Abstract:

Youth empowerment is the key to sustainable development. Today, there is the largest cohort of
young people in world’s history i.e. 1.8 billion under the age bracket of 25 years (UNFPA,
2014). As the cornerstone of nation’s development, it is crucial to engage young policymakers of
tomorrow in the development decisions of today. Youth empowerment is the phenomenon when
young people realize that they have or can create choices in life, are aware of the implications of
those choices, make informed decisions freely, act based on those decisions and accept
responsibility for the consequences of their actions. Empowerment also means having the ability
for supporting enabling conditions under which young people can act on their own behalf, and on
their own terms, rather than at the direction of others. These enabling conditions fall into major
categories such as an economic and social base; political will, access to knowledge, information
and skills, adequate resource allocation and supportive legal and administrative frameworks; a
stable environment of equality, peace, democracy and positive value system (African DPoA,
2011). It also stresses people to receive education, to have better health, to have access to decent
employment opportunities and to be benefitted from civic and political empowerment. These
constructive measures help a country to compose sustainable development and long term growth
while harnessing vigorous youth imbibed with energy in positive development to prevent the
same potency used in social vices. It is a major challenge of modern-day knowledge-based
economies, besides others, to keep the young people at the center of development agenda. It is,
therefore, essentially important to have meaningful participation of young people in development
process across the board to make socio-economic, cultural, and political development (Olalekan,
2013). Globally, young people form a major mass in the current statistics of the world
demography constituting over 1.8 billion of total population United Nations Population Fund
(UNFPA, 2014). Of this number, alone. Ethiopia is a young country indeed as more than 63.5%
of its total population is below the age of 29 years (Pakistan NHDR, 2015) but majority of them
is vulnerable because of the sundry conditions they are coping with. To profit such a promising
resource, has been launched which offers a window of opportunity through an array of youth
schemes which envisages youth development through educational, economic and social
empowerment to face life challenges. This significant proportion in overall population renders a
demographic advantage for expediting and sustaining phenomenal growth once they are
streamlined through empowerment (YDI Report, 2013).
 Population Growth Estimates of Ethiopian Youth. Ethiopia is experiencing the second-
largest youth budge in Africa, after Nigeria;8 the median age in Ethiopia is estimated to be 19.9
Of 102 million Ethiopians, an estimated 30 million are aged 15-29,10 and the number of young
people in this age group could rise to 40 million by 203011. Coupled with Ethiopia’s growing
youth population is a growing urban population. In 2017, 19 million Ethiopians lived in urban
areas; by 2030, an estimated 39 million people, many of whom will be youth, will be living in
urban areas.12
Concept of Youth
Generally, youth is considered as transitional period during which a person turns out to be an
active and fully responsible member of the society. Youth is not a homogenous construct (DFID,
2009) hence, there is no single agreed definition of whom and what bands youth. The United
Nations General Assembly defines youth of ages between 15 and 24 while the Commonwealth of
Nations consider people aged between 15 and 29 years as youth (YDI Report, 2013). The
operational boundary of the term ‘youth’ differs from country to country, based on specific
socio-cultural, institutional, economic and political factors (Bessant, Sercombe, and Watts, 1998)
and even in youth-based programs and schemes. Practically, it is considered as a transitional
stage in life which lies in between childhood and adulthood (World Bank, 2007. In Pakistan, the
perspective of youth receives a contour as “it is the phase of physical, emotional, spiritual and
intellectual growth, aged between 15 to 29 during which he/she actively partake in the process of
developing attitudes, skills, knowledge and competencies for realizing the potential and strength
of optimized level for the self development, family, communities and the country” (Punjab Youth
Policy, 2012). Planning Commission of Pakistan defines youth as “a period during which a
person is being prepared and prepares to be an active and fully responsible member of the
society” (Annual Plan, 2013-14).
Concept of Empowerment
Empowerment refers to stepping up the strength of individuals and communities in the realms of
spiritual, political, social, or economical categories (Tope, 2011). It is significantly used in the
programs commenced for youth. As a social construct, it is widely shared by many disciplines
and arenas such as community development, psychology, sociology, education, economics,
management sciences, political studies, studies of social movements and organizations. Lausch
(2011) stated that very often and wide use of term empowerment has made its definition blurred.
As explained by Malhotra et al., (2002), the word empowerment came into limelight for civil
rights of marginalized people for instance women, the poor, and empowering community
through development. It relates to the ability of people in gaining a considerable understanding
and control over the matters related to personal, social, economic and political forces to improve
their life situation (Israel et al., 1994). The process of empowerment enhances the power or
capacity of people to implement by acting (Czuba, 1999). For an action to be done,
empowerment is essential (Schusler et al., 2009). Empowerment itself can’t promise the well-
being and prosperity until and unless people take charge of it (Gergis, 1999).
