1. Researches developing a socioeconomic impact assesment
1.1. DG INFSO
1.1.1. 2006, Evaluation Models and Tools for Assessment of Innovation and Sustainable Development at the EU level
1.1.1.1. The aim of the present study is to review the existing models focussing on the relationship between ICT investment, technological innovation and diffusion and European performance in terms of growth, employment and social inclusion. To assess the usefulness for impact analyses we focus on both the economic content (richness and detail of relationships and feedback mechanisms included in the models) as well as the methodological aspects
1.1.2. 2007, Status of e-Inclusion measurement, analysis and approaches for improvement
1.1.3. 2008, Inclusive Innovation for Growth and Cohesion: Modeling and demonstrating the impact of eInclusion/ Vienna Study on Inclusive Innovation for Growth and Cohesion: Modelling and demonstrating the impact of eInclusion
1.1.3.1. The Vienna Study, primarily focussed on the social and economic impact of eInclusion, also analysed the root causes behind processes of digital inclusion or exclusion and derived from it important implications for policy. In order to do so: a) some 300 hundreds theoretical and empirical sources have been reviewed; b) 1000 cases of eInclusion support initiatives were screened and 125 of them analysed in depth; c) a wide ranging review of the economic literature on the impact of ICT was conducted; d) an econometric model to assess the impact of possessing or lacking digital skills on employability and wage differentials was designed and run. In addition to this, the Vienna Study also leveraged and analysed the empirical evidence from another project funded by DG Information Society and Media on ICT potential for the economic and social inclusion of immigrants and ethnic minorities (realised by the Join Research Centre of the European Commission Institute of Prospective Technological Studies, IPTS)3. The sheer breadth and depth of the theoretical and empirical evidence gathered and analysed in this study is unique and makes it a ground breaking contribution to the field.
1.1.4. H3
1.1.4.1. e-Inclusion impact resulting from advanced R&D based on economic modelling in relation to innovation capacity, capital formation, productivity, and empowerment (SMART 2008/0065)
1.1.5. NO YOUTH DIRECT RELATION BUT IMPORTANT / 2010 - eInclusion public policies in Europe
1.2. DG EAC
1.2.1. 2009, The Socioeconomic scope of Youth Work in Europe
1.2.1.1. Although there is a wide range and diversity of youth work experiences in European countries, at the moment there is only limited specific information available on this sector. The aim of the study was therefore to provide a comparative overview and analysis of youth activities, especially regarding * the sectors of specific and related youth activities * the money and time invested in them; * the number of people employed and * the young people participating in these activities.
1.3. UK
1.3.1. 2007, The cost of social exclusion, counting the cost of youth disadvantage in the UK
1.3.2. April 2008, BECTA Study, "Assessing the potential of e-learning to support re-engagement amongst young people with NEET status
1.3.2.1. Aims and purposes of the study
1.3.3. October 2008, Digital Exclusion Profiling of Vulnerable Groups - Young People not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET): A Profile
1.3.3.1. This profile considers young people not in education, training or work. It aims to understand group members' actual and potential interaction with technology. The starting point of the profile is to understand the life circumstances of group members through desk-based research. Our understanding of group members' (potential) engagement with technology has been developed largely through primary research. In particular, focus groups were set up with group members and professionals working with the group.
1.3.4. 2009, Rallying Together: Summary of a research study of Raleigh’s work with disadvantaged young people
1.3.4.1. Raleigh is a youth development organisation that runs overseas expeditions for young people to work together on community, environmental and conservation projects around the world. In 2008, ippr was commissioned by Raleigh to research the long-term impact of Raleigh’s work with young people from disadvantaged backgrounds. This research had two key objectives: 1. To provide Raleigh with feedback on its work with disadvantaged young people over the past 25 years 2. To provide a case study of a practical intervention which has broader lessons for policymakers and practitioners concerned with improving young people’s lives.
1.4. 2007, EURlife, Eurofound monitoring quality of life
1.4.1. EurLIFE is an interactive database on quality of life in Europe, The data provided deals with the objective living conditions and subjective well-being of European citizens. Today we have 27 EU Member States and the candidate countries Croatia and Turkey in the database.
1.5. Youth In Action Policy
1.5.1. A European network on Research-based Analysis of Youth in Action – RAY-Network
1.5.1.1. On 19/20 June 2008, a meeting of National Agencies and their (potential) research partners interested in research-based analysis and monitoring of YiA was held in Innsbruck, Austria.
1.6. World/ ICTs for Education: Impact and Lessons Learned from IICD-Supported Activities
1.6.1. This impact study is part of a series of publications on the use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in various sectors in developing countries. It describes the experiences, achievements and lessons learned of the International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD) and its partners in using ICT to enhance education through thirty-two projects and ICT policy processes over eight years in Jamaica, Bolivia, Zambia, Burkina Faso, Mali, Ghana, Tanzania and Uganda.
2. Publications / int. researches / available data
2.1. UK
2.1.1. 2009, Best Practice in tackling NEET (16-18 old) in West Yorkshire (UK)
2.1.2. Summer 2009, Youth Tracker, issue 1
2.1.3. 2007 Livingstone, Helsper: Gradations in Digital Inclusion (UKCGO- 2007)
2.2. Sweeden
2.2.1. eRevolution - how do we energise and involve young citizens?
2.3. Spain
2.3.1. 2009, Encuesta: La juventud y las redes sociales
2.4. Germany
2.4.1. 2009 - Project: Digital Divide - Digital Competence in Childhood
2.4.2. 2010 -“Growing up with the Social Web”: Presentation of Research Results
2.5. US
2.5.1. 2009/ Enhancing Child Safety and Online Technologies Final Report of the Internet Safety Technical Task Force to the Multi-State Working Group on Social Networking of State Attorneys General of the United States
2.5.1.1. 50 TECNOLOGIES TO IMPROVE CHILD SAFETY ON INTERNET
2.5.2. 2009, Taken Out of Context: American Teen Sociality in Networked Publics, Danah Boyd Phd
2.5.3. 2008, Mobilizing Generation 2.0: A Practical Guide to Using Web2.0 Technologies to Recruit, Organize and Engage Youth
2.5.4. New Media Literacies (MIT)
2.5.5. Video: Inspiring Material
2.5.6. e-Mentoring study
2.6. World
2.6.1. 2009, A Digital Shift: Youth and ICT for Development Best Practices
2.7. Data/stats/survey
2.7.1. OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)
2.7.2. 2006, OECD, ICT and Learning: Supporting Out-of-School Youth and Adults
2.7.3. 2006- Mediappro: the appropriation of new media by youth
2.7.4. Byron review: Safer Children in a Digital World
2.7.5. EQUAL database
2.7.6. 2006, Youth poverty and transition to adulthood in Europe
2.7.7. 2008, DG JRC, IPTS, Young People and Emerging Digital Services: An Exploratory Survey on Motivations, Perceptions and Acceptance of Risks
2.7.8. 2008, ITU: Use of Information and Communication Technology by the World's Children and Youth
2.7.9. 2009, Belgium, Fondation Travail Université, Offline Youngsters, "Les risques d’inégalités dans la génération des “natifs numériques”
2.7.10. 2009-2011, EU Kids Go Online
3. Economic participation
3.1. 2003, Youth unemployment and social exclusion in Europe
3.2. YES Youth Employment Support
3.2.1. Especially for small and medium-sized enterprises (SME), insertion of young people is often a big challenge. Many young applicants are early school leavers, have failed to complete vocational education and training, and often they are socio-economically and/or personally disadvantaged. YES offers SME support opportunities for the employment and introduction of those young persons.
3.3. UP2YOUTH
3.3.1. > Young Parenthood > Transition to work of youth ethnic minority group > Civic participation
3.4. YUSEDER
3.4.1. The study has paid special attention on the consequences of long unemployment of youth on their physical and mental health
3.4.1.1. Kronauer (1998) outlines that social exclusion is always linked with unemployment - and that it is only given if at least both marginal economic position and social isolation are experienced at the same time. However it must be stressed that this concept can only be udnerstood by considering its multidimensionality. This means the flowing six indicators for social exclusion must be taken in account.
3.4.1.1.1. Exclusion from the labour market
3.4.1.1.2. Economic exclusion
3.4.1.1.3. Institutional exclusion
3.4.1.1.4. Exclusion through social isolation
3.4.1.1.5. Cultural exclusion
3.4.1.1.6. Spatial exclusion
3.5. Welfare Theory - Esping-Andersen
4. Social inclusion / Civic engagement / Active citizenship
4.1. NotSchool
4.2. UK
4.2.1. Break Out
4.2.2. On Road Media
4.2.2.1. SavvyChavvy
4.2.3. Lego League
4.2.4. Hero
4.3. European
4.3.1. UP2YOUTH
4.3.1.1. > Young Parenthood > Transition to work of youth ethnic minority group > Civic participation
4.3.2. REPLAY
4.3.2.1. Videogames
4.3.2.1.1. The vision of REPLAY is to use this technology as a means of motivating young people into a better awareness of how and why they behave the way they do and encourage them to take greater responsibility for the consequences of their decisions and behaviour.
4.3.3. Civicweb project
4.3.3.1. ICT/ Internet/Civic websites - Political and social engagement of youth
4.3.4. EUMargins
4.3.4.1. EUMARGINS investigates experiences of young adult immigrants in seven urban-metropolitan areas
4.3.5. eParticipation / Momentum Project
4.3.5.1. Young people find the concept of public debating dark wood-paneled chambers just to old-fashioned and hard to relate to. But they are more than happy to say what they think if given the chance to express themselves in more familiar environments, like the latest ICT tools.
4.3.6. Bordergames
4.3.6.1. Ravalgames
4.3.7. CousCous Global
5. Access to education, formation, training and life long learning
5.1. European
5.1.1. Incluso project
5.1.1.1. Digital Magazine
5.1.2. LINKS UP
5.1.3. YIPEE -Young people from a care background pathways to education
5.2. UK
6. European Comission
6.1. Policy
6.1.1. Com(2001)681 White Paper: A new impetus for European Youth
6.1.2. Com(2009)549 Youth - Investing and Empowering EU YOUTH REPORT
6.1.3. Com(2009)200 final An EU Strategy for Youth – Investing and Empowering A renewed open method of coordination to address youth challenges and opportunities
6.1.4. European Youth Pact 7
6.1.5. Europe 2020, A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth
6.2. Coordination/Consultation
6.2.1. Youth Partnership is driven between the Council of Europe and the European Commission
6.2.1.1. Good Practice Database
6.2.2. 2009: European Research on Youth - DG Research
6.2.2.1. Open Method of Coordination - Lisbon Strategy
6.2.2.1.1. The policy process was developed with the 2001 White Paper and is currently based on three pillars: – Active citizenship of young people via the OMC with four priorities (participation, information, volunteering and better knowledge of young people), common objectives, Member States reports and structured dialogue with youth; – Social and occupational integration through the implementation of the European Youth Pact7 under the Lisbon Strategy, with three priorities (employment/social inclusion, education/training, reconciliation of work and private life). The Commission Communication "Promoting young people's full participation in education, employment and society" went further in proposing additional actions; – Youth mainstreaming in other policies (such as anti-discrimination, health).
6.2.3. 2008 - 2 months online public consultation in the youth field
6.2.4. European Knowledge Centre for Youth Policy (EKCYP)