Young people’s lived sexual and reproductive health citizenship: participation and power of youth in Malawi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative, focused critical ethnographic study explores how young people's 'lived SRH citizenship' and their active roles realising their sexual and reproductive health (SRH) and rights, shape their agency and participation in decision-making in Malawi. Informed by postcolonial feminist and difference-centred citizenship theories, our findings reveal that age-based power differentials, systems of gerontocracy and a culture of adultism impede bona fide youth involvement in SRH policymaking, making young citizens' participation more of an illusion than reality. Although democratisation and decentralisation aim to promote youth engagement, SRH policy spaces/processes lack institutionalised processes for integrating youth and remain dominated by donors and government. Collective efforts to build young citizens' capacity and to support their engagement are essential for realising their active and meaningful participation in SRH decision-making. Recognising youth as equal members of society is vital to expose systemic gerontocracy/adultism, and democratise power to youth in Malawi, and beyond.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".