Concept of Youth Empowerment
Commonwealth Secretariat (2007) defines youth empowerment as “creating and supporting the
enabling conditions under which young people can act on their own behalf, and on their own
terms, rather than at the direction of others”. The process of youth empowerment is centered on
the attitudinal, structural, and cultural dimensions of an individual whereby he/she gains the
ability, authority, and agency for taking decisions and implementing change in his/her own life
(Tope, 2011). It creates conducive environment for an individual by enhancing motivation to
perform (Akintayo & Adiat, 2013). The empowerment happens to be assured when youth come
to realize there is enhancement in their abilities to control, influence or cope with their socio-
economic roles. It not only covers economic empowerment but also takes social, ideological,
educational, technological and political empowerment in its ambit. It revolves around three key
dimensions i.e. i) economic,ii) social, and iii) political dimensions, which are the building blocks
of youth (Punjab Youth Policy, 2012). Henceforth, it is the definite mean whereby young people
are helped to realize success in life. Therefore, a significant amount of importance is attached
with this concept by both, the nations and the individuals, to secure the future prosperity for them
as well as for the generations to come (Mike, 2014).
Concept of Sustainable Development (SD)
Development entails a constant positive improvement in existing state-of-affairs. It also covers
gradual change and progression passing through different levels aimed at expansion,
improvement or completeness or a state whereby the subject reveals its identity (Word-web
Dictionary, 2010). Bruntland Commission Report (1987) first coined the term SD and described
it as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs”. SD is amongst the central principles of development
(United Nations, 2002). It involves three main aspects i.e. economic growth, environmental
protection, and social equality. The social equality and equity dimension focus on the social
well-being of the people. SD, by all definitions, demands the world to be viewed as a system.
This catchphrase admonishes current generations towards the growth and development while
adopting systems approach. Thus, to execute this target, there is need of collaboration of
pertinent organizations, especially from the government to lay out suitable strategy to achieve the
desired goals. It also emphasizes on the improvement of living standards to fulfill the utmost
anticipation of human desires (UNDP, 2001). According to Disano (2001), economic, social, and
environmental issues fall in the theme of SD. In the past few decades, researchers, governments,
economists and agencies such as the IMF, World Bank, WTO have also outlined SD strategies.
However, in different countries, the prospect of sustainable development besets a comprehensive
meaning, interpretations and infinite assumptions. The sustainability of development task should
Become the core foundation to obtain the goals of national development agenda
(Phimphanthavong, 2011).
Youth Empowerment and Sustainable Development
Youth and sustainable development is highlighted in particular because it is currently one of the
most active areas of youth engagement with the United Nations (United Nations,1992).
Representing grassroots activities and concern for the future of the environment, youth have been
engaged since the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, held in 1992. The Earth Summit set an
important precedent in its final declaration, Agenda 21, by asking governments to “support the
promotion and creation of mechanisms to involve youth representation in all United Nations
processes in order to influence those processes.” This mandate, coupled with rising youth
activism and the availability of information on the Internet, resulted in more youth participating
in the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Johannesburg 2002) than any other UN
summit in history. In Johannesburg, youth were able to participate as one of nine “Major
Groups” officially recognized by the UN to the Summit, and therefore were able to make
interventions throughout the Summit deliberations, challenging governments and all stakeholders
to abide by their commitments, (United Nations, 2002).
Sustainable development can be defined as development which permits for economic growth but
at the same time demands the protection of the environment. United Nations, (2002) defines
sustainable development as development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Any of these two
definitions sums up the use to which we must apply our human and natural resources and the
guiding principle for nation building and development. Lack of sufficient human and natural
resources and its judicious application will result in backwardness and poverty or put simply in
national under-development. On the other hand where they abound and are effectively and
efficiently applied, there certainly will be national prosperity and national building and national
development can be taken for granted Nation building is dependent on good and committed
political leadership, a corrupt-free and patriotic citizenry, political stability, the prevalence of the
rule of law, freedom of speech, safety of lives and property and above all, a society where
opportunities abound for every citizen to freely develop himself or herself to the best of his or
her ability. I must emphasize that the capital market is an important financial means for nation
building and development but will play its role better only if the conditions stated above are
present. Finally the goal of nation building and development in an egalitarian society is where
there is full employment and the population is happy, peaceful and there is a guaranteed future.
