* This guest op-ed article was written by Sonia Ugwunna

Around the world, cities are embracing the language of inclusion. Young people are invited to forums, informed about plans, and given platforms to share their visions for the future of the places they call home. But too often, this participation is symbolic and disconnected from real decision-making power. 

We are being kept busy, but busy doing what?

We attend major conferences, sit in air-conditioned rooms, and listen to experts speak in technical language. When it’s time for questions, we are told, “We can only take one.” Other times, we organize our own design workshops, then chase government officials just to get them to honor our invitations. And when they do show up, they praise our eloquence, encourage us to “do more,” and then disappear until the next event. 

If you are lucky, you might be absorbed into a sounding board or a steering committee, or earn the title of “youth leader.” You might share your ideas during focus groups at inception meetings, then offer a few words of commendation at the final presentation of a policy you know little about but must attend to remain visible.

Yet between inception and presentation is where the real work happens and where young people often disappear. This gap is especially troubling in cities across the Global South, where, majority of the population is made up of young people, for example, over 60% of Africa’s population is under the age of 25. 

The space between being seen and heard, and being heeded, reflects deeper structural flaws in how local governance is designed.

Despite talk of inclusion, decision-making systems have not evolved to accommodate new voices. Take Nigeria, for example, urban planning remains a top-down affair. Local governments often operate under centralized authority, with limited funding and political interference. The Land Use Act concentrates land authority at the state level, eclipsing local influence and muting calls for accountability. In these settings, participation is still treated as an event, not a process. Youth are invited to consult, but there are rarely clear mechanisms to integrate their input, follow up on recommendations, or hold leaders accountable when nothing changes. 

So what truly reflects participation by youth?

Beyond being the largest demographic in many cities, today’s youth are also among the most climate-conscious generations, bringing innovative perspectives, solutions, energy and commitment to the table. Recognizing this, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)’s Youth4Climate Manifesto has emphasized the critical role and potential for youth education, training, and capacity-building to drive real progress in climate action.

To make youth participation meaningful, especially in cities of the Global South, we need to rethink how we engage. In 1969, Sherry Arnstein introduced “A Ladder of Citizen Participation,” framing participation as a redistribution of power, not just presence. Her point still holds: Participation without power is not participation at all. If youth engagement is to move beyond the symbolic, urban governance systems must be redesigned to share power practically, structurally, and consistently.

A systems-thinking approach asks not just how young people participate, but where and when within the process. 

Any serious conversation about youth inclusion must begin with local government reform., as localized governance is the only meaningful pathway for embedding youth participation in ways that matter. This reform must include structured systems that make youth engagement a continuous part of governance, with clearly defined roles for young people across planning, implementation, and monitoring.

One way to frame this is as a dual engagement model. First, youth can serve as co-implementers in the delivery of urban services, contributing localized knowledge about what’s needed, where, and why. Their lived experience offers critical insight – whether it’s co-designing public spaces, leading local surveys, or running awareness campaigns. Many already bring skills across climate policy, urban data, and digital communication. But even when they don’t, their everyday experience of the city makes them legitimate actors in shaping it. 

Expertise matters, but ownership matters too. 

Youth can also serve as accountability actors, independent from government goodwill. Legal protections are needed to safeguard youth-led monitoring, reporting, and advocacy efforts. In this sense, youth are civic actors helping hold the system to account.

This approach resonates with ICLEI’s Unlocking the Power of Youth checklist, which outlines practical steps local governments can take to institutionalize youth engagement, not as symbolic participants, but as co-creators and drivers of sustainable urban development.

If youth participation is to be more than a performance, we must get serious about power – where it lives, how it’s shared, and who gets to shape the outcomes that define urban life. This means embedding youth in conversations and systems with roles that are clear, consistent, and backed by law. Until then, we are not participating. We are performing.

* About the author

Sonia Ugwunna is passionate about building cities that are designed for people and climate resilience. She founded NatureFy, a youth community exploring how Nigerian cities enable or hinder climate adaptation by spotlighting the links between urban design, climate risks, and everyday experience. 

Through NatureFy, she hosts #What’sUrbanAboutThis?, a monthly standup where young people reflect on how urban issues shape their daily lives and is leading the NaturePlay project, transforming an urban schoolyard into a resilient garden. Sonia is completing her Bachelor’s degree in Urban Planning, focused on climate disaster risk and infrastructure planning.