Dr Rob White, an Associate Professor of Criminology at the University of Melbourne, has been actively involved in the area of youth studies for a number of years. He is the author and editor of several books on young people and has written extensively on issues such as young people and public space, ethnic minority youth, juvenile justice, youth unemployment and police-youth relations.

Foundation for Young Australians

The Foundation for Young Australians (previously the Australian Youth Foundation) is a dynamic not-for-profit organisation funding innovative initiatives that support and empower the lives of young Australians aged 12 to 25. Particular focus is on initiatives that encourage youth participation and assist young people to reach their full potential and enable them to make a positive contribution to the community. Approximately 20 per cent of Foundation for Young Australians grant funding is dedicated to initiatives specifically designed to benefit young Indigenous Australians.

National Crime Prevention Programme

The National Crime Prevention Programme (previously the National Campaign Against Violence and Crime) is a strategic initiative of the Commonwealth Government to fund and promote policies and projects to prevent and reduce violence and crime and fear of crime in Australian communities.

Administered by the Attorney-General?s Department, the Programme includes both research and practical initiatives including national pilot projects, local prevention activities, communication and crime prevention professionals training initiatives.

ISBN: 1876516 003

Copyright © Commonwealth of Australia 1998

First published 1998, Reprinted 2002

Author: Dr Rob White, Associate Professor of Criminology, University of Melbourne

Editor: Margaret Seaberg, Australian Youth Foundation Communications and Publications Officer

The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the view of the Commonwealth of Australia. Whilst all reasonable care has been taken in the preparation of this publication, no liability is assumed for any errors or omissions.

Design: GRASP Design, Canberra

Print: National Capital Printing, Canberra

Publisher: Commonwealth Attorney-General?s Department

Acknowledgements iv

1. Youth Needs and Rights 5

2. Planning and Development Strategies 9

3. Managing Public Space 10

4. Evaluation 12

II: Projects and Initiatives 15

1. Research and Consultation 15

2. Creative Use of Existing Places 36

3. Art and Drama in Public Spaces 50

4. Commercial Site Management 57

5. New Development Projects 61

6. Local Council Integrated Planning 64

7. State-Wide Initiatives 72

8. National Initiatives 80

I am grateful for the assistance and moral support provided by Kiersten Coulter, who was a central person in coordinating and administering various facets of the larger research project, and who was instrumental in making contact with and gathering information from many of the projects discussed in the present Guide.

Special thanks goes to all those people engaged in youth public space projects and initiatives in community-based projects, local councils and commercial enterprises who have demonstrated by example how public spaces can be made more youth-specific and youth-friendly, to the benefit of young people and their communities.

Finally, thanks are due to the Australian Youth Foundation for funding various public space initiatives, and for providing the resources to co-produce and distribute publications such as the current Guide. The AYF has an impressive record of positive intervention on youth-related issues, and plays a vital role in instigating meaningful projects and reform at the grassroots level.

Rob White

Experience has shown that very often the best approach to youth-related issues is one which is holistic, community-based and which involves young people directly in the process. Accordingly, if there are conflicts over how public space is used, experienced and regulated, then attention should be given to those measures which attempt to deal with the issues in a creative and positive manner. This is the intention of the present book.

The Guide provides brief descriptions of a wide range of public space projects which have been undertaken across Australia in recent years. The aim of the book is to provide an outline of the key elements of a broad youth-friendly public space strategy, and then to describe the basic features of various grassroots initiatives and specific community-based projects.

A wide range of interventions on public space issues is described in the Guide. There are a number of different sites where public space initiatives can take place. Some of these include:

• Existing Commercial Sites (e.g., shopping centres)

• New Commercial Developments (e.g., shopping complexes)

• Publicly-Owned Communal Spaces (e.g., local council areas)

• Multi-Functional Spaces (e.g., high schools)

• Outdoor Spaces (e.g., council reserves and parks)

There are also different points of intervention or different orientations to public space issues. Some of these include:

• Planning Processes (e.g., design and planning)

• Working with Management (e.g., shopping centres, local councils)

• Youth Arts (e.g., cultural events, graffiti programmes)

• Special Projects (e.g., public consultations)

• Integrated Planning (e.g., multi-agency collaboration, guidelines and regulation)

This Guide focuses on projects which have involved special funding or specific authority approval for particular project purposes, mainly involving community groups, and community development sections of local councils. It also considers projects relating to planning processes and shopping centre management strategies, which involve both private commercial interests, and public bodies such as local councils and state government departments.

The specific measures described in this Guide are in many instances transferable to localities other than those within which they have been developed. This is recognised in the discussions contained in the first four sections of the Guide. The intention of Part I of the Guide is to provide a broad strategic framework which outlines the key principles and directions for work in this area. Combined with the concrete examples of good practice in the second part of the Guide, it is hoped that the framework provided herein will assist others in developing forms of intervention and prevention strategies on public space issues appropriate to their own local community needs.

