Umbrella Organizations, Identity and Political Advocacy: A Process Tracing of Identity Management in The National Council of Swedish Youth Organisations

(1)

Umbrella Organizations, Identity and Political Advocacy

A Process Tracing of Identity Management in The National Council of

Swedish Youth Organisations

Oscar Almqvist

Spring semester 2019

Department of Government

Bachelor Thesis, 15 credits

Tutor: Andreas Gottardis

(2)

List of figures

Figure 1: Hypothesized mechanism ... 11

Figure 2: Organizational chart of LSU ... 12

Figure 3: Hypothesis and the structure of the analysis ... 16

List of tables

Table 1: Operationalization of identity formulation ... 15

(3)

1. Introduction

The National Council of Swedish Youth Organisations (LSU) is the umbrella organization for 83 of Sweden’s youth organizations and functions as a forum for cooperation and advocacy work for the member organizations’ interests (LSU, 2019b). LSU’s purpose is to strengthen Swedish youth associations, democratic organization, and act as a meeting place focused on leadership, organizational development, advocacy and youth politics (LSU, 2014b).

Of the eight parties represented in the Swedish parliament, only four of their youth organizations are members of LSU1_{(LSU, 2018b). In 2009, the presidents of five member}

organizations (political youth organizations) authored a debate article in Dagens Nyheter threatening to leave LSU because of the increased politicization of LSU’s activities. The authors claim that LSU should continue to be an apolitical organization that supports networking between youths and youth participation in politics, and that LSU should not carry out political advocacy independently: “The youth organizations of Sweden needs a gathering,

apolitical organization - that which LSU once was.” (Andersson, Ferm, Guteland, Johansson

Metso and Weimers, 2009). Of the five youth organizations who wrote this debate article, two have since left LSU (LSU, 2019b). This standpoint from five member organizations was indicative of a problem with organizational identity as there was internal disagreement surrounding the purpose of the umbrella organization.

Despite being an umbrella organization representing 83 youth organizations with a wide range of varied interests, LSU has consolidated itself as a legitimate political actor that conducts political advocacy for the youth perspective in Sweden today. LSU is consulted in the Swedish government’s propositions for the direction of youth politics, engages in forums for formalized dialogue between the government and civil society and works with the government on issues surrounding Agenda 2030 (LSU p. 20, 2012; Regeringen, Ku2018/00152/D; LSU pp. 8-9, 2017a). Today, LSU advocates nationally for more specific policy issues than ever before. These include reinstating permanent residence permits for refugees, lowering the voting age to 16 years, increasing rights for people with disabilities and including youth in the implementation of Agenda 2030 on all levels (LSU pp. 3-4, 2017b; LSU, 2019c). This increased

1_{Ung Vänster, SDU, Grön Ungdom and CUF are members of LSU today (LSU, 2018b). MUF, KDU and LUF}

opted to leave LSU while SDU’s membership application was rejected in 2011 (Yilmaz, 2011). Ung Pirat and Unga Feminister are also members of LSU but do not have representatives in the Swedish parliament (LSU, 2018b)

(4)

political advocacy marks a shift in the recent decade. In LSU’s description of its 2008 operations no mentions were made of advocacy for specific political issues, and LSU rather defined its role as improving the conditions for youth organizations in general and their abilities to affect their environment (LSU p. 22, 2008). According to five member organizations LSU functioned as a more apolitical organization before 2009 and LSU used to function as meeting place where youth organizations could support each other rather than promoting specific political issues (Andersson et. al., 2009).

As LSU represents youth organizations from a wide range of interests, including organizations based on ethnicities, hobbies, religions, disabilities and party politics, conducting advocacy for a shared youth interest presupposes that there is a cohesive youth identity to be used within the organization. Research within the field of sociology, management studies and social psychology shows that there are clear benefits of having a cohesive organizational identity in order to organize members who are willing to make sacrifices for the organization and carry out political change in accordance with the organization’s goals (Ashfort and Mael p. 21, 1989; Hogg, Terry and White p. 259, 1995; Pichardo, 1997).

There are difficulties for umbrella organizations to construct the cohesive identity needed to carry out political advocacy work. Umbrella organizations differs from other types of organizations as they have organizations as members rather than individuals. This has been shown to lead to a higher degree of competition between the umbrella organization and the member organizations, for example if the umbrella organization conducts advocacy work in an area which is already covered by a member organization (Karlberg and Jacobsson p. 1443, 2014). While LSU carries out political advocacy work to improve the conditions for youth organizations and young people in a wide variety of ways, 81 % of LSU’s member organizations reported in 2018 that they themselves conduct some sort of political advocacy work independently (LSU, 2018a).

1.1. Purpose and research question

The purpose of this study is to analyze the mechanisms which make it possible for umbrella organizations to carry out political advocacy work for specific policy issues despite representing a wide variety of interests through their member organizations. In order to conduct sustained political advocacy work and lobbying some type of united and cohesive platform ought to be needed in a democratic organization, and this study seeks to find the mechanisms by which this type of cohesive platform can be created. This will be done through an analysis

(5)

of the youth identity management by the umbrella organization for Sweden’s youth organizations LSU. The main research question addressed in this study is:

• Which mechanisms allows umbrella organizations to carry out political advocacy while

representing a wide range of different interests?

This question will be answered by studying the strategic construction of a youth identity in LSU which created the cohesive platform needed for political advocacy. This leads to the following two sub-questions:

• What characterizes the Swedish youth movement’s identity constructed by the umbrella

organization LSU?

• How has a shared youth identity been constructed by the leadership in LSU?

According to Ahrne and Brunsson the research surrounding umbrella organizations is a growing field of research due to increased globalization. They note that organizational theory has neglected umbrella organizations, in which the members are other organizations rather than individuals. The members in umbrella organizations have more resources and more opportunity to define the organization’s identity than in regular organizations (Ahrne and Brunsson p. 433-437, 2005). This study thus seeks to find whether strategic identity management from an umbrella organization’s leadership is possible to unite its members behind advocacy for specific policy issues.

