Europeanization of youth policy : case study of Finland and Norway

Abstract

Youth policy is a relatively young topic for International Relations. Nevertheless, it becomes more relevant at the European level. There is an evolution and growing quantity of youth related strategies, programmes, acts and policies both at the European and domestic levels. For Europe, the youth can be a resource to support cooperation, smart economy and sustainable development. This Master’s Thesis argues that the European youth dimension has particular impact on domestic youth policies. This thesis inquires how European integration appears in the youth policy, and discovers causal relations between European and domestic policy changes. The object of this research is youth policy, and the subject is its evolution and changes due to European integration.

It is possible to look at the youth dimension through the lens of Europeanization theory, and its narrower type – EU-ization. This thesis traces Europeanization in two cases – Finland and Norway. Both cases, on the one hand, have similar features of belonging to the Nordic states. On the other hand, they have different experiences of European integration. Process tracing and analytical narratives are the tools used in this research.

The empirical research conducted in the Thesis discovered interconnections between European and domestic youth policies: consequences of policy changes, parallels in youth policy agendas. However, in both cases domestic youth policies have specific priorities. European integration has had different impact in the case of Norway and in the case of Finland. These differences seem to be caused by Europeanization and, in Finland, by EU-ization. Despite the fact that the youth dimension is young and not on the top list of European policies, European states introduce changes at domestic levels.

This research shows how Europeanization and EU-ization appear in youth policy. It means that in order to design a more effective European youth policy, policy makers should identify which common recommendations and strategies are relevant for each particular state. Further unification of youth policy standards at the European level may cause domestic changes which are not objectively required, and thus would appear only under the “goodness of fit” notion. Instead, it might be more efficient to diversify the youth policy agenda and leave more initiative for domestic youth policies.