Children’s participation matters: a step towards institutional and legal innovation in Spain

Abstract

Since its adoption in 1989, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) has had a significant impact on multilevel legislation regarding children’s rights. This research aims to examine the Spanish legislation on childhood and adolescence in four autonomous communities and in the central state. To achieve this objective, a sociological neoinstitutionalist approach and qualitative methodology based on content analysis and coding using MAXQDA software in its 2022 version were employed. The study focused on the language of the rules, objectives, system of governance, and participation as the main variables. The analysis allowed for an understanding of the discourse and degree of development of these variables. The results of this research reveal the importance of CRC and its influence on national legislation. Additionally, the emphasis on protection policies for the creation of a sphere for children and adolescents is noteworthy. Lastly, the instruments of participation vary but tend to take institutionalized forms. This research contributes to our understanding of the impact of CRC and its influence on childhood and adolescence legislation in Spain.

I. Introduction

Article 12 of the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) marked a turning point when it declared that children must be able to express their views and have their opinions considered. More than three decades later, the CRC declaration continues to create interest and debate. The nations that signed the CRC have designed their own national plans after accepting the need for an active and impactful role for children in the public sphere. The new childhood paradigm recognizes children as political subjects who are endowed with agency given their social and relational nature.¹ The starting point is that childhood is not seen as a transitional phase, nor as a phase of people in the making, but as a structural category of society. This new perspective has given rise to controversies that continue to this day.

Spain ratified the CRC in 1990 and since then the volume of Spanish legislation on children and adolescents has increased considerably. This research builds on this interest and uses a qualitative empirical method to examine the Spanish national and regional legislation that implements the CRC.

The implementation of CRC has been studied in comparative² and legal³ literature. Both approaches have received the attention of professional and scientific researchers.

The implementation of the CRC has received special attention as an object of study, with case studies appearing in the comparative literature from various nations⁴ as well as studies of the legal adaptations⁵ given the interest and scientific relevance of the subject.

The research questions that have guided the theoretical work have been various and include: (i) What role do children play in children’s policies in Spain? (ii) Is the role of children recognized by Spanish law truly empowering and participatory? (iii) Are there recognized situations of adultcentrism in legislation?

Attempts to answer such questions must be considered in light of a complex system of jurisdictions and multiple stakeholders in governance.⁶

However, before making an analysis of the relevant Spanish legislation, the theoretical foundations for the empirical work are set up. After this introduction, the theoretical framework (based on sociological neoinstitutionalism and the innovative approach to childhood as a social category) is established. The methodology is then formulated as the cornerstone, and this is followed by the main results, a discussion, and conclusions.

II. Theoretical framework

1. Institutions in sociological neoinstitutionalism

Sociological neoinstitutionalism is one of the pillars of social science and draws from the sources of organizational theory. Its starting point is that institutions, regulations, and procedures are essential elements in collective life that shape our individual and collective decisions.⁷ Scott⁸ defined sociological neoinstitutionalism by stating that institutions are built from cognitive and regulatory structures and processes that influence stability, meanings, and individual behaviour—and that these provide consistency for the processes of institutionalization. While the regulatory aspects have been extensively studied in the legal and institutional literature, the cognitive aspects are less understood, and it is necessary to return to the classic studies of Bourdieu⁹ to trace the origins. The construction of a world and the interpretations of our own actions require shared meanings in specific fields or domains. Since discourses, words, and actions are intimately linked, perceptions and understandings are fundamental in defining the socio-political environment, corporate culture, institutions, and processes of institutionalization. This statement emphasizes that interpretations and signification of actions will eventually impact on institutions. For example, policymakers make decisions based on how they perceive socio-political regulations, which ultimately impact on the development of legal texts.¹⁰ The language employed in a legal text is not the product of chance but reflects an intentional choice and the content of a given policy, given that words and meanings are shaped by the intentions of legislators.¹¹

Consequently, language is an important indicator of how children are understood through legislation. Language denotes the interpretation of policy beneficiaries and determines their role in society. Thus, the following research hypothesis can be formulated:

Proposition 1: The language used and the formulation of aims reveal the positioning of policymakers and their vision of children.