The aim of the study is to describe the way central actors within LSU has constructed an image of the political young person to create the cohesive organizational identity needed for effective and sustained political advocacy work. My hope is that this will also increase the understanding of an increasingly important group in the political sphere: youth. Previous research has shown that young people who get leadership experience, for instance by carrying out board work in civil society organizations, are more likely to be candidates for political office and have increased political activity in the future (Lundin, Nordström-Skans and Zetterberg, 2015). By increasing the understanding of the identity construction for politically active young people under the umbrella organization of LSU I hope the study will give a basis for further research surrounding the values with which our future power holders and activists are socialized with in youth organizations.

(6)

It is a single case study of youth identity construction within LSU, which is a case of strategic identity management in an umbrella organization. The research will be answered through a process-tracing approach. This method is suitable when it comes to tracing a historical process of cause and effect (Teorell and Svensson p. 247, 2007). What sets a process-tracing study apart is its attempt to gain a deeper understanding of the mechanisms which led to an outcome in a specific case (ibid, p. 249). This will be done by putting the level of analysis on the central actors, a lower level than the structural explanations for an outcome. As the intentions of actors can be difficult to interpret, the study will insofar it is possible give a detailed description of each causal link. The intended outcome to trace in this case will be how LSU became able to carry out political advocacy for specific policy issues despite the variety of interests represented within the umbrella organization and the history of conflict surrounding LSU’s political operations.

1.2. Disposition

Firstly I will give definitions for some of the central concepts in the study and present the delimitations that will be made in order to give both nuance and depth to the study within scope of the thesis. Secondly an overview of the previous research and a theoretical framework surrounding organizational identity and umbrella organizations’ ability to manage identity formation in its subsidiaries will be presented followed by the hypothesized mechanisms leading to the studied outcome. Thirdly a discussion surrounding the selection of LSU as a case and an operationalized framework for the analysis as well as a clear methodology will be presented to ensure transparency, validity and reliability. This section will also present the material used for the analysis alongside a discussion surrounding its strengths and limitations for the intended purpose. Fourthly, the analysis will be carried out in four parts: the first will investigate whether the leadership in LSU realized that there was a problem surrounding the identity within the organization. In the second I analyze whether the creation of a cohesive identity within the organization was a strategically implemented action to tackle the identified problems. In the third part I will lay out the fundamental characteristics that LSU gives to itself and its opponents in order to construct an identity. In the fourth and final part of the analysis part I will give a brief overview of how this identity formation was implemented in LSU and its member organizations. Finally, a conclusion will be reached based on the analysis and discussion.

(7)

1.3. Definitions and delimitations

Youth is defined by LSU’s criterias for membership stated in paragraph 13 of their bylaws (2014b) as people between 6 and 25 years of age.

Umbrella organization or meta-organization is defined as an organization whose members are other organizations, not individuals (Ahrne and Brunsson, 2005). In management studies the term meta-organization is used more frequently but as LSU defines itself as an umbrella organization, which shares the same properties as the meta-organization, the term umbrella organization will be used in this study (LSU, 2018c).

As a basis for this study, I will use Sidney Tarrow’s definition of a social movement as “collective challenges, based on common purposes and social solidarities, in sustained

interaction with elites, opponents, and authorities” (Tarrow p. 9, 2011). LSU and the youth

movement as a whole will be treated as a social movement in accordance with this definition. Organizational identity is defined as “the collective understanding of what is central,

distinctive, and durable in an organization” (Jansson p. 127, 2012). The identity studied will

be the one formulated by LSU, and not the one created in an interplay between LSU and its member organizations.

The period studied will be the previous ten years, from 2009-2019. This is in part due to the limited scope of this thesis but mostly due to the fact that the problems surrounding the identity of LSU was brought to light that year in the debate article in Dagens Nyheter. It is reasonable to assume that such a clear stance from five of the political youth parties made the period after essential in formulating the organizational identity to its member organizations. The study will not deal with the structural mechanisms behind LSU’s increased political advocacy but rather focus on the level of central actors.

2. Previous research, theoretical framework and hypothesized mechanisms

2.1. Previous research

In order to give the research questions substance, we need to first understand why identity within an organization and an umbrella organization is important to conduct political advocacy.

(8)

2.1.1 Identity management in class organizations and social movements

In the study of strategic identity management in the Swedish labor movement, class identity formation is described by Jansson as the realization that there are common interests among a class and where collective action is needed to advocate and create change in line with these interests. Central to Jansson’s study is how class formation is triggered, and several structural explanations from this is explored, including Marxist theory, lived experiences theory and post-modernist approaches (Jansson pp. 40-45, 2012). However, Jansson notes that these explanations neglect the role of central actors such as the leadership in class formation, and the study finds that leadership is central to the class formation process as it can strategically formulate an identity within a class organization (Jansson pp. 256-257, 2012). Leadership’s role in strategic identity formulation is important in other social movements than class organizations as well. Sidney Tarrow writes that social movements often have a hard time politicizing their identities. They therefore try to suppress the part of their identities which does not fit with their goals, and instead attempt to create more homogenous and reduced identity dimensions which better suits the movement’s goals (Tarrow p. 151, 2011).

Movements require solidarity to act collectively and consistently; constructing identities around its claims is one way of doing so (Tarrow p. 151, 2011).

Activists are often faced with the task of building solidarity among a diverse membership, which can require very careful, deliberate identity work (Tarrow p. 152, 2011)

Taken together, this previous research highlights the importance of strategic identity management to unite a diverse movement for cohesive and consistent political advocacy.

2.1.2 Umbrella organizations and political advocacy

In their article about the umbrella organization of the Swedish Women’s Lobby Karlberg and Jacobsson outlines some of the crucial considerations to make when applying organizational theory to umbrella organizations. One thing that characterizes umbrella organizations is the fact that its members also are organizations, and not individuals. This in turn can lead to a higher degree of competition between the umbrella organization and its member organizations (Karlberg and Jacobsson p. 1443, 2014). The same study shows that the umbrella structure also carries a significant advantage as it increases the capacity for collective action among its members. Although the Swedish Women’s Lobby’s member associations had different and

(9)

sometimes competing interests, the umbrella organization managed to run political campaigns by establishing itself as a unified actor that includes and highlights its member organizations (Karlberg and Jacobsson p. 1456, 2014). The Swedish Women’s Lobby shows many crucial similarities to the structure of LSU, and the need for a unified organization is therefore highlighted by this example.