In the outcome of WSSD, the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation (JPOI), youth were
mentioned in relation to poverty reduction, consumption and life style, education and the
implementation of sustainable development programmes. Paragraph 153 of JPOI commits
governments to: “Promote and support youth participation in programmes and activities relating
to sustainable development through, for example, supporting local youth councils or their
equivalent, and by encouraging their establishment where they do not exist.” (United Nations,
2002). To follow up on the status of commitments made in Rio and Johannesburg, and continue
to provide forums to evaluate the status of the world’s environment, the UN meets every year at
the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD). The Children and Youth Major Group, led
by the CSD Youth Caucus, continues to have a distinguished role in the proceedings of the CSD.
Caucus members often site on the floor with the delegates and make interventions throughout the
annual Commission, where they share the activities and priorities of youth working at the
grassroots level. This serves as one of the most functional and effective ways youth participate in
the UN system. The members of the CSD Youth Caucus increasingly have strong networks and
background in local and international policies and mechanisms (Adepeju, 2009). At the
Commission, and online throughout the year, youth share information, form coalitions, facilitate
other forms of engagement with UN agencies, and build capacity themselves and their
organizations through trainings. Youth involved in the CSD also meet directly with their
governments to ask how their country’s sustainable development commitments are being
fulfilled, as well as to lobby for increased ways for youth to participate in the implementation of
national sustainable development initiatives. Providing mechanisms to improve their
participation and capacity once they return home to their constituencies would strengthen the
work of these youth on the ground, and further the implementation of the agenda of the
Commission. The continued and growing youth participation at CSD shows that youth want to
help their governments follow through with their commitments, and participate in decision-
making processes.
Youth in Ethiopia
Ethiopia is experiencing the second-largest youth bulge in Africa today. Of the 102 million
people in Ethiopia, an estimated 30 million are aged 15-29.1 The number of people in this age
group is projected to rise to 40 million by 2030.2 To better understand the status and aspirations
of these Ethiopian youth in their journey from adolescence to adulthood, USAID commissioned
Youth Power Learning to conduct a Cross-Sectoral Youth Assessment (CSYA) using a Positive
Youth Development (PYD) lens.
With almost 63.5% of its population below the age of 29 (and 31% between 15-29 years of age),
youth is one of the most important forces that will forge the future of Ethiopia. The Ethiopia
youth presents the most promising resource and a big reservoir of energy which can play an
important role in social, economic, culture and ideological revolution in the country and
contribute significantly to economic growth and poverty alleviation. The need, therefore, is to
create increasing opportunities for them to develop their potentials, personalities, functional
capabilities to enable them to be productive citizens.

Literature Review
As a matter of fact, young people are the main construct in the underpinnings of every social
structure. To assess the condition of a society’s development, a good place is to start with how
well its young people are making headway (Global Wellbeing Index, 2013). DFID (2007)
recognized youth as both, tomorrow’s leaders, parents, professionals, workers and today’s assets.
The combination of youth and innovation has the potential to create solutions to transform the
societies (Clark, 2014). The UNFPA asserts that the high potential of youth, when connected
with greater investment, will bring into being by the same token high returns (ICPD Report,
1994). On the contrary, any development plan, without taking into consideration the potential of
youth, will not transport the desired results. UNESCO (1998) recognize youth as equal partners
and actors for development and peace. Generating opportunities for young people and investing
in their capabilities must be prioritized in governmental policy making at all levels. Development
does not begin with goods; it goes along with people and their education, organization and
discipline. Its success can be ensured if it is undertaken as a broad, popular movement of
reconstruction, with key focus on the full utilization of the drive, enthusiasm, acumen and labor
power of everyone (Schumacker, 1995). UNESCO Youth Strategy (2014-2021) emphasizes to
invest in research, policies and programs for creating an enabling and rights-based environment
for young people to thrive and ensure the prosperity of society (Souter, 2014).Youth’s chance for
Contribution in nation’s economic, social and cultural development is maximized through the
process of empowerment (Lisbon World Conference, 1998). That’s why, now there is an
increasing realization among world leaders and policy makers for astonishingly underserved and
unheard youth (IRC, 2012).