Part II of the Guide describes eight types of public space projects and initiatives. These include:

• those which involve consultations on public space issues

• those which aim to make creative use of existing public spaces

• those which use art and theatre in raising the public profile of public space issues

• those which deal with management issues relating to commercial sites such as shopping centres

• those which involve planning processes pertaining to new development projects

• those involving local council approaches to integrated planning, which incorporate the views and needs of young people

• those which involve state-wide initiatives oriented toward providing resources and models of ?good practice? for local councils

• those which involve national initiatives in the form of funding strategies, occasional publications, research reports and regular newsletters.

The information contained in this Guide comes directly from the projects in question, or from descriptions provided in general literature. An attempt was made to include mention of all major projects from around the country, drawing upon community contacts and published materials in order to do so. In most cases, the projects referred to were undertaken in 1996-1997, and many of them are now no longer in operation due to lack of funding or because they have achieved their immediate project goals.

Many of the agencies and organisations mentioned in this Guide have a history of involvement in the areas of youth service provision, crime prevention, youth advocacy or youth project development. It needs to be acknowledged that, generally speaking, the projects discussed in this Guide were or are a reflection of ongoing commitments by local councils and community organisations to youth matters, rather than simply one-off interventions.

The nature of documentation, including assessment of each project?s processes and outcomes, varied considerably. In most cases, the discussion is informed by direct contact with a project team or a major publication describing the project. The less extensive descriptions are based on information already provided in general overview documents (such as the recent Darwin, Brisbane and New South Wales studies). A listing of relevant documents (including the overview studies) is provided at the end of the Guide.

The discussions should be treated as indicative of broad project development, rather than as an evaluative exercise. In Part II, the structure of each project description for the first three sections is based upon the fact that many of the project documents provided explicit information on such things as ?methods and strategies? and ?outcomes?, and this seemed an appropriate way to provide a reasonably uniform presentation. Comments on strengths and limitations are based upon general observations and are not intended to detract from the specific achievements and positive benefits of each project, especially given the limited time, resources and people-power available to most of the projects.

The next five sections of Part II are organised somewhat differently. Due to the variation in reporting methods and documentation, these sections concentrate on providing descriptions of the materials and strategies, rather than more structured consideration of objectives, methods and outcomes. The extent to which each project or strategy is described was circumscribed by the materials available at the time of writing.

In some instances, the projects were multi-dimensional, involving, for example, aspects of consultation, research, creative use of public space, management strategies, and art and drama. Where this was the case, a specific aspect of the project was focussed on in order to highlight its particular innovative qualities or strengths. This is reflected in its subsequent location within the Guide (i.e., the section within which it is placed, such as ?research and consultation?).

From examination of various reports and case studies relating to the specific issue of young people and public space, it would appear that the following elements are important components of a successful youth crime prevention framework:

• the adoption of a broad social development approach, which incorporates measures designed to enhance the opportunities of young people and which allow them to take part in the negotiations and decisions that affect them and others around them

• the creation of a constellation of programmes and activities, to cater to a wide variety of interests, needs and situations, and which include programmes which are well targeted at specific problems

• the importance of community ownership which takes into account local conditions and which allows the direct and active involvement of local young people and other members of the community

• the necessity of adopting a holistic approach to youth issues, which recognises the intersection of family, school, employment, recreation and other issues in creating ?risk? situations

• the importance of multi-agency involvement, including the involvement of young people, so that a wide range of skills, knowledge and resources can be drawn upon in addressing complex problems

• the necessity of research and auditing processes in order to determine levels and types of need, sources of conflict and potential avenues for action

• the importance of evaluation of existing projects and programmes, and the need for greater information about the effectiveness of different kinds of interventions

• the necessity of being flexible in approach so that programmes can be changed or modified as required, and through on-going evaluation, better targeting and better outcomes can be achieved.

Bearing this framework in mind, the task is to apply these observations and principles to the specific issues at hand.

While the principle of respect for the rights of young people, and the recognition of youth needs in relation to public spaces, provide the strategic base for improving existing relationships, these need to be translated into concrete measures at a practical level. General prescriptions in this area include:

• provision of a diverse range of options for young people - this means that young people need to be provided with facilities and spaces which are multi-functional or which offer a range of uses, and which do not become the exclusive domain of any one group of young people (e.g., skateboard ramps tend to have limited, but nevertheless important, appeal to a small proportion of young people)

• provision of youth outreach services - this means that young people can connect with youth advocates, adult mentors and service providers where they are located, rather than having to come in to specific fixed locations, and that assistance in the form of welfare, counselling, health and legal support as well as someone to mediate between groups of young people, and young people and authority figures is available