Previous research on umbrella organizations also indicates that they are commonly built on some shared characteristic with their members, but that the members can vary in size, structure and abilities. This can in turn lead to conflict between the member organizations, which may have different interests and capacities. Therefore to ensure harmony, efficiency and cohesion, the umbrella organization may seek to maintain and accentuate the similarities between its members (Ahrne and Brunsson p. 435, 2005). In the case of LSU, this would mean that there is an incentive to create an identity based on the shared youth characteristic within the organization.

2.2. Theoretical framework

In this section theories explaining why organizational identity is important, how identity is formed, and how actors within the organization can strategically shape this identity will be presented. This will be followed by more specific research surrounding umbrella organizations’ ability to shape the identity of its member organizations.

The basis for research surrounding identity is in the social identity theory, which suggests that the social category an individual feels he or she belongs to, provides the characteristics that the individual uses in order to formulate a self-definition and a self-concept (Hogg, Terry and White p. 259, 1995). Furthermore, categorization allows the individual to systematically define others, as well as locate one’s own position in the social environment (Jansson p. 31, 2012).

The social identity theory puts the individual at the center of analysis, whereas organizational theorists such as Ashfort and Mael extrapolates the theory to put the organization at the center of analysis instead. By doing this, the importance of identity is integrated within the existing

organizational theory (Ashfort and Mael p. 21, 1989). In Jansson’s study of the rise of the

Swedish labor movement she describes the merging of these two theories, and why organizations facilitate identification:

(10)

The marriage between the two research traditions highlights identity formation within the organization. Organizations easily become the reference point for social identities because they have clear boundaries, which make it easy to categorize the self and others (members and non-members) (Jansson p. 32, 2012).

Jansson further explains the importance of identification with an organization:

Because social identities obviously play an important role in people’s lives, from the organization’s perspective there is much to gain from being the reference point of social identities. As the community with which members identify the organization is important to its members: if members identify with the organization, they are more likely to work and make sacrifices for it (Jansson p. 32, 2012).

Although the research from Ashfort and Mael has its foundation within the for-profit business sphere, much of the same logic can be applied to the social movement in this case of the Swedish youth movement. Identity should be even more important in social movements because all members join voluntarily, as opposed to as a result of employment and for direct monetary gain (Jansson p. 33, 2012).

Based on the theory that organizational identity is important for the members for definition of the self and others, a further theory, the logic of appropriateness, explores how the content of identity can affect the actions of the members of the organization. This creates an incentive for the leadership to formulate the identity in order to effectively carry out contentious action in accordance with its goals. According to this theory the organizational identity will create a certain set of values within the member base which in turn will guide their behavior. The characteristics of the organization’s identity creates the norms and rules surrounding the boundaries of what constitutes acceptable behavior for its members (March and Olsen, 2004). Judging from the above mentioned benefits of identity construction within an organization it is clear that there should exist an incentive for the leadership within an organization to construct an identity in order to effectively achieve their goals.

In Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics Sidney Tarrow outlines the basic properties of social movements. While their actions are based on contentious challenges against elites guided by common purposes, Tarrow means that entrepreneurs and actors within the movement are needed to tap into feelings of solidarity or identity in order to mobilize

(11)

consensus and recognition around these common interests, at least in order to perform sustained contention (Tarrow p. 11, 2011). In Jansson’s study of identity formation of the Swedish labor movement it is claimed that:

[...] leaders have an advantageous position in the organization that facilitated the management of identity formation by establishing a certain image. In other words, how members perceive the organization can be affected by the leaders’ proclaimed definition of it (Jansson p. 51, 2012).

Jansson further claims that:

managing identity should supposedly be done by establishing a discourse. [...] Most of the time, the leadership mainly “manages continuity,” that is, it upholds and maintains the organization’s dominant self-perception. Nevertheless, sometimes the leadership also alters the organization’s identity (Jansson p. 53, 2012).

The means of managing identity is described as the establishment of a discourse. This can be done by:

• defining the members’ position in the organization

• defining “the other” or opponents

• defining the context for the organization’s work

• defining the way the organization’s work should be interpreted

• defining the rules and norms the members should adhere to (Jansson p. 53, 2012)

Jansson writes that a change in identity formulation usually occurs after some kind of incident in the organization:

theories from organizational research claim that re-formation of the identity of an organization is usually preceded by some kind of incident that forces the management of the organization to question current perceptions (Jansson p. 56, 2012).

The theory that leadership can create and maintain an organizational identity through the establishment of a discourse around a certain image of the organization, which I will call the

(12)

theory of leadership’s management of identity, will lie at the center of the analysis for this study.

Establishing a discourse surrounding the identity within the organization can be through both internal and external communication.

According to Ahrne and Brunsson, since there tends to be a higher degree of competition between the umbrella organization and its member organizations, umbrella organizations typically attempt to accentuate and maintain the similarities and shared characteristics between the umbrella organization and its members, even though this might not be the primary interest for the member organizations (Ahrne and Brunsson p. 435, 2005). Seeing as LSU’s member organizations represent many other interests than just the youth interest, we can draw from the previous research on umbrella organizations that there is at least an incentive for LSU to accentuate the shared characteristic between all its member organizations - the youth identity. LSU has much to gain to be the centralized organization with the ability to represent the youth interest from a wide variety of backgrounds within a centralized organization.

2.3. Hypothesized mechanism

Drawing from the theoretical framework the hypothesized mechanisms behind LSU’s increased ability to be an effective political advocate for the youth movement is that the leadership has strategically managed the creation of a cohesive youth identity which resonates with the interests of its member organizations, despite them having a wide range of other interests represented by each individual member organization. The hypothesized mechanisms are divided into four steps. First, LSU ought to have realized that there was a problem with organizational identity due to incidents that challenged current perceptions. Second, the creation of a cohesive youth identity which benefited LSU’s goals of conducting increased political advocacy was identified as the solution to this problem. Third, the means of doing this was by formulating a certain identity in education programs, reports and communication for the youth movement in accordance with the theory of leadership’s management of identity. Finally this formulated identity ought to have been implemented within the member organizations.

