Evidence Review of Cross-Sectoral Youth Development Approaches in Conflict-Affected Environments

The review focuses on youth development interventions most associated with stabilization activities, such as education, employment, and civic participation. The evidence suggests that holistic programming is the preferred approach in conflict-affected environments, with most programs incorporating five or more cross-sector components. The literature highlights the importance of addressing the needs of youth in conflict-affected areas, which are often significant. Comprehensive programs are considered the most effective way to provide needed services. The review aims to unpack the emerging evidence regarding the optimal mix of youth development approaches to achieve desired outcomes in conflict-affected environments. Positive Youth Development (PYD) is a concept that emphasizes empowering youth to reach their full potential by developing skills, assets, and competencies, as well as fostering healthy relationships and strengthening the environment. PYD approaches have shown promise in achieving outcomes across various sectors, including violence reduction, conflict resolution, and civic engagement, as well as health, education, employment, and gender equality. The review considers the integration of health interventions as part of a cross-sectoral approach, but it only briefly examines health-specific outcomes in conflict-affected environments. The findings are based on a recent publication by USAID, which examined 108 studies reporting on 46 programs implemented across 56 countries. Additional literature was reviewed to capture recent cross-sectoral practices in peacebuilding, peacebuilding education, economic opportunity, and civic participation. The evidence suggests that youth are less likely to display violent behavior when they have access to decision-making opportunities and agency. Soft skills, such as self-control, positive self-concept, social skills, communication, and higher-order thinking, are essential for youth success. Cross-sectoral PYD approaches show promise for achieving outcomes across various sectors, including violence reduction, conflict resolution, and civic engagement, as well as health, education, employment, and gender equality. Single-sector youth interventions in conflict-affected areas should be approached with caution. Education, particularly non-formal education with flexible offerings and cross-sectoral components, has an important role to play in promoting youth inclusion, socialization, social capital, and social benefits. However, the link between education and peacebuilding has not been robustly proven. Peacebuilding education has been shown to have unintended consequences, such as increasing conflict when youth are not allowed to exercise their learning with civic engagement opportunities. The global evidence suggests that education has an important role to play in social and cross-sectoral outcomes. School-based universal social-emotional learning programs have been linked to improved academic performance, social-emotional well-being, and reduced aggression. However, the link between education and peacebuilding has not been robustly proven, as not enough research has been conducted to confirm the relationship between short-term education outcomes and longer-term impact in terms of stability or reduced violence at the country level. Evaluations are often focused on program goals rather than long-term peacebuilding effects. Imprecise definitions related to peacebuilding, as well as the many factors contributing to peacebuilding, make it challenging to establish a relationship between education, conflict, and peacebuilding. In spite of its positive effects, education can be a spark for further exclusion or oppression if not delivered responsibly or insufficiently monitored.