• provision of youth-oriented public transport services - this means ensuring that public transportation is available and matches the entertainment needs of young people, as in the case of cinema end-times, that special services be available for weekend late night travel or special events (e.g., concerts or sports carnivals), and that public transport personnel are adequately prepared to deal with, and are respectful of, young users of public transportation

• provision of spaces and facilities which take into account the social differences between young people and which thereby offer flexible usage - this means that smaller publicly visible spaces and larger sized spaces can be combined to provide different groups (e.g., young women and young men) places within which they can feel comfortable and safe, yet still part of a general congregation of people; or that different age groups be provided with specific types of amenities in line with their particular interests (e.g., games parlours, café-style shops)

• the need to adopt a range of communication strategies to cater to the needs of different groups of young people - this means varying the methods of consultation and information provision to suit the distinctive style of any particular groups (e.g., language, single-sex groups, use of youth advocates, links to wider community and family networks)

• the guaranteeing of safe, confidential methods of consultation - this means that certain issues (e.g., relating to illegal drugs) and conflicts (e.g., relating to racism or sexual harassment) which have a big impact upon how public spaces are used, must be able to be conveyed and discussed in ways which allow for voices which otherwise may be silenced to be heard

• allowing for both formal and informal means of participation and inclusion - this means representation on management committees, setting up of ?youth councils? or similar types of participatory bodies (as part of local councils, local youth services, or site management committees), as well as ongoing grassroots consultation (through forums, use of advocates, surveys, etc.) with young people who may not wish to become so active, who may not feel able to articulate their ideas, or who may be prevented for social and economic reasons for participating in more structured bodies

• the development of competencies in young people so as to ensure better use of resources and facilities - this means that in some cases young people need to be shown how to use facilities, or to learn certain skills, in order to maximise their use of and interest in what is on offer (e.g., sports, computers)

• development of clear guidelines and codes of conduct involving young people themselves - this means that young people participate directly in establishing boundaries of acceptable or unacceptable behaviour, in particular kinds of public spaces as appropriate (e.g., shopping centres, city skating zones), and that there be effective and fair application of rules, and defined avenues of appeal when rules have apparently been breached

• provision of some spaces for the exclusive use of certain groups of young people - this means that some young people, such as young women, indigenous young people and ethnic minority young people, have access to spaces, perhaps at designated times, on an exclusive basis in order to reflect their specific needs and interests, as well as safety concerns

• undertaking of proactive campaigns which attempt to break down social stereotypes and barriers which may be limiting or oppressive of certain groups of young people - this means the carrying out of activities such as youth reconciliation projects for young people from diverse cultural and ethnic backgrounds in order to foster better relationships between different groups of young people who use public space.

The development of specific projects or programmes needs to take into account these kinds of concerns, especially given the common problems faced by many young people. However, there are particular groups and particular issues which warrant separate and further attention. This is most evident in the case of young women, ethnic minority young people, and indigenous young people. Here the key problems tend to revolve around two major issues which, while alluded to above, deserve further attention.

First, there is the issue of whether to construct some spaces as exclusive to certain groups, given their particular needs and histories, or whether to attempt to integrate each group into the mainstream of public space life. The answer is that it is possible to do both, particularly if there are mixed opinions among the young people themselves as to what they prefer.

For example, it is important to ensure that consultation processes be as inclusive as possible, and public space areas and activities as diverse as possible, in order to cater to multiple uses and groups. Simultaneously, it may be appropriate to set aside certain spaces for the use of particular groups (e.g., women-only rooms in a drop-in centre, indigenous cultural centres, ethnic minority meeting places) and/or certain times for the use of some facilities or amenities (e.g., swimming pool hours for exclusive use of some young people, which might, for example, fit the cultural and safety requirements of some women). Building a skateboard ramp is rarely seen in terms of social exclusivity; nor should providing separate spaces for other groups.

Secondly, although it is important to meet the needs of particular ?special population? groups such as young women or indigenous people, it is equally important to engage in proactive campaigns which attempt to break down the social prejudices which may fuel conflicts between different groups of young people.

The marginalised position of indigenous people in Australia, for example, is in many cases compounded by deeply ingrained and widely shared negative stereotypes. There are many instances of racist attitudes and behaviour being directed at Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people - not only by authority figures such as the police and security guards, but by other young people, their parents and members of their wider community. The ?youth reconciliation? project currently being undertaken in Adelaide provides one example of what such a proactive campaign might look like. In this instance, the project was devised to overcome some of the problems relating to tensions between different ethnic/racial groups in the inner city, and to counter racist attacks on particular groups (especially ?Asians? and indigenous people). The aim of the project is to promote better relations between young people of diverse cultural backgrounds, by applying concepts of reconciliation and anti-racism. Similar attempts to challenge racism and cultural misunderstandings, in Melbourne and Brisbane, have used performance drama as the medium for the message.