(13)

Figure 1. Hypothesized mechanism

3. Methodology and research design

3.1. Selection of case

LSU as a case for the purpose of this study is in part to highlight the political identity formation of Sweden’s youth, a group which can be expected to make up a part of the decision makers of the future. The selection of LSU in order to research leadership’s identity management within an umbrella organization is also to increase the chances of generalizing the results of the study to other umbrella organizations. There is a proven history of conflict surrounding the identity of the organization, which goes along with the previous theories surrounding difficulties of managing identity within an organization whose members are also organizations. What sets LSU apart from many other umbrella organizations is the wide variety of different political interests which it has under its organization, with 81 % of its member organizations carrying out political advocacy independently (LSU, 2018a). This should make identity formation in LSU even more difficult as the only obvious common denominator among the member organizations is that they are youth organizations. Furthermore, many of the member organizations within LSU are themselves umbrella organizations, whose members consists of local organizations which in themselves consists of individual members. A simplified model of the organizational structure can be seen in figure 2.

(14)

Figure 2, Organizational chart of LSU (LSU, 2019b)

If we find that identity management from the leadership of LSU was possible, despite the obvious challenges posed by the wide range of interests represented and varying organizational structures in its member organizations, we should to a certain extent be able to generalize the results to umbrella organizations where there is a higher degree of cohesion in the member organizations’ interests and structure. In other words, it is a strategic choice of a critical least likely case (Esaiasson, Gilljam, Oscarsson, Towns & Wängnerud pp. 161-164, 2017). If the

theory of leadership’s management of identity finds support in this case, where there should be

a high degree of difficulty doing so due to LSU being an umbrella organization representing such a wide range of interests, we should have a higher chance of generalizing the results to other umbrella organizations. This should in turn enhance the degree of external validity of the study.

3.2. Process tracing, operationalized framework and methodology

The process tracing approach can be described as a type of detailed description of the mechanisms leading up to a certain outcome. These mechanisms are studied on a lower level on analysis than the intended explanation variable and the observed outcome (Teorell and Svensson p. 249, 2016). In the case of LSU and its ability to carry out political advocacy work, we will take a step back from the structural explanations and the overall composition of youth organizations within LSU. Focus will rather be shifted to the level of the actors within LSU, and their attempt to manage a cohesive youth identity. In doing so, we must fundamentally be able to give a basis for the motives behind certain actions with a theoretical framework as a foundation. Extracting hypothesized mechanisms from the outlined theories and testing them

(15)

on the case of LSU is an attempt to do so, although it is not without its difficulties. Teorell and Svensson outlines certain indicators that can be used to prove that there existed a certain motive, which will be presented in order of relevance:

• The actor’s own explicit motivations for acting in a certain way is the most relevant

indicator.

• General statements of motive, which may give us an indication on how the actor tends

to act in similar situations although no explicit motive is given for the studied action. • The way the actor acted in other situations, but in accordance with the same motive as

in the situation studied (Teorell and Svensson pp. 250-253, 2007).

When using the process tracing approach the outcome is already known, and focus lies on the process leading up to the outcome. In this case the outcome is LSU being able to carry out political advocacy for specific policy issues with a cohesive platform, and the hypothesized mechanisms are based on developed theories surrounding the incentives and abilities of an organization’s leadership to manage its identity. By mapping the chain of events from 2009 until today, the study seeks not only to describe what happened, but also to give an interpretation of the motivations which led to the studied outcome. In order to do this, we need a set of indicators that can support or question our hypothesized mechanism (Jansson p. 26, 2012). The analysis will be carried out in four parts:

The first part of the analysis is concerning problems LSU was facing. Since Jansson notes that a restructuring of identity usually happens after an incident that forces leadership to question their perceptions, this part seeks to find the incidents which made LSU realize that there was an identity problem in 2009 (Jansson p. 56, 2012). According to Jansson this could be explicit problem statements, but also internal threats that leaders can be reluctant to talk about and may only appear in meeting protocols and recorded internal debates (ibid p. 57, 2012).

• Were there indicators of a perceived identity problem within LSU in 2009?

The second part the analysis has to do with the preferred solution to this problem. If our hypothesis is to find support in the case of LSU, we need to find indicators that LSU knew that identity management within the organization was a way to solve the identified problem. This can be done by finding LSU’s own explicit motivations for solving a specific problem, or

(16)

general statements of motive on how LSU means identity problems should be solved.

• Which solutions to the identity problem were explicitly and implicitly formulated by

LSU?

The third part of the analysis has to do with the means of solving the problem. For this section the basis will be the indicators from Jansson analysis of the organizational identity within the Swedish labor movement (Jansson pp. 126-127, 2012). These are based in the organizational identity theory which suggest that the content of identity is most easily measured through

centrality and distinctiveness, that is how the organization describes itself, and how it

distinguishes itself from other organizations. Jansson states that “group identity is built on a

sense of who belongs to the group and who does not: ‘one of us’ or ‘one of them’” (ibid p. 127,

2012). Two groups are consistently distinguished as “the other” by LSU: one being politicians and decision makers and the other being anti-democratic forces, often represented as far-right groups or right wing populists. The description of centrality and distinctiveness will in turn be divided into three parts: history, properties and action. Jansson means that history is important according to narrative theory, which suggests that narratives about the past is a way of putting the present into a certain context that should make up the foundation of identity. In this context it is also important for the organization to distinguish what it is not and the history of its opponents (ibid p. 128, 2012). The properties of the organization’s identity is useful in determining the nature of the organization. Symbols, values and a construction of the ideal member are all important ways of creating the properties of the organization’s identity (ibid pp. 129-130). The properties are then meant to guide the actions of the organization’s members. These actions can be characterized by explicit or implicit descriptions of the reality in which the organization operates, and formulate the values which should guide the members’ behavior. Jansson further notes that the organization can implement mechanisms which promote a certain type of behavior (ibid p. 130).

For a social movement to engage in collective action such as political advocacy, Tarrow notes that members of a movement must collectively find that their situation is unjust, attribute the responsibility of the injustice to other groups and propose solutions to the injustice (Tarrow p. 145, 2011). In LSU’s constructed identity, we therefore ought to find a description of injustices towards youth, other groups responsible for these injustices and proposed actions to correct these injustices.

(17)

If our hypothesis is to find support in this case we should find a consistent and coherent description of LSU’s identity with indicators suggesting that political advocacy is a valued goal within the organization. The operationalized indicators for the analysis of the means and contents of identity construction can be seen in table 1.

Table 1, Operationalization of identity formulation (Jansson pp. 128-131, 2012)

Central features Distinctive features

History How does LSU portray the

organization’s and the youth movement’s development and history?

How does the development and history of LSU and the youth movement compare to that of “the others”?

Properties How does the LSU describe itself, its

member organization and youth? What properties are ascribed?

What properties are ascribed to the “others”? What properties distinguish LSU and youth from these other organizations and groups?

Action How does and should LSU, its

member organizations and youth act?

How do the “others” act? How does that differ from how LSU and youth itself acts and should act?

The fourth and final question will be whether LSU could identify the success of the implementation of these education programs and the formulated identity. To support the hypothesis we must find indicators that LSU’s formulated identity spread within the member organizations.

• Are there indicators of the formulated identity being implemented within the member

(18)

Figure 3, Hypothesis and the structure of the analysis

3.3. Materials and critical discussion of sources

When it comes to analyzing the problems identified by the leadership within LSU, protocols from annual meetings and articles published by member associations criticizing the purpose and operations of LSU will be studied to find indicators of a problem with identity. To ensure chronology these documents will be from the first years of the studied period (2009-2010). Regarding the proposed solutions to the identified problem the analysis will be based on annual reports, operational plans and long term strategy documents for the same period. This material will prove beneficial as they give contemporary explicit statements of motive regarding the actions taken and the planned future operations. Through the study of reports and educational materials LSU’s explicit and implicit views on how an organization should operate to conduct political advocacy will be analyzed.

For the analysis of the means of formulating an identity, internal and external communication such as reports and publications as well as educational materials aimed at the member organizations and its members from the period between 2009-2019 will make up the majority of the analysis. This is the primary way the leadership within LSU can create a certain image of youth and organizational identity while simultaneously accomplishing its mission of being a meeting place which helps with leadership and organizational development. There has been a variety of different educational programs carried out from LSU towards the member organizations. “Ung med Makt”, “DEMO”, “HEL” and LSU | Metodo are all examples of these.

(19)

These can all be used to formulate and accentuate certain characteristics of what a youth identity is or ought to be.

When analyzing the implementation and diffusion of the formulated identities within the member organizations, annual reports and yearbooks authored by LSU describing the educational programs’ and internal communication’s success and impact will be used and make out the majority of the substance in this section.

There is a problem combined with assessing the degree to which of LSU’s formulated identity was implemented in the member organizations. LSU might have a tendency to exaggerate the success of its operations with regards to their communication and education programs, but there are further problems combined with going to the grassroots level of the member organizations that is best left for another study. Due to the scope of this thesis, LSU’s own assessment of its communication’s success therefore ought to be our best guess of how the identity was implemented.

3.4. Discussion on operationalization, methodology and materials

This is a single case study, which is beneficial in giving detailed descriptions of a chain of events and theorized causal mechanisms. However, without making any comparisons we cannot definitively prove that the studied causal links are the mechanisms leading up to the studied outcome (Teorell and Svensson pp. 82-83, 2007). Successes in creating a cohesive youth identity with clear interests is by no means a complete result of the strategic actions of LSU. Room will need to be given to other structural explanations which form the political identities of youth in Sweden. However, the ambition of this study is not to give a complete explanation for the success of political youth advocacy, but rather to explain the role strategic identity formulation from leaders within the umbrella organization can have in creating the organizational cohesion needed to advocate for specific policy issues, however limited it may be. This is a crucial consideration to keep in mind for the rest of the study.

As this is an explanatory study using a process tracing approach, there are certain considerations to note with the shortcomings of this method to give a full causal explanation for a certain outcome. The detailed descriptions of a process tracing’s strength lies in its ability to give a basis for the chronology of events, as well as the hypothesized mechanisms which connects the independent variable with the dependent variable. This method’s weakness however is twofold. Firstly, it fails to isolate from other variables which may have caused the actors to have a certain

(20)

motive, and it lacks the consideration for the wide range of motives which lies at the basis of a certain action. Secondly, even if we find evidence of explicit statements of motive from the actors, we cannot find definite counterfactual support for the fact that this action would not have been made had the actor not had that explicit motive (Teorell and Svensson, pp. 250-259). Both of these weaknesses are important considerations to make in analyzing the result of this study, its strength lies in showing the cause of events in this specific case. By choosing a case that has characteristics which should be unlikely to prove the hypothesized causal mechanism (as LSU is an umbrella organization consisting of such a wide range of interests as well as member organizations which are in turn also umbrella organizations), some of these weaknesses should be alleviated. Due to the problems with isolation and counterfactual support the study should however not be seen as an exhaustive explanation for LSU’s ability to carry out political advocacy.

An alternative explanation for the success of carrying out political advocacy for the youth movement is structural changes such as the opportunity to work with the implementation of the global Agenda 2030 and renewed political ambitions from the Swedish government and authorities where the youth interest may be lent increased attention. This may in turn lend the youth movement more clear issues to advocate for which is not necessarily a result of internal organizational identity. Another explanation for a more unified youth identity in the recent decade could also be improved means of communication between youth organizations due to technological advancements which is not necessarily a result of LSU’s forums and networks. One of the main problems with validity is the previously mentioned problem of assessing the impact of the education programs and their ability to construct an identity. We have a problem in isolating the specific causal effects of education. However, if we can see that LSU themselves saw that the education programs had an effect regarding the cohesiveness of the organization’s identity, we can assume that there is at the very least a perceived effect. Educational programs carried out by LSU are followed by reports in which the member organizations can assess the efficacy and relevance of the educations. LSU also evaluates their own operations yearly in their annual reports. This should subsequently be our best estimate of how successful the educations were in diffusing a certain identity of LSU and youth, at least according to LSU themselves.

(21)

3.5. Ethical considerations

The initial reason for studying the identity construction within the youth movement was my own involvement in one of the member organizations of LSU, The Swedish Association of International Affairs (UFS), in which I was a board member during the operational year of 2017/2018. During this year a major discussion was surrounding the organizational identity of UFS, and whether any form of political advocacy with the youth perspective ought to be conducted by the umbrella organization. Having since left the organization, this thesis is not meant to sway the organizational identity of LSU or its member organizations in any way, nor is it meant to criticize or praise the political advocacy of the youth movement. It is rather used as a case to highlight and study the ability of leadership to accentuate and maintain a certain identity in order to carry out effective political advocacy, where the results can be generalized to other types of organizations and social movements. Although no topics generally should be seen as off-limits for researchers, it is important to keep this in mind when presenting the research design and results of the study (Teorell and Svensson p. 20, 2007). Furthermore, upon collecting the materials from LSU, the organization was informed of the intended purpose of the study and how the materials were to be used.

4. Analysis and results

LSU’s international advocacy was complemented with national operations in 1992 with the aim of improving conditions for youth’s organization and to spread a positive image of youth organizations. This was done in response to Sweden’s youth organizations’ threat of creating a separate organization for national operations (LSU, 2017c). Conflicts arose in 2009 surrounding LSU’s purpose with regards to its national political advocacy work. Before then, political advocacy for specific issues seems to have been limited and LSU primarily focused on strengthening its member organizations’ abilities to affect society (LSU p. 22, 2008). The four parts of the analysis seeks to find indications of identity problems in LSU, proposed solutions to this problem, the means and contents of LSU’s constructed youth identity and the way this identity was implemented in a way that today allows LSU to carry out increased political advocacy.

4.1. Problems facing LSU

The debate article written by five member organizations in 2009 threatening to leave LSU makes up a clear incident which ought to have made LSU’s leadership to consider whether there is a problem with their organizational identity as not all organizations had the same view of what LSU’s purpose should be when it comes to political advocacy.

(22)

That the National Council of Swedish Youth Organisations (LSU) has been politicized in recent years make us [...] consider leaving LSU if the organization does not realize the problems and return to LSU’s base operations.

[…] The youth organizations of Sweden needs a gathering, apolitical organization - that which LSU once was (My translation, Andersson et. al., 2009).

Although LSU and other member organizations may disagree with the views presented in the article, it is clear that some degree of conflict existed in the organization.

This was not an isolated incident that year. At the yearly meeting in 2009, seven other member organizations expressed a reservation against certain statements in the operational plan for 2010. This reservation meant a clear stance was taken among these seven organizations that LSU should not run a selective political agenda, and that LSU should solely create forums for issues that all member organizations have in common. These seven organizations wanted LSU to instead assist the member organizations in performing political advocacy independently (LSU §22, 2009a).

LSU should help its member organizations being able to independently work for their interests, not act in their place. [The contents of the operational plan is] an operational area which we do not consider be a part of LSU’s purpose or community (LSU §22, 2009a).

Taken together this can be seen as indicators of two incidents in which LSU would have reason to evaluate whether they had done enough to consolidate this type of advocacy work with its member organizations.

4.2. Solutions

Shape the World: 8 factors for successful lobbying and advocacy, is a report aimed at member

organizations meant to describe factors behind successful lobbying and advocacy. LSU writes that:

Providing a platform for joint action is a good starting-point when building the confidence and strength that is needed to influence power structures. A platform, in this context, is an arena where youth organisations, groups and individuals gather

(23)

around shared values or common goals in order to take action together (LSU p.8, 2010b).

This is a general statement of motive as LSU knew that a solution to conflicts surrounding political advocacy through the organization was to create and accentuate an identity with shared values and common goals. Further described advantages of clear shared values is that it, according to LSU, creates confidence among members and legitimacy in relation to decision-makers (ibid p. 8, 2010b). The same report also accentuates the importance of developing an independent agenda with broad ownership within the organization and that this can be done by being clear on the values and visions of the organization (ibid p. 27, 2010b). This shows that LSU knew that they would also need to be clear on their values and visions in order to be able to develop a platform for political advocacy.

At LSU’s annual meeting in 2010 a new idea program and strategy for 2011-2013 was accepted. This idea program contained three main issues which will guide LSU’s political work. One of these issues is an emphasis on the conditions for youth’s organization. Youth organizations are described as crucial in gathering young people around shared ideas, spreading certain operations, advocate a certain political issue and being a united voice for its members (LSU p. 56, 2010a). If LSU then is to be a united voice for the youth perspective and advocate specific political issues, they show that they knew that a solution for the perceived identity problem surrounding political advocacy in LSU was to gather its members around shared ideas. A cohesive identity is needed in order to increase the potential of and legitimacy for political advocacy coming from the umbrella organization. This can be seen as another general

statement of motive.

In LSU’s operational plan for 2011 the organization explicitly states that they should "[…]

during 2011 develop methods and procedures that strengthen LSU as an advocacy organization for Sweden’s youth organizations.” (LSU p. 16, 2010c). The same document states that LSU’s

advocacy should be goal-oriented, cohesive and generate new knowledge for LSU’s members. This is an indication of the proposed means of solving the identity problem, generating new knowledge through political advocacy by the umbrella organization which in turn can be a tool of identity management.

(24)

In the long term strategy document meant to guide LSU’s operations for the years following 2014, LSU identifies one of its strengths being the wide spectrum of organizations and therefore interests represented in its member base.

Few other umbrella organizations in Sweden gathers organizations from such a wide thematic spectrum. Nobody else facilitates the type of exchanges that can happen at LSU. This is a particularly strong part of our educations, networks and forums (My translation, LSU p. 5, 2013a).

LSU explicitly identifies its own importance in this as the organization offers educations, forums and networks for its members. By accentuating its own strength as a uniting force for these varied interests under the umbrella of the youth identity, LSU identifies its ability to shape the youth perspective by these means. The same document highlights LSU’s own role in being an expert within Swedish politics which should actively advocate for youth issues, and that this should be developed further (ibid p. 5, 2013a).

4.3. Means and contents of identity

In this section means of identity construction by LSU will be shown as well as the contents of this identity. This will be done in three parts, all covering both central and distinctive features of LSU in relation to decision makers and right wing extremists. The first part will be the narrative surrounding their history, the second part will cover the properties and the third part will cover the prescribed actions.