Akintayo and Adiat (2013) also opined if developing countries like Nigeria yearn for
development and prosperity then they need to invest in their youth. Non-formal education,
vocational training, on-the-job training and other educational guidance of its kind should be
advanced as an essential instrument of empowerment (Arnold et al., 1991). These instruments
raise the bargaining power of the poor and bring in substantial awareness of their legal and
Social rights (Gergis, 1999). Kolade et al., (2014) studied the role of entrepreneurship education
and found that nations can gain competitive advantage due to natural resource endowment
thriving on quality manpower that can efficiently expedite economic growth. Malyadi and
Sunama (2012) argued that the promotion of entrepreneurship as an instrument of job creation,
empowerment and economic dynamism has captivating policy concentration. But unfortunately,
there has been no systematic attempt to look at it from youth perspectives in many emergent
economies. States need to identify the varied needs of youth and focus to develop more
sophisticated policy interventions which can lodge this multiplicity. Gone are the days when ‘one
fit for all’ solutions were in place. Therefore, it is advised that government should not impose
empowerment from above as top-down approach. It must be brought before an individual as an
objective to be strove for while ensuring equal access to economic opportunities, rest hinge on
the will and interest of the citizens (Gergis, 1999).
Alliance for International Youth Development Report (2013) stated that young people must be
taken on equal footings while addressing world’s most daunting development challenges. These
goals are not achieved singularly, but with coordinating efforts. For this purpose, a Special
Envoy for Youth has been appointed by the UN Secretary General who is responsible to bring
the voices of youth into the UN United Nations Development Program (UNDP, 2013). High-
Level Panel of Eminent Persons’ Report (2013) on the Post-2015 Development Agenda also
consider youth as the bright future of the world because of their ever-increasing role in shaping
socio-economic development, challenging social norms and values and building the foundation
of the new age. Development stakeholders and policymakers search for creating and increasing
access to training and education, technology and economic prospects for youth in order to profit
the huge prospective offered by these demographic transitions (Philanthropy and Youth
Empowerment, 2014). Governments around the globe are progressively supporting youth
ministries, youth policies and youth programs but still there is a long way to go to comprehend
this potential. Social entrepreneurship has also been rendered as important tool to build up the
youth facilitating network for the development of any society (McKinsey & Company, 2011).
A report by the NESTA hold that future generations need to be equipped with the skills i.e.
innovation, confidence, motivation, commitment, leadership and energy to communicate their
vision to others and drive it forward from concept to reality (Chell & Athayde, 2009).
Intermediary period, from childhood to adulthood, is quite a challenge as well as thriving
prospect. If potential of youth is not advantageously marshaled towards progress, nuisance may
happen (Ojikutu, 1998). The ILO (2006) ballpark figure points out that globally about 23% of
the total young workforce is young working poor, with earnings of less than $1 a day. Having
enormous pledge in the present and future state of the planet Earth, young people can participate
optimistically in all aspects of SD if they are supplied with enabling environment (Peter &
Philip, 2009). Sustainable development (SD) is an inclusive and convoluted concept defining a
wide array of political visions (Munasinghe,2001). The creation of a shared vision of a
sustainable and enviable society is the most decisive challenge facing humanity today. One of
the most significant issue, according to (Herman, 1992), is to contribute undeviating prosperity
while remaining in the biophysical precincts of the world in a way that is fair and evenhanded to
all of humanity, from present to future generations (Costanza, 2000). According to World
Commission on Environment and Development (2011), SD phenomenon holds two key
concepts: at the outset, the concept of‘needs’, particularly the fundamental needs of the world’s
underprivileged segments, to which foremost precedence should be given; and at the second
place, the position of state technology and other environmental situations which may impose
restrictions in order to meet the present and future needs of the society. The integration virtually
intimates the contribution of all traditional zones of both economic and government actions
involving as economic planning, health, natural resources, water, education, science, energy,
agriculture, water, industry, and the most importantly environment. The indicators of SD are
used to scrutinize and assess the dimensions of advancement and projected to appendage the
political decision-making, typifying states and progression of growth. Though, such indicators
are not only being employed to appraise the sustainability of any nation and policies but also
have limitation of only reflecting the systematic interaction between them. David (1996) stated
SD in terms of obtaining the economic growth required for fulfilling human needs, raising living
standards and providing financial resources to make environmental protection possible. Two
major aims of SD are i) a sustainable economy which accomplish human needs impartially
without being extracting their source inputs or driving out waste more than the environment’s
renewing expanse, ii) and sustainable human institutions which ensure both safety and the
contingency for spiritual life and social correlation. The sustainability of development task
should become the core foundation to obtain the goal of national development agenda. It is
counterfeited that sustainable development depends mainly on three elements i.e. social
development, economic growth and environmental factors (Phimphanthavong, 2011).