The place of indigenous young people in society generally, and in relation to the criminal justice system, deserves special mention. Public space issues in this case are heavily overlaid by problems stemming from colonialism and invasion. While the matter of separate spaces should not be seen in terms of an either/or proposition (as discussed above), the regulation of public space is a slightly different issue. Given the historical relationship between the police and indigenous young people, and given the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody on the importance of self-determination in indigenous affairs, it seems reasonable that special protocols continue to be developed, and resourced, in relation to public space strategies for indigenous young people. In particular, the use of indigenous police officers, advocates, community justice panel members, night and youth patrols, and other appropriate people in devising ways to both diffuse problems before they arise, and to solve them when they do, is essential. Fundamentally, any implementation of specific strategies should be undertaken with full regard to the importance of community decision-making input into the process.

Local councils can certainly play a useful and key coordinating role in this process. Particular measures which facilitate consultation could include:

• the development of a youth policy in local government strategic plans, and in the broad operational framework of private sector planning, design and architecture companies

• the incorporation of youth concerns into urban planning regulations, through social impact assessments, and into local government procedures relating to things such as development applications

• the employment of youth advocates by local government, located in the relevant community development and human services sections, accompanied by the registering of relevant youth advocacy bodies and relevant youth services

• consideration of a wide variety of consultation techniques and mechanisms, to suit the particular objectives of each organisation, that are appropriate to the type of project being undertaken and the young people most likely to be affected

• clarification of the decision-making process, timelines and accountability structures as part of the consultation process

• the public documentation of consultation processes, and provision of time for feedback on any preliminary findings.

The consultation process needs to lead somewhere. However, the end result will not necessarily rely solely on what young people have to say or contribute. It needs to be acknowledged from the outset that professionals working in the area have expertise, and that this expertise has to be used in conjunction with, but not to the exclusion of, popular input into the planning process. Communication of expert ideas and opinion to a lay audience can in fact be an important part of the overall consultation process. For example, there are a number of planning and design principles which have already been developed and which have immediate relevance to the planning of safe youth public spaces.

From the case studies and literature on public space management, it is possible to discern a number of measures which would enhance the relationship between authority figures and young people. These include:

• taking the time to communicate directly with young people, and in particular listening carefully and being non-judgemental about what they have to say, and explaining the rules or code of conduct expected in a particular place

• establishing some kind of connection with young people, through simply being a friendly presence in their lives, through to developing more formal institutional links with youth services and youth committees or youth councils

• adopting an attitude of conciliation in dealing with young people, so that each contact is as positive as possible, rather than based upon suspicion and threat

• dealing with rule-breaking or offensive behaviour immediately and fairly (the behaviour is the problem), and with due respect for the dignity and rights of the young person (the young person is not)

• cooperating with other agencies and personnel, so that advice and referrals are close at hand, and appropriate measures can be taken depending upon circumstances

• adoption of a problem-solving approach, such that the underlying issues of particular cases, or particular patterns of conflict, can be dealt with rather than simply the symptoms

• a willingness to be held accountable, both through regular surveys of local young people on performance and conduct, and with regard to suitable mechanism in which complaints can be registered and dealt with as a means to improve future performance

• active incorporation and recruitment of indigenous people, women and ethnic minority people into particular services, accompanied by genuine commitment to multicultural service provision

• support for and cooperation with youth-oriented, community-based night patrols which may be created to deal with specific groups of young people (e.g., indigenous young people), or specific types of behaviour (e.g., substance abuse)

• undertaking of specialised training which might include information about youth issues, skills such as interpersonal communication, and learning about alternative dispute resolution techniques

• development of specific protocols regarding how best to deal with young people under certain circumstances, involving young people?s direct participation and which might include a code of conduct for authority figures and young people alike.

For police and security guards, professionalism should be seen in terms of the capacity to think creatively and laterally about problems, and to be multi-skilled across a range of task areas. Management of sites should be evaluated in terms of community relationships, rather than tasks accomplished. The adoption of cross-cultural sensitivity training and anti-racist education as key elements of pre-service and in-service professional development rates a high priority in this regard. This kind of training is particularly important given the cultural differences in how different ethnic and indigenous groups use and experience public space.

In operational terms, while many police services have ?youth policies? which spell out broad guidelines, and some security firms are developing similar guidelines, there is a need to develop detailed, but flexible, protocols at a local level, which best reflect the feelings of young people and the resources available. As mentioned above, a protocol could include a code of conduct, for authority figures and young people alike, as well as procedures to be used in the event of conflict or a breach of the rules (by either party).

Ongoing evaluation provides a benchmark for how a strategy is working, and what may need to be done to improve its chances of success. A useful summary of evaluation techniques in this regard is provided by a recent Australian Youth Foundation S.T.A.R.T. Do It Yourself Evaluation Manual designed for use by agencies involved in youth-related projects. One of the centrepieces of the methods outlined in this is the use of SWOT analysis. An indication of what this entails is provided in the accompanying table.

Source: adapted from AYF & Sharp, 1996, pp.16-17.

A SWOT analysis helps to provide a realistic picture of the internal and external environments which impact upon programme and project development. It can provide a snapshot of current trends and responses, and is useful as a continuing means to measure both support and resistance to particular approaches and projects.

Strategic planning is really about being clear about what you are trying to do, who precisely is doing what, and how you plan to go about doing it. It means identifying who the target groups are, and what the priority needs are. A three-tiered planning process might include:

• setting out specific aims of the programme or project

• identifying the intended outcomes of the programme or project, through clearly set out goals and objectives (for which groups as well: the project team as well as the intended target group)

• providing specific information about how each goal is to be achieved: identifying the strategy to be adopted; the type of activity to be engaged in; the timeline; and the performance measure.

Project development depends upon good research and evaluation practices. The use of techniques such as those described above are essential tools in determining outcomes.

Evaluation is not only about outcomes however. Given the strategic framework outlined at the beginning of this section, it is important to evaluate processes as well. Key questions which might be asked with respect to this include such things as:

• the type and extent of youth participation in an initiative, and the extent to which young people are provided with resources that maximise their participation

• the exercise of decision-making power by different parties, who gets the final say, and what kinds of avenues are open for community and professional input into projects

• where and to whom the basic accountability for project development and outcomes ultimately lies

• the mechanisms in place to ensure adequate documentation of project development, and provision of information and feedback channels to key stakeholders

• distinguishing between multi-agency cooperation (e.g., dialogue between parties) and strategic partnerships (e.g., formalised relationships which involve group decision-making and adherence to decisions by the group as a whole)

• consideration of how intentional effects from programme implementation may lead to particular unintended consequences and how these might be avoided, and the ability to deal with unforeseen circumstances if they do arise

• the ways in which original stated aims (e.g., reducing youth crime) can be modified or changed as a result of project research and development (e.g., enhancing community solidarity).

The measurement of programme or project outcomes needs to take into account performance indicators internal to the initiative (e.g., incidents of vandalism) and effects which may not have been intended for measurement as part of a project brief (e.g., other forms of community cohesion or conflict as a result of the initiative). Performance indicators should be seen as useful tools to guide processes and thinking about issues. They are the benchmarks for ?good practice?.

1. Research & Consultation

The need for the project arose out of local concern that, due to a lack of affordable, accessible, alcohol-free venues for recreation and entertainment, and due to community attitudes that have tended to generalise and stigmatise young people in a negative manner, Launceston?s young people have felt increasingly alienated and isolated from their community.

The project investigated the following questions:

• the relationship of young people to community space

• how best to consult with and involve young people in the social and civic functions of their community

• how to resolve tensions, real and perceived between young people?s use of public space and other interests.

The project approach was by way of consultation. Over 700 people in the Launceston area were consulted in a four-month period from February to June 1997. A literature review of young people and public space issues was also undertaken.

The choice of models for consultation was influenced by a desire to provide both conventional statistical and general information, as well as documentation on ideas, opinions and information gathered through more informal, creative and direct processes. Consultation occurred via a survey/questionnaire, four community forums that each had a specific focus, video technology and through data gathering on the streets.

This provided the opportunity for young people and other members of the community to come together to share concerns and identify needs in relation to young people?s uses of public spaces, recreation and entertainment provision; as well as to identify possible solutions and compromises for identified areas of contention.

Forums held included: Community (open); Schools (via elected school representatives); Mall (youth only); Skaters (open).

The strengths of the forums were:

• easy to set up and implement

• provides specific groups with the opportunity to express their views

• may demonstrate to people, particularly young people, that they are being heard and taken seriously.

The limitations of the forums were:

• channels of communication to student representatives can be obstructed by school administrative procedures

• analysis of results can be messy and time consuming.

ii. Survey/Questionnaire Model

This provided an avenue to gain both statistical and general information through the use of a varied number and format of questions.

The survey was designed to be user-friendly; was piloted to ensure clarity and reliability; was distributed to a broad cross-section of young people; and was distributed on a face-to-face basis in order to ensure detailed, accurate information.

The strengths of the survey were:

• can be conducted by young people amongst their peers

• involves large numbers

• may be a credible public relations exercise

• can provide credibility to funding submissions

• enables specific and objective analysis of results.

The limitations of the survey were:

• a survey which requires a written response may disadvantage those with a low level of literacy

• answers may be shallow and without detail

• the questionnaire format may limit the types of possible response

• the survey format will limit the issues that are addressed

• collation and interpretation may be time consuming.

iii. The ?Out and About and on the Streets? Model

This model allows contact with a broad cross-section of young people in a wide variety of environments, and involves setting up stalls in a variety of locations.

The strengths of this model were:

• provides a means of face-to-face direct and immediate consultation

• it is a voluntary, informal and personal process which is easily implemented

• it is flexible and provides an outlet for the dissemination of information about the project

• creates a high profile for the organisations involved.

The limitations of this model were:

• uncontrollable in terms of the weather

• people may not approach workers

• need to have good advertising and attractive banners.

iv. Youth Video Consultation

Originally it was planned to interview young people on camera, but due to the extensive nature of the consultations, this was felt to be unnecessary. However, throughout all consultations the video camera was used to record the interactions. Several hours of footage were edited into a 15-minute video.

The strengths of using video technology were:

• flexible and easy way of gathering information

• appealing and current method of consultation with young people

• responses tend to be detailed, accurate and informative.

The limitations of using video technology were:

• dependency on expensive resources such as video cameras, monitors and tapes

• excludes those who are camera shy

• some responses may be minimal and/or flippant.

Outcomes:

The consultations revealed that due to a lack of resources and negative community attitudes many young people have felt increasingly alienated and isolated from their community.

The consultation also found that the extension of schooling and the demise of full-time employment opportunities have had the impact of making peer interaction a central feature of young people?s lives and for an increasing period of time.

It was found that inadequate transport, and little or no money for leisure activities meant that young people have a need for spaces and places of their own in which they can establish and maintain relationships with each other and as affordable places to spend time out of school and home.

The project demonstrated that when young people are viewed as legitimate members of the community and are actively involved in planning and decision-making processes, it is possible to build better relationships between young people and other sectors of the community.

Four recommendations were made to the City Council on the basis of the consultation results:

1. That Council establish a Youth Advisory Group, to give a substantive voice to young people and ensure their active participation in decisions affecting them (to consist of a broad cross-section of young people, and several supportive adult members).

2. That Council employ the services of a full-time Youth Development Officer, to engage in service coordination, consult with young people and develop new initiatives (to act as a central point of contact for young people, Council and other spheres of government and community).

3. That Council support the development of a range of recreational facilities for young people, to provide more leisure and recreational opportunities (including skating, blading and biking facilities; under-age activities such as raves, dances and band nights; and a youth service centre, and café).

4. That Council support the enhancement of already existing public spaces, to better accommodate for the needs of young people (through up-grading seating, shelters, parks, provision of basketball rings and notice boards, planting of flowers and trees in mall, etc.).

1.2 Queensland:
Girls in Space
[Brisbane]

The specific needs and interests of young women are apparent in the fact that they tend to be less visible than other people in public spaces, parks and recreational facilities. Issues of safety, harassment, support and stereotyping all affect their uses of public space. It would appear that the only spaces owned, controlled or managed by young women for any substantial period of time are private and designated as being exclusive to young women. The aim of this project is to investigate fully issues relating to young women?s use of and requirements for public space. Key issues for exploration include young women?s recreation participation, barriers to participation, social (including parental) influences on young women?s leisure and young women?s current use of public space.

The goals of the project are:

• to provide a variety of programmes for young women accessing public space

• to generate information relating to young women and public space

• to develop strategies to enhance young women?s access to public space

• to trial and refine identified strategies

• to allow public policy makers to access and use the information.

Priority is to be placed at all stages of the project on the issues of young women who are most disadvantaged.

Phase 1 will investigate the nature of young women?s relationships to public space by identifying a range of issues relating to the ways in which research participants are involved in organised and supervised activity.

Phase 2 will explore specific issues relating to young women?s participation and non-participation in public space activity.

Phase 3 will identify, trial and refine strategies which increase young women?s access to, and participation and visibility in public spaces. Analysis at the end of this phase will result in the documentation of ?best practice? models.

At the time of writing, phase 1 of the project had been completed. The methods used for this phase are therefore the subject of the current review. The phase 1 methodology was constructed in order to explore the relationship that particular groups of young women in Brisbane have to public spaces. A ?focus group interview process? was the research technique used. This involves encouraging informal discussion and allows young people being interviewed to remain comfortable and familiar with others in the focus group. The focus group interviews were held with single gender and mixed gender groups. The groups ranged in size from two to ten people.

The identified research groups were all engaged in organised or semi-structured recreational activity. Young women who participated in the interviews were drawn from a wide spectrum of groups and activity areas. The sources of the focus group participants included a women?s physical performance troupe, indigenous young people involved in an arts project, women who had participated in an internet training workshop, participants in a similar young people and public space research project, young people in drop-in centres, a library group, a holiday programme, a basketball clinic, pool hall, outdoor team building course, circus skills workshop, and a dance party.

The focus group discussions sought information about the following areas:

• participant?s past and current leisure experiences and preferences both within structured and unstructured time

• participant?s knowledge in relation to public and private spaces

• why participants make certain choices relating to recreation and public space usage

• participant?s experiences relating to recreation and public space

• participant?s advice and ideas relating to recreation and public space.

