the country. Every year they publish a manifesto (party platform, for Americans) detailing what they believe to be the most important issues facing youth in the UK. The manifesto sets the stage for debates and discussions at the Youth Parliament session.

What do the youth of UK want? Thanks to the Youth Parliament’s manifesto, it’s easy enough to tell. Certainly the manifesto is not all inclusive, and it is geared toward political and social issues instead of the economic solutions often preferred in regional development organizations, but there is a wealth of information in this document. Some sample concerns include:

* Negative portrayal of youth in media
* Keeping university tuition fees down
* Expansion of local government-youth interaction
* Rural development

We can’t just pay lip service to youth engagement. Youth are savvy enough to pick up on instances where adults are asking, but not listening. Case in point: In the USA, we sometimes have student members of school boards. These representatives very often have no voting rights, no committee memberships, and no authority. Ask the youth in these schools how much they care about being represented in this kind of structure.

By contrast, the UK invests legitimacy into youth councils and the YP. When a municipal government proposed budget cuts to youth related services, they required budget analysts and executives to justify these budget cuts to a local youth council. Ultimately this committee was charged with trimming down the budget in a way that preserved the most value for youth.

Although the YP has had its share of setbacks, it provides a number of benefits to youths and their communities. Participating youth are able to articulate policy preferences and have an organization which is responsive to their preferences. The community benefits by receiving additional feedback, which can be used to refine government services and the programs of community organizations.

Economic or business development firms may benefit from these kinds of organizations as well. Youth councils are potential sources of valuable marketing data and can also provide a channel of distribution for goods and services.

There are plenty of good ways to get a similar program started. Simply bringing together a number of youth and asking them to talk about their community is one way. In 2008 the McCook Economic Development Corporation brought together a number of youth to discuss ways to improve their rural Nebraska community. The result? McCook’s Young Leaders (MYL)– a non-profit organization composed youth and young adults. Since then, MYL has gone on to produce a large First Night festival. The youth had to write grants and request permits from the city.

Youth organizations are good for a lot of things and are not exceptionally tricky to establish. Community support and a little communication can go a long way. Ask anyone involved in the UK Youth Parliament.

~This blog post was originally posted to Dropping In (innotout.wordpress.com).

http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/08/smallbusiness/rural_onshoring/index.htm

Although entrepreneurial activity is an important part of a capitalist economy, data about U.S. businesses in their early years of operation have been extremely limited.1 Only recently has it become apparent what important contributions new and young businesses make to job creation and innovation activities.2 As part of an effort to understand the dynamics of new businesses in the United States, the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation (the Foundation) sponsored the Kauffman Firm Survey (KFS), a panel study of new businesses founded in 2004 that have been tracked annually and will continue to be tracked through 2011. Tracking businesses over time allows us to follow business evolutions that would not be apparent in cross-sectional snapshots, the more typical collection method. The KFS dataset provides researchers with a unique opportunity to study a panel of new businesses from startup to sustainability (or exit), with longitudinal data centering on topics such as how businesses are financed; the products, services, and innovations these businesses possess and develop in their early years of existence; and the characteristics of those who own and operate them.3