Environmental sustainability holds the concept of upholding such practices that add to the
quality of the environment on a long-term basis. This factor’s measurement emphasizes the
viability and well-being of living systems in their diverse and wide-ranging magnitude (Dalgard
et al., 2004).
At the 1992 ‘Rio Earth Symposium’ in Brazil, 152 leaders from around the world participated to
underscore the significance of sustainability and consensus was made that all countries should
fabricate a national sustainable development strategy which is included in agenda 21 of the
summit. In sum, youth empowerment is a decisive element for a country’s sustainable
development. The potential youth is the greatest investment opportunity for a country’s
sustainable development (Commonwealth, 1998). Hence, to deal with changing world dynamics,
youth must be equipped with all-encompassing intellectual, moral, social and relevant skills at
earnest (Lagun, 2002). Unfortunately, young people did not receive much-needed care and
attention from the concerned authorities during subsequent regimes. Flimsy governance
structures, an inopportune record of development, regular episodes of heightened social conflict
and a trembling macro-economic situation all contributed to young people’s lack of confidence
in Ethiopian’s future (British Council, 2009).
The cherry on the cake is there is no official youth council in the country but many self-
supported youth groups are operating at national, provincial and local levels (Pakistan Youth
Policy Factsheet, 2014)7. Azmat (2014) points out that no amount of income support programs,
or youth loans can meet the desperate lack of confidence and capacity in our young people.
Ethiopia owes its children and youth a better deal than this. With an unavailability of effective
teachers and sound learning outcomes, Ethiopia is on its way as continued in producing ‘literate’
individuals lacking the basic skills necessary to be productive citizens.
There is no dearth of talent but to streamline the efforts. It is important to enable everyone to
participate in providing solutions and to attain MDG targets (Common Country Assessment of
Ethiopia, 2011).

Conclusion
Young people are an asset and potent agents of change that present a nation with both great peril
and promise. There is no rebuff to the fact that they are the lynchpin of their country’s
sustainable development. Literature reveals that the countries who manage to provide their youth
with education, support and opportunities have yielded significant returns in socio-economic and
political spheres over the span of time. But it is still a myth in developing and emerging
economies of the world whether youth empowerment a dream, a roadmap or mere a political
statement. Resultantly, youth in these countries is marginalized, overlooked and under-
represented in policy making processes. In Pakistan, various youth centered initiatives have been
employed during successive political regimes, and the PMYP is one of them that allow youth to
use the window of opportunity. This, six in one package of software-centric approaches (Youth
Skill Development, Fee Reimbursement and Youth Training/Internship Scheme) and hardware-
centric approaches (Youth Business Loans, Laptops and Qarz-e-Hasna Scheme), is a welcoming
step to acknowledge the promising role

References
Alsop, R. & Heinsohn, N. (2006). Measuring Empowerment in Practice: Structuring Analysis
and Framing Indicators. World Bank Publications, 35(10). Akintayo, D. I., & Adiat, K. O.
(2013). Human Resource Development for Sustainable Development: Perspective for Youth
Empowerment in Nigeria. International Journal of Advances in Management and Economics,
2(5), 17-21. Arnold, & Rick. (1991). Education for Change, Toronto: Doris Marshall Institute
for Education and Action and Between Lines. Assessment. (2011). Common Country Assessment
of Pakistan, United Nations. Balsano, B. (2005). Youth Civic Engagement in the United States:
Understanding and Addressing the Impact of Social Impediments on Positive Youth and
Community Development. Applied Developmental Science, 9(4), 188-201.
Bessant, Judith, Sercombe, Howard & Watts, Rob. (1998). Youth Studies: An Australian
Perspective. South Melbourne: Longman. British Council Report. (2009). Active Citizen
Program: British Council. Retrieved from http://www.britishcouncil.pk/Programs/society/active-
citizens. Brundtland Commission Report. (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford University Press.
Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brundtland Commission
Youth Empowerment. Government of Pakistan. Annual Plan (2013-14). Planning
Commission of Pakistan. Retrieved from http://pc.gov.pk/annual%20plans/2013-14/15-
Youth%20Empowerment.pdf
Population, Labor Force and Employment. Pakistan Economic Survey. (pp. 199-211)
Retrieved from http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey
Chinman, M. J., & Linney, J. A. (1998). Toward a Model of Adolescent Empowerment:
Theoretical and Empirical Evidence. Journal of Primary Prevention, 18(4), 393-413.
Collins, K. M. (2013). Youth Empowerment Programs: Using a Program Evaluation
Framework to Identify Developmental Outcomes of Youth Empowerment. (Doctoral
dissertation). The Claremont Graduate University.