Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Diagnoza Młodzieży 2026 (Youth Diagnosis 2026) identifies a tension that deserves particular attention: young people express an interest in public affairs and a desire to influence decisions, yet many experience low political efficacy and perceive formal channels of participation as weak or ineffective. At the same time, civic activity increasingly takes place within a digital ecosystem that expands opportunities for information, expression and mobilisation while also exposing young people to disinformation, fragmented attention and algorithmic influence. This commentary argues that these findings are best interpreted through a participation-ecosystem lens rather than through a binary opposition between online and offline engagement. Drawing on research on digital participation, political efficacy and meaningful youth participation, it proposes an analytical distinction between access, voice, audience, influence and institutional response. This perspective can strengthen future measurement of youth participation by asking not only whether young people participate, but whether their participation is heard, traceable and capable of producing feedback or influence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Matteo Bartolini (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: