Advertisement

Cross-Fertilizing Children’s Rights and the Capability Approach. The Example of the Right to Be Heard in Organized Leisure

  • Daniel StoecklinEmail author
  • Jean-Michel Bonvin
Chapter
Part of the Children’s Well-Being: Indicators and Research book series (CHIR, volume 8)

Abstract

The authors explore new ways of conceptualizing children’s citizenship and participation through the capabilities approach (Sen 1999) applied to children (Biggeri et al. 2011). They highlight factors that must be considered when observing how formal entitlements, such as the rights of the child, can (or cannot) be transformed into real freedom to participate. Their study conducted in Switzerland and in France shows the conditions for the right to be heard (art. 12 UNCRC) to be converted into effective participation in organised leisure activities.

The authors identify four sets of factors (economical, political, organisational and personal) that convert or obstruct the child’s entitlement to participate in the definition of organized leisure activities. Two ideal types – bottom-up participation and top-down participation – are built along these lines. The research shows that child participation is mainly induced by professional adults working in youth associations and leisure centres while knowledge of “participation rights” is rather low. Respondents do very seldom use the narrative of “children’s rights” to reflect upon their praxis. This typical line of conduct, or “system of action”, indicates that social relations play a greater role than children’s rights in their subjective evaluation of participatory projects.

The study highlights child participation as a sequential process whereby the actor’s reflexivity plays an important role as a converting factor, and thus enriches the theoretical model used in the capabilities approach (Bonvin 2008). The results have important implications for the paradigm of the social actor and contribute to the theory of child participation (Thomas 2007). They underline the instrumental dimension of participation rights as they become real through the exercise of participation itself. The chapter allows for important theoretical and practical developments in the field of child participation, notably by discussing the issue of agency within structure and suggesting a dynamic framework to understand agency as a system of action.