The researchers were conscious of the need to establish a sense of trust between the interviewer and the interviewees. It was found that single sex groups were usually more comfortable discussing gender-specific issues than those in mixed sex groups. Differences were also found in trust levels between focus group participants who were part of a long-term project or existing networks, and those who were participating through social events or short-term projects. Trust building was also facilitated by ?ice breaker? type activities (such as role-playing exercises). Interview sessions were also prefaced with an assurance of participant confidentiality and an explanation of the project goals. The process involved three separate interviews with each group, in order to develop group rapport and to give participants time to think about the issues between interviews. The interviews were recorded through the use of either tape recorders or a video camera.

The strengths of phase 1 of the project were:

• interviewer sensitivity to use of language and vocal inflections, and emphasis on trust building as an essential part of the interview process

• participation of young people from a wide variety of groups and activity areas, with inclusion of people from a range of ethnic and cultural backgrounds, indigenous backgrounds, socio-economic backgrounds and sexualities

• use of an observational researcher who worked with the interviewer to ensure against ?loaded? questions and to assist in evaluating sessions in order to create a more relaxed atmosphere and more meaningful information

• use of both mixed and single-sex groups, which allowed for assessment of the nature of gendered interactions, and the social differences within and between single-sex groups.

The limitations of phase 1 of the project were:

• difficulties in conducting three interview sessions with each group, due to the temporary nature of some of the activities, demands on participant?s time, and lack of immediate or short-term gratification for participants

• some venues for the interviews did not work well, due to the fact they were held in peer social spaces such as a youth centre and places of non-neutral space

• questions arose over the steps necessary to ensure confidentiality when the video camera was used to record group interviews and activities.

• participants were without time constraints (e.g., had another activity to go to)

• participants were in a comfortable, relaxed environment (e.g, coffee shop)

• discussions occurred within a chosen activity (e.g., participants could continue to play pool during discussion).

Secondly, this phase of the project identified the key factors which impact upon young women?s leisure practices. Some of the themes to emerge were: the importance of social networks and social events; personal safety issues; issues relating to activity types and design of public space which took into account the specific needs of young women, such as indoor venues and non-competitive environments; different modes of transport; the ways in which social background influence the experiences of different groups of young women in public spaces; and the influence that parents/custodians have on girls? perceptions of and access to public space.

Arising from this information was a series of recommendations relating to the research process (e.g., alternatives to focus groups discussions), participant targets (e.g., parents, custodians and carers; young women with disabilities), and action proposals (e.g., developing protocols on public space use with teachers and police; engagement with public space designers regarding ?female aesthetics? and activities).

1.3 Western Australia:
Streetwize Networks Project
[Town of Bassendean]

Many young people in the Bassendean area suffer disadvantage in terms of low socio-economic status, reduced educational achievement and lower school retention rates. Issues of youth unemployment, truanting, drug taking and offending, and conflicts with authority figures such as parents, police and shopkeepers, are prevalent. Young indigenous people have been identified as a particularly disadvantaged and marginalised group.

To address these issues, the Town of Bassendean, through the Bassendean Youth Services, initiated work with and for disadvantaged young people. The goals of this project are:

• to provide effective communication of ideas and concerns of young people regarding the use of public space

• to promote greater awareness of options available to young people regarding public space

• to promote and enrich the activities of young people in the area, in particular by facilitating youth access to public space

• to focus on promoting activities to enrich the development of disadvantaged young people in the area

• to create a positive profile for young people within the area and improve relations between local business and young people

• to enhance networks with other agencies in the region

• to involve young people in the Town Planning Scheme review for the Town of Bassendean

• to produce a draft Youth Policy Statement

• to improve Council?s awareness of the needs of young people.

The intention of the project is to engage young people in esteem building activities, to promote a greater awareness of options for young people and to reduce harmful activities.

• consultation with young people on a range of issues including the use of public space

• conducting a needs assessment of local services and options for young people

• generating positive publicity about young people

• drafting and evaluating youth policy options

• conducting a programme of activities which promotes healthy lifestyles

• providing information to young people on services and facilities

• providing opportunities for young people to participate and communicate.

The consultation phase of the project involved meetings and distribution of a survey with over two hundred young people. Focus groups were held at five local high schools, two youth activity camps, community groups (such as Venturers), and participants at the Bassendean Youth Service. A survey of local businesses was also undertaken, which focussed on the perception of young people by the business sector and the nature of interaction between the business sector and young people.

The strengths of the project include:

• detailed implementation plans, which are structured around clearly stated information regarding goal, strategy, activity, timeline and performance measure

• recognition of the multifaceted nature of public space and youth issues.

The limitations of the project include:

• part-time staffing of the project

• inflexible nature of local government, particularly when it comes to budgets

• the ?at risk? target groups are difficult to access for meaningful consultations

• lack of existing youth participation networks

• ambitious programme objectives given the budget and time frame for completion.