4.3.1. History Central:

The Swedish youth movement and LSU (then called SUL) was initially a national committee of the World Assembly of Youth (WAY) founded in 1949. The values behind the creation of WAY is therefore a significant part of LSU’s history. During this time, SUL only worked with political advocacy in international issues, such as opposition to apartheid in South Africa (LSU p. 8, 2013c). The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights outlined the core values of the movement (Wirmark p. 11, 2009). Central to the youth movement’s identity historically was anti-colonialism. One of WAY’s goals was to “support and encourage youth organizations in

(25)

SUL’s advocacy for a boycott of South African goods and sanctions against the country due to apartheid is emphasized as a positive example of their history (ibid p. 16, 2009). This description of LSU’s history is also accentuated in a 2013 report. SUL is described as initially being a cooperative organ for organizations, corporations and government authorities in the aftermath of the second world war and was advocating for youth on international issues rather than national ones (LSU p. 8, 2013c).

Distinctive:

National governments were not represented as enemies, but rather institutions who were willing to cooperate provided young people could organize effectively. A need for a permanent institutionalized dialogue with political authorities is emphasized (Wirmark p. 45, 2009). LSU notes that since the Swedish government’s first proposition for youth politics in 1994, youth politics has been established as a multisectoral area of politics where the government has set goals of increasing the political power and influence of youth (LSU pp. 8-11, 2013c). The Swedish government and decision makers are thus framed as increasingly supportive of a more politically active youth movement.

The creation of WAY (and therefore SUL) was a direct response to the events of the second world war, and a clear initial portrayal of the youth movement is that it distinguishes itself from nazism and the anti-democratic ideologies which were prominent during the war (Wirmark p. 8, 2009).

4.3.2. Properties Central:

The minimal criteria for what constitutes the organizational identity is stated in the membership criteria found in organization’s bylaws (2014b). These include that youth organizations should be non-profit, independent and democratic. They should adhere to international conventions on human rights and have at least 1000 youth members. Furthermore, according to the thirteenth paragraph in LSU’s bylaws they should work in at least five regions and have operated for at least two years.

The framing of youth as a discriminated against group is an overarching theme in LSU reports and communication:

(26)

Young people all over the world belong to one of the most marginalised groups when it comes to influence and power (LSU p. 4, 2010b).

A shared experience for many young people is to be underrepresented in decision making processes (My translation, LSU p. 12, 2016a).

In the year following the problems identified in 2009, LSU created a new diversity network meant to strengthen participants from the youth organizations in issues relating diversity, equal treatment, norms and discrimination (LSU p.22, 2010a). These can be seen as valued properties among youth organizations.

2014 saw the launching of project DEMO, which sought to spread the democratic values which characterizes the young civil society in Sweden to schools and unorganized youth as well as giving young people the tools to organize. This project ended in 2016 and was seen as an important part of LSU’s internal development work and work for social inclusion of different target groups (LSU p. 18, 2017a).

In a publication directed internally towards the member organizations regarding the role of youth in the work with Agenda 2030, LSU gives a basis for what it means to be youth and what a youth perspective is. Some described shared experiences among youth is political underrepresentation and discrimination (based on age, nationality, sexuality, disability, gender and ethnicity). Furthermore youth as a group is described as diverse and competent, with good intentions and large potential (LSU p. 12, 2016a). The publications further states that no generation before has been as educated as today’s youth (ibid p. 71, 2016a). It seems necessary for LSU to highlight the competencies of youth in order to legitimize its increased political participation and advocacy. Highlighting youth as a group with undervalued knowledge and competencies is a clear goal for LSU’s communication. In the 2015 report Erkänt Engagemang LSU notes that youth organizations are important arenas for the development of skills and perspectives of young people, but that these organizations must improve the way they market these skills towards employers and the rest of society (LSU pp. 36-37, 2015a).

A further property given to democratic youth organizations within the Swedish youth movement by LSU is awareness and recognition of our age as a post-colonial age:

(27)

VIT-ICKE-VIT [...] is hereby published with the hope that it will outline a shared reference in a continued work within LSU, the youth movement and the democratic civil society. VIT-ICKE-VIT is a presentation of the post-colonial perspective, and a suggestion that future work with availability and inclusion should include a post-colonial power analysis (LSU p. 1, 2018d).

This is a description and recognition of reality as post-colonial, where racism and a patriarchal power structure is deeply rooted in our society. LSU further notes that the post-colonial description should be intersectional to highlight how different people are oppressed in different systems (LSU p. 35, 2016b). This is an attempt to diffuse a certain perspective within the youth movement: the post-colonial world-view. This perspective is aimed towards both organized and unorganized youth. A book published by LSU under project DEMO, a project which to a large extent was directed towards unorganized young people, further accentuates this perspective and notes that these post-colonial thought patterns are present in society today (Rådet av Enade Kreoler pp. 41-42, 2016). Taken together these are explicit descriptions of what makes up the youth identity within LSU.

Distinctive:

Politicians and decision-makers are invited to formalized seminars and discussion with LSU and its member organizations on a yearly basis during LSU Forum, which functions as a meeting place for young civil society and key decision-makers (LSU p. 31, 2010a). This forum can be seen as legitimizing the institutionalized channels for political advocacy rather than working with other forms of non-institutionalized contentious action.

An overarching frame used to describe politicians and decision-makers is that they lack the perspective of young people and that they need to increase support and recognition for youth organizations for a better functioning democracy (LSU p. 35, 2015a; LSU pp. 63-65, 2016a). This is the gap which LSU and the youth movement aims to fill.

The government is further described as the most important source of financing for youth organizations. Continued and increased financing is seen as a vital part of strengthening young civil society so that it can organize and operate independently. Government funding is seen as a crucial but lacking, as the current funding structure does not give youth organizations incentives to expand their operations (LSU p. 14, 2016d).

(28)

Sweden’s right wing populist party The Sweden Democrats’ youth party SDU was described by LSU’s president Seher Yilmaz in 2011 as a symptom of racism, and SDU’s membership application to LSU was rejected in an attempt to avoid normalizing and legitimizing racism, which is a fundamentally anti-democratic idea (Yilmaz, 2011). LSU notes in a press release that youth organizations who work for issues surrounding norm criticism and anti-racism become targets for threats from reactionary forces which can impede youth’s ability to organize and endanger their health (LSU, 2019a). Many threats come from right wing extremist organizations and individuals, and are framed by LSU as serious threats against democracy, as it is a large source of negative stress for many engaged young people which in turn impedes their ability to effectively organize and participate in the political sphere.