After accepting the importance of language in capturing institutional logic, we need to consider another element that shapes institutions: the environment. All institutions and organizations are affected by various tensions, changes, and innovations—and it is the individuals pursuing their own interests that ramify choices and decisions with unintended results.¹² The environment favours a phenomenon known as sedimentation, which describes the accumulation of changes, values, and culture in an organization.¹³

The five regulations analysed in this article are recent, which means that the legislators have incorporated many of the new instruments, reflections, and lessons learned nationally and internationally. The starting point is an acceptance of the debates that have conditioned the world’s public discussions on childhood and how they fit into the new paradigm.

We believe that the standards analysed will not opt for any one type of approach to children and that, rather, they will generate dynamics of sedimentation in which multiple instruments are combined. Hence, policymakers will generate legislation that contemplates different ways of understanding childhood and incorporates multiple instruments and different forms of participation according to these visions. Hence, the following research proposition is formulated:

Proposition 2: children’s policy incorporates language that combines differing social perceptions of childhood.

2. Childhood as a social category

The concept of childhood is not fixed but contextual and this explains the variety of views on how to interpret this social category.¹⁴ Four visions, or currents, found in the literature on childhood and adolescence are offered: paternalism; liberalism; welfarism; and the new protagonist and child-centred approach.

The first vision is one of the classical currents known as paternalism or traditional paternalism.¹⁵ This view proposes that children are incapable of rational behaviour and should be subject to adult judgement because they cannot interact in society. Paternalism justifies that children are subject to special protection because their vulnerability stems from a lack of ability. This emphasis on protection acts as a preventive barrier to minimize possible developmental problems that may appear later and creates separate child and adult spheres.¹⁶

The second current comes from the liberal tradition and does not differentiate between minors and adults. This vision may violate equality and generate abuses towards children¹⁷ as shown by the penal and legal systems in some countries. The third current on childhood is called welfarism and creates a modern paternalism that understands childhood as an object of protection until adulthood. A separation between children and adults is safeguarded through protective policies and social or welfare support.¹⁸ What differentiates this vision from classical paternalism is that as the child evolves towards adulthood, this separation is dynamic rather than a fixed line.¹⁹ Finally, recent social and legislative changes have made it possible to broaden the way children are viewed in terms of their future and the type of adults they will become. This approach assumes the centrality of the child as a political subject empowered to participate in the public realm.²⁰ Accordingly, children are social actors, as well as active citizens and full members of society.

All these views support an adult-centred character, albeit with differences in degree, so that the debate has widened to how participation should be interpreted. Qvortrup²¹ understands participation in terms of rights similar to the Declaration of Human Rights. Percy-Smith & Thomas²² approach child participation in a dialogical framework in which children do not see participation as an approach to assert their rights, but as a dynamic arising from mutual interdependence, recognition, and respect between children and adults. Indeed, the participation of children in democratic debates, regardless of scale and scope, develops democratic capacities and enhances democracy by embedding such discussion in its structures.²³ Moreover, the inclusion of children in decision-making is a bold way of supporting their rights and explaining their needs.

One of the main concerns of researchers in child participation has focused on how to apply the articles of the CRC declaration and turn participatory practices into a tangible reality. Several groupings of rights have been created, such as the 3Ps, which refer to the rights of provision, protection, and participation,²⁴ or the 6Ps applied to public policies²⁵ and which are listed in Table 1.

As can be seen, the approach taken to understanding the child in the study standards will lead to different measures and policies being proposed. It is understood that the more protagonist approach is more advanced, as it has been generated in recent times according to the literature. Traditional paternalism and liberalism have a vision closer to the conceptions of the beginning of the 20th century. In addition, as we affirmed in the last section, there is a mix of visions about children to get a protective sphere adapted to their capabilities. This could explain the protective instruments inside the studied laws.

Based on this argument, the following research propositions can be formulated:

Proposition 3: Children’s policies, with the most protagonist approach, incorporate a more child-centred approach to decision making.

Proposition 4: child protection