In conducting the ‘Futures of Youth Work’ research, the team was acutely aware of several inherent limitations that influence the transferability and generalisability of the findings.
Donna Haraway’s notion of situated knowledge challenges the idea of objective and detached observation in favour of understanding knowledge as inherently connected to the specific contexts and perspectives of those producing it. According to Haraway, all knowledge is ‘situated,’ meaning it is shaped by the particular circumstances, experiences and positionalities of the knowers. This perspective argues that rather than striving for an impossible objectivity, it is more honest and productive to acknowledge the partiality of all knowledge and the importance of diverse viewpoints in creating a richer, more nuanced understanding of any issue.
This concept is particularly relevant to the ‘Futures of Youth Work’ research, which employs methods such as horizon scanning, signal spotting and scenario building. These methods inherently rely on the diverse insights and observations of various participants who bring their unique perspectives to the process. By recognising and valuing the situated nature of these insights, the research embraces a more holistic and inclusive approach to understanding potential futures. Haraway’s notion of situated knowledge thus underscores the importance of incorporating a wide range of voices and experiences, making the research more robust and reflective of the complex realities faced by youth work practitioners. This approach aligns perfectly with the goal of creating scenarios that are not only plausible but also grounded in the lived experiences and contexts of those involved in the field.
Signal spotters: diversity and constraints
Our signal spotters were recruited voluntarily through channels and networks already utilised by the European Academy on Youth Work and the youth work community. This approach successfully engaged a diverse profile of individuals in terms of age, gender, geography and expertise. However, these participants are primarily engaged in youth work at the European level, often bringing pre-existing perspectives shaped by their professional and regional contexts. This selection bias poses a challenge to the transferability and generalisability of the findings, as the insights may not fully represent the broader global context of youth work.
Geographical scope: a European focus
The geographical focus of the research is another limitation. While the aim of the study is to explore the future of youth work in Europe, it predominantly (though unintentionally) reflects Western European perspectives. This Eurocentric orientation, while aligned with the research frame, limits the applicability of the findings to non-European contexts and potentially overlooks significant regional variations within Europe itself. This constraint hinders the comparability and global applicability of the scenarios and recommendations derived from the study.
Research team: subjectivity and reflexivity
The composition and perspectives of the research team also influence the study. With their specific profiles, ideologies, experience and positions, the team members bring subjective interpretations to the analysis. Unlike an objective algorithm, the team’s insights are inevitably shaped by their personal and professional backgrounds. Recognising this, the team prioritised self-reflexivity and awareness throughout the research process, striving to address and mitigate these biases.
Addressing the challenges
To address these limitations, the research team employed several strategies:
-
Self-reflexivity and awareness: Continuous self-reflection and acknowledgment of inherent biases and limitations were integral to the research process. The team consciously factored these considerations into its analysis and interpretations.
-
Internal diversity: The diverse backgrounds within the team fostered internal deliberations and critical discussions at all stages, leveraging the varied perspectives to enrich the analysis.
-
Transparency and openness: The research process was kept open and transparent, with progress and findings shared for external feedback. The Resonance Workshop held in February 2024 served as a crucial platform for presenting and refining ideas, incorporating inputs from signal spotters and advisory board members of EAYW.
-
Continuous feedback loop: Feedback from the Resonance Workshop and sessions at the EAYW was heavily deliberated upon and integrated into the research. The aim of this iterative process was to validate and enhance the robustness of the findings.
While the scenarios developed in the research are grounded in the signals collected during the research, it is important to acknowledge that they do not provide a complete picture of all possible futures for youth work. Certain topics, such as sex, gender, health and economy, received limited coverage in the signals, resulting in potential blind spots within the scenarios.
It is crucial to recognise that no research can be entirely free of ideology. In his book Ideology: An Introduction, Terry Eagleton provides a comprehensive analysis of ideology, arguing that all knowledge production is inherently ideological. According to Eagleton, ideology is not just about ideas, but about how those ideas are lived out in everyday practices and institutions. This perspective underscores that research and its interpretations are influenced by the values, beliefs and positionalities of those involved.
In our case, the research team holds specific values and ideological positions, such as a strong belief in universal human rights and democracy. These values have inevitably influenced our scenario building, hence there are no scenarios that glorify or focus on autocratic governance models. Instead, the scenarios developed within this research emphasise democratic principles and human rights, reflecting our commitment to these ideals. This is not to say that alternative perspectives are invalid, but rather to highlight that our work is situated within a particular ideological framework. Readers should remain mindful of these limitations and consider them when interpreting and applying the findings.
Inviting critical engagement
The research team acknowledges that the research report is not a definitive conclusion but rather a starting point for further discussion. Readers are encouraged to adopt a critical mindset when engaging with the study, recognising the time and space limitations that accompany it. It is crucial to deconstruct and reconstruct the findings within their own settings, contexts and realities, which are in constant flux.
Embracing this approach aligns with Haraway’s notion of situated knowledge, emphasising the contextual and contingent nature of understanding. By continuously re-evaluating and adapting the findings, youth work practitioners can better prepare for and shape the future, ensuring that this study serves as a stepping stone for ongoing reflection, learning and action.