4.3.3. Actions Central:

Youth organizations are described as tools for youth to gain increased power and resources to affect society, as well as places for young people to develop competencies and leadership skills (LSU p. 13, 2016a). These are framed as valued goals and organization among youth is therefore a prescribed action. In the same publication, LSU gives prescriptions for actions that can be taken to work with the goals within Agenda 2030. These include organizing to conduct political advocacy work and lobbying to affect decision-making processes (ibid p. 36, 2016a). Other prescribed actions are included concerning equality, such as educating young men about equality and patriarchal structures as well as actively reviewing the female representation in local and national legislative assemblies (ibid p. 43, 2016a). Equality is therefore something that is framed as a guiding value for political action. An overarching framing of the actions youth should conduct to accomplish these goals is active organization, political advocacy and lobbying.

These descriptions of advocacy and lobbying as essential actions for youth to correct injustices, are seen in other internal reports:

We are a few examples out of many, of how youth organisations work towards societies where young people have real participation, influence and power. Advocacy and lobbying are essential means to achieve this vision (LSU p. 5, 2010b).

(29)

Carrying out political advocacy work and specific actions is further described as a means to increase the relevance, changing the image of young people as well as develop knowledge within the organization (ibid p. 19, 2010b).

A consistently recommended course of action is to act with a post-colonial perspective, which constitute values that should guide the youth organizations’ actions (LSU p. 7, 2018d). Attentiveness to power structures, availability and inclusion are all examples of these values. This perspective and description of the youth movement is also described in a 2015 position paper accepted by the LSU board.

In conclusion the consequences of racist and colonial structures are of great relevance for LSU, its member organizations and society at large. [...] By admitting that today’s age is post-colonial LSU commits to give attention to and handle issues that the post-colonial state actualizes (My translation, LSU p. 4, 2015b)

Not only does LSU try to diffuse this world view among its member organizations, but they also commit themselves to act in accordance with this, and thus consolidating this view firmly within the organization.

Distinctive:

Cooperation with politicians and decision-makers is seen as essential in order to carry out lobbying and political advocacy (LSU p. 12, 2010b). However, politicians are framed as disproportionally consisting of older generations which fails to act in accordance with the interests of young people. This group is characterized as lacking the new perspectives and values which young people have, likely in order to highlight the need for increased youth participation (ibid pp. 4-5, 2010b). In the recent decade several positive examples of discussions with decision makers have been accentuated, although LSU means that further steps can be taken to include the youth perspective and strengthen the organization of young people (LSU p. 17 ,2014a).

Regarding right wing populists and right wing extremists, they are described as acting outside the legitimate frames of democracy, actively trying to worsen the conditions for engagement and participation of young people through threats and undermining of the values of diversity which characterizes the legitimate youth movement. Citing a SIFO survey, LSU notes that

(30)

threats directed towards youth organizations is increasing, and that this is a threat against democratic participation and therefore a threat against democracy itself (LSU p. 8, 2017a).

Table 2. Summary of the youth identity formulated by LSU Central features of LSU

and youth

Distinctive features of decision makers and politicians

Distinctive features of right wing populists and extremists History - Values based on UN

Universal Declaration of Human

- Platform for anti-colonialism and human rights.

- Political advocacy against apartheid and human rights violations.

- Supportive of the growing youth movement.

- Allies provided youth can organize.

- Institutionalized dialogue needed.

- Heavily relied upon for funding.

- The original enemy. - Anti-democratic forces.

Properties - Underrepresented and

discriminated against group.

- Diverse, competent and capable group.

- Critical of norms and discrimination. Values equality.

- Post-colonial world view.

- Legitimate institutions and actors to advocate towards.

- Lacking the youth perspective needed to enable youth

participation.

- Heavily relied upon for funding.

- Racist world view incompatible with the youth perspective. - Undemocratic and sometimes criminal. - Endangering the conditions for youth participation.

Action - Youth organizations are

tools to gain increased influence for youth perspective

- Advocacy and lobbying needed to gain increased influence for youth. - Actions for increased equality with a post-colonial world view.

- Fails to act in the interest of young people unless they are targets of youth advocacy.

- Takes certain steps to include the youth perspective, but more can be done.

- Acting outside the legitimate frames of democracy.

- Undermining democratic values such as diversity and threatens youth participation.

4.4. Implementation

The diversity network established in 2010 with the purpose of strengthening the organizations in questions surrounding diversity, equal treatment, norms and discrimination. This network

(31)

had explicit norm-shaping ambitions for the participants (LSU p. 21, 2010a). LSU brings up the following comment from a participant about the network:

The diversity network was really good, you had time to sit down and discuss important issues that you otherwise is not very prominent in the organization. There was time to think, have opinions and get support. [...] Furthermore the exchange with different organizations that you maybe otherwise do not have a lot in common with has been very rewarding. (My translation, LSU p. 22, 2010a)

This is an example of the ability of LSU to create common values based on discussions and common experiences in varied organizations that otherwise would not have a lot in common. Through the discussions and exchanges in these networks certain values can be spread to the member organizations.

There are several indicators that education programs in particular affected young people in leadership positions in the member organizations. After the 2013 leadership program Ung med

Makt LSU writes that one member organization’s president said the following in the evaluation:

I would say that Ung med Makt gave me time to reflect upon my leadership. Here I have gotten models and structure to understand my everyday life as a leader from the outside and other valuable tools. I have also gotten a broad contact network in the non-profit sector and a mentor who helped me in my development (My translation, LSU p. 44, 2013b).

The contents of this program can therefore in a way be seen as a structuring of the way leaders within the youth movement see their role as young leaders, their organization and the environment in which they operate. When the same program was carried out in 2014 LSU notes that the participants’ response was overwhelmingly positive:

[…] the program has given [the participants] new insights and perspectives of their leadership as well as their environment and their organization in it (My translation, LSU p. 58, 2014a).

The launching of project DEMO in 2014 was seen as successful in the schools as it strengthened the participants’ understanding of democratic norms and gave tools on how to influence their

Umbrella Organizations, Identity and Political Advocacy: A Process Tracing of Identity Management in The National Council of Swedish Youth Organisations