Keywords

Leisure Activity Ideal Type Capability Approach Participation Process Autonomous Functioning 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Bai, L. (2005). Children at play: A childhood beyond the Confucian shadow. Childhood, 12(1), 9–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  3. Biggeri, M., Ballet, J., & Comim, F. (2010). The capability approach and research on children: Capability approach and children’s issues. In A. Sabrine, D. Isabell, S. Uwe, & Z. Holger (Eds.), Children and the good life: New challenges for research on children (Children’s well-being: Indicators and research series, Vol. 4, pp. 75–90). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biggeri, M., Ballet, J., & Comim, F. (2011). Children and the capability approach. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blumer, B. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Bonvin, J.-M. (2008). Capacités et démocratie. Raisons Pratiques, 19, 237–261.Google Scholar
  7. Bonvin, J. M., & Farvaque, N. (2006). Promoting capability for work: the role of local actors. In S. Deneulin et al. (Eds.), Transforming unjust structures: The capability approach (pp. 121–143). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P. (1994). Raisons pratiques. Sur la théorie de l’action. Paris: Le Seuil.Google Scholar
  9. Council of Europe. (2011). Child and youth participation in Finland. A Council of Europe policy review. http://www.coe.int/t/dg3/children/participation/PolicyReview_en.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec 2013.
  10. COE. (2012). Council of Europe. Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)2 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the participation of children and young people under the age of 18 (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 28 March 2012 at the 1138th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies). https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1927229&Site=CM
  11. Denzin, N. (1990). Interpretive interactionism (Applied social research methods series, Vol. 16). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  12. Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. D.C Heath & Co publishers.Google Scholar
  13. Elias, N. (1991). La société des individus. Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
  14. Ellis, C., & Flaherty, M. (1992). Investigating subjectivity. Research on lived experience. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  15. Evaldsson, A.-C., & Corsaro, W. (1998). Play and games in the peer cultures of preschool and preadolescent children: An interpretative approach. Childhood, 5(4), 377–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
  17. Foucault, M. (1980). The politics of health in the eighteenth century. In C. Gordon (Ed.), Michel Foucault: Power/knowledge. Brighton: Harvester Press.Google Scholar
  18. Foucault, M. (1991). Governmentality. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  19. Franklin, B. (1997). The ladder of participation in matters concerning children. In J. Boyden & J. Ennew (Eds.), Children in focus: A manual for participatory research with children. Stockholm: Grafisk Press.Google Scholar
  20. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  21. Hanson, K., & Nieuwenhuys, O. (Eds.). (2013). Reconceptualizing children’s rights in international development. Living rights, social justice, translations. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Hanson, K., & Vandaele, A. (2003). Working children and international labour law: A critical analysis. The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 11(1), 73–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hart, R. (1992). Children’s participation from tokenism to citizenship. Florence: Innocenti Research Center.Google Scholar
  24. James, A., & Prout, A. (1990). Constructing and reconstructing childhood. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kamerman, S. (2010). Preface. In S. B. Kamerman, P. Shelley, & B.-A. Asher (Eds.), From child welfare to child well-being. An international perspective on knowledge in the service of policy making (Children’s well-being: Indicators and research series, Vol. 1, pp. v–x). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lansdown, G. (2005). Can you hear me? The right of young children to participate in decisions affecting them (Early Chilhood Development, Working Papers No 36). The Hague: Bernard Van Leer Foundation.Google Scholar
  27. Lansdown, G. (2011). A framework for monitoring and evaluating children’s participation. A preparatory draft for piloting. Unpublished draft.Google Scholar
  28. Lareau, A. (2000). Social class and the daily lives of children: A study from the United States. Childhood, 7(2), 155–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liebel, M., in collaboration with Robin, P., & Saadi, I. (2010). Enfants, droits et citoyenneté, Faire émerger la perspective des children sur leur droit. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  30. Matthews, H. (2003). Children and regeneration: Setting an agenda for community participation and integration. Children and Society, 17(4), 264–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  32. Naftali, O. (2010). Caged golden canaries: Childhood, privacy and subjectivity in contemporary urban China. Childhood, 17(3), 297–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nibell, L. N., Shook, J. J., & Finn, J. L. (2009). Childhood, youth, and social work in transformation: Implications for policy. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Oke, M., Khattar, A., Pant, P., & Saraswathi, T. S. (1999). A profile of children’s play in urban India. Childhood, 6(2), 207–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Oswell, D. (2013). The agency of children. From family to global human rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Parazelli, M. (2002). La rue attractive. Parcours et pratiques identitaires des jeunes de la rue. Sainte-Foy: Presses de l’Université du Québec.Google Scholar
  37. Percy-Smith, B., & Thomas, N. (Eds.). (2010). A handbook of children and young people’s participation. Perspectives from theory and practice. New-York/Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Pfaffenberg, B. (1988). Microcomputer applications in qualitative research (Qualitative research methods series 14). Sage Publications: London.Google Scholar
  39. Pufall, P., & Unsworth, R. (2004). Rethinking childhood. London: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Reynaert, D., Bouverne-de-Bie, M., & Vandevelde, S. (2009). A review of children’s rights literature since the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Childhood, 16(4), 518–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Robeyns, I. (2003). The capability approach. An interdisciplinary introduction. (Paper, revised version 9 December 2003, written for the training course preceding the 3rd international conference on the capability approach, Pavia, Italy, on 6 September 2003).Google Scholar
  42. Roucous, N. (2006). Loisirs de l’enfant et représentation sociale de l’enfant acteur. In R. Sirota (Ed.), Eléments pour une sociologie de l’enfance (pp. 235–243). Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.Google Scholar
  43. Schütz, A. (1987). Le chercheur et le quotidien. Phénoménologie des sciences sociales. Paris: Méridiens Klincksieck.Google Scholar
  44. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Shier, H. (2001). Pathways to participation: Openings, opportunities and obligations. Children and Society, 15(2), 107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sinclair, R., & Franklin, A. (2000). Young people’s participation (Quality Protects Research Briefing, No. 3). London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
  47. Sirota, R. (2006). Eléments pour une sociologie de l’enfance. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.Google Scholar
  48. Snodgrass Godoy, A. (1999). “Our right is the right to be killed”. Making rights real on the streets of Guatemala. Childhood, 6(4), 423–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Stoecklin, D. (2009). L’enfant acteur et l’approche participative. In J. Zermatten & D. Stoecklin (Eds.), Le droit des enfants de participer. Norme juridique et réalité pratique: contribution à un nouveau contrat social (pp. 47–71). Sion: IUKB/IDE.Google Scholar
  50. Stoecklin, D. (2013). Theories of action in the field of child participation. In search of explicit frameworks. Childhood, 20(4), 443–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (2004). Les fondements de la recherche qualitative. Techniques et procédures de développement de la théorie enracinée. Fribourg: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  52. Thoburn, J., Lewis, A., & Shemmings, D. (1995). Paternalism or partnership? Family involvement in the child protection process. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  53. Thomas, N. (2002). Children, family and the state: Decision-making and child participation. London/Bristol: Macmillan/Policy Press.Google Scholar
  54. Thomas, N. (2007). Towards a theory of children’s participation. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 15, 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Treseder, P. (1997). Empowering children and young people. London: Children’s Rights Office/Save the Children.Google Scholar
  56. UNCRC. (1989). UN convention on the right of the child. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  57. Walkerdine, V. (1984). Developmental psychology and the child-centred pedagogy: The insertion of Piaget into early education. In J. Henriques, W. Hollway, C. Urwin, C. Venn, & V. Walkerdine (Eds.), Changing the subject: Psychology, social regulation and subjectivity. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  58. Weber, M. (1978). In R. Guenther & W. Claus (Eds.), Economy and society. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  59. Zermatten, J., & Stoecklin, D. (Eds.). (2009). Le droit des enfants de participer. Norme juridique et réalité pratique: contribution à un nouveau contrat social. Sion: IUKB/IDE.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Children’s Rights UnitSion 4Switzerland
  2. 2.Ecole d’études sociales et pédagogiques (EESP)University of Applied Sciences Western SwitzerlandLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations