Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article investigates how post-Soviet states integrate the participatory principles of SDG 16.7 into their youth policy frameworks while preserving long-standing state-managed forms of engagement. Focusing on Russia and Belarus, the study conducts comparative and discourse analyses of national youth strategies, SDG implementation documents, and the charters of major state-supported youth organisations. The analysis reveals a strong discursive alignment with SDG 16.7 across two countries. In practice, however, youth participation remains highly constrained. State-affiliated organisations reproduce hierarchical structures rooted in Soviet mobilisation models, prioritising patriotic socialisation, loyalty-building and civic service over representation, contestation or shared decision-making. Despite cross-country variation in policy design and organisational diversity, youth participation is largely symbolic and aligned with state-defined priorities. These findings show that the localisation of SDG 16.7 in post-Soviet contexts risks becoming a performative exercise that reinforces existing power arrangements rather than expanding political agency.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Olga VLASOVA (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: