Young People and Interfaces Report - Institute for Conflict Research

YOUNG PEOPLE AND INTERFACES
The impact of segregation and sectarianism can greatly impact upon the ‘life choices’ of a young
person living in an interface area. 12 A research study by Owen Hargie et al. (2006) found evidence
of a ‘double penalty’ facing young people living in interface areas of Belfast. 13 This ‘double penalty’
is not only linked to the levels of poverty associated with living in areas of multiple deprivation, but
also involves the impact of sectarianism and segregation, which makes young people in interface
areas more vulnerable to social exclusion (Roche 2008: 75; Hargie et al. 2006; Smyth et al. 2004
and 1998; and McVicar 2000). 14
2.3 ‘Building, Bolstering or Bridging Boundaries?’
While concepts of safety and risk have emerged as central concerns in modern childhood, 16
Madeleine Leonard asserts that these issues of safety and risk take on new meanings in areas
which have suffered from prolonged conflict (Leonard 2007: 432).
Young people’s perceptions of risk may at times be based on what they have learnt from their
parents and siblings. Schubotz and Devine (2004) found that young people in Northern Ireland
believed that their parents were the biggest influence on their views about the ‘Other’ community,
while Bell et al. (2010) found that parents and family were two of the three main influences on what
young people learn about Irish history. 17 However, Leonard asserts that young people do not
uncritically accept narratives passed down from their parents and family with regards to ‘safe’ and
‘unsafe’ spaces (Leonard 2010a: 103).
She suggests that some spatial boundaries can be permeable rather than fixed, with young people
giving inconsistent accounts of boundaries and where they felt safe going to (Leonard 2008). She
notes that those children who lived closer to an interface wall were more inclined to express
heightened feelings of fear and uncertainty, and girls were more inclined than boys to suggest that
they could move more easily across the interface (Leonard 2007: 436).
Previous research has also revealed that interface boundaries may become more porous or
permanent at certain times of the day, week or year particularly with regards to the marching
season or specific sporting events (Hamilton et al. 2008; Jarman 2005). The marginal location of
interfaces and the relative lack of an adult presence turns them into spaces and places that
children and young people are both relegated to and, to, some extent, can define for themselves
and claim as their own (Jarman and O’Halloran 2001: 5).
2.4 Young People and Attitudes
Quantitative data gathered on an annual basis by the Young Life and Times survey appears to
show some progress over the past decade with regards to the attitudes of 16 year olds to
community relations issues. 18 However young people still tend to remain more negative in attitudes
in survey data when compared to older generations.
13 Rosellen Roche (2008) referred to an analogous position as one of ‘Bounded Contentment’ in which young people restrict themselves to limited future
pathways. In her study, Roche found that just under two-thirds of the young people had ‘no need’ to mingle with members of the opposite community
and felt safer staying within areas that they ‘knew’.
14 Osborne et al. (2006) found evidence of limited geographic mobility which restricted the areas where young people were prepared to travel to work.
15 This terminology has been adapted directly from Madeleine Leonard’s article (2008).
16 See in particular, Backett-Milburn and Harden (2004) and Valentine and McKendrick (1997).
17 In 2003, 47% of young people surveyed in the YLT stated that their family were the most influential source of ‘knowledge’ about the ‘Other’ community,
in 2007 this figure stood at 50% (ARK 2003b; 2010b).
18 There was no YLT survey held in 2011 due to a lack of funding which is why 2010 statistics have been used as the most up to date information. It
should also be noted that these surveys reflect the views of approximately 1,000 16 year olds across Northern Ireland and not specifically young people
living in interface areas. Prior to 2003 the survey sought the views of 12-17 year olds, but from 2003 onwards only 16 year olds were targeted, in part
due to ethical issues and secondly to better standardise questions for one age cohort.
11