The project involves a wide range of activities. Some of these include writing newspaper articles and press releases, preparing a youth newsletter and shopping centre displays, undertaking surveys and consultations, examining and assessing youth policies, and being involved in music concerts, recreational activities and skill development programmes.

1.4 South Australia:
OutaSpace Youth Speak
[City of Adelaide]

• to provide an environment where young people are encouraged to recount their experiences and express their views

• to provide opportunities for discussion by incorporating the perspectives of young people, youth workers, traders, local government, security guards and police

• to make provisions for the expression and recording of recommendations that young people may make

• to develop the content and style of the forum so that it is relevant to young people

• to have young people involved in the organisation and running of the forum

• for the youth forum to result in positive changes in the way that public space is allocated for young people.

Approximately 500 young people attended the forum. In addition to panel presentations and invited speakers, there were eight workshops conducted and 184 questionnaires completed. Over 50 separate recommendations were developed.

The strengths of the forum were:

• each objective was accompanied by clearly set-out criteria relating to (i) implementation strategy, (ii) outcome, and (iii) evaluation

• ongoing commitment demonstrated by Council and other relevant bodies to listen to what young people had to say, and act upon the recommendations.

The limitations of the forum were:

• organised as a single event, and one method of consultation used

• covered too many topics and speakers in the time allocated.

The high priority recommendations included:

• set up a youth specific hangout (action: Council, trader organisations, young people)

• provide skating facilities in the city that are useful for in-line skating, skate boarding and free style cycling (action: Council, young people, businesses, Dept. of Sport, Recreation and Racing)

• organise regular outdoor live concerts for all-ages audiences (action: SA music industry, Carclew, Arts SA, Council)

• allocate a space where young people are able to practice and showcase their talents (action: as above)

• involve young people in the development and implementation of projects that are developed as a result of the forum (action: Council).

Since the forum, a number of initiatives relevant to the issues raised and recommendations have been taken. Among these are:

• development of a ?perceptions and reality? booklet to provide information on a range of issues affecting young people and the business community, including citizenship and access to public space

• negotiation of an agreement on ?police and youth services protocol?, which is intended to strengthen communication and collaboration between the police and the youth sector

• development of a ?youth reconciliation project?, that will promote the diversity of cultures amongst young people and which is aimed at reducing violence between different groups of young people visiting the city

• inclusion of a panel session with young people as part of ?police youth training?, which has been extended across South Australia

• planned construction of a public skating park with a range of equipment for 1998

• provision of ?performance space? which caters to the needs of young people.

A close collaboration between key stakeholders appears to underpin the policy development and project implementation processes in Adelaide.

1.5 Western Australia:
Youth Forum
[City of Perth]

The objectives of the Youth Forum were to:

• identify issues which are important to youth in the City of Perth

• promote a positive forum for youth in the City of Perth

• identify key partnerships for youth groups and agencies

• identify key actions to be addressed by the City of Perth and other agencies

• make recommendations on the outcomes of the consultations and the Forum, to document and direct to the City and other agencies.

The target group was to be young people (generally between 12 and 25 years of age) who use the City, including mainstream youth and ?at risk? groups.

The consultations were conducted using a variety of methods. These included:

• a street intercept survey carried out over a 24 hour/7 day period at city locations where large numbers of young people are present to ascertain key issues for youth in the city

• school-based consultations undertaken in seven schools, with the majority of students in Year 10

• a website survey was set up on six computers at the Perth Railway Station as part of an event Rant & Rave @ Artrage

• video interviews were conducted with young people by young people during the weekend of the opening of the Artrage Festival, by ?roving reporters? at different city sites

• specific consultations were undertaken with indigenous young people, involving audio interviews conducted by Aboriginal youth reporters from 6AR (Aboriginal Radio), discussion sessions with students at Clontarf Aboriginal College, and by community agencies working at the street level of indigenous young people

• specific consultations were undertaken with ethnic minority young people from non-English speaking backgrounds, in conjunction with the Northern Suburbs Migrant Resource Centre and involving participants from seven different national backgrounds

• specific consultations with ?at risk? young people (e.g., truants, vulnerable street present young people, homeless young people), which involved direct service providers which had already established rapport and trust speaking with the young people on a one-to-one basis.

The findings of the consultation were compiled into a report, and presented to City Councillors and the Minister for Youth Affairs.

The strengths of the Youth Forum include:

• consultations beforehand with service agencies to determine most effective methods of consultation

• linkage of Youth Forum project with other youth events and initiatives such as Artrage Festival and Skateboard Association?s Street Intercept Survey as part of its business case for an integrated youth facility in the city

• sensitivity to different youth populations, and the necessity for different types of consultation

• variety of consultations, over an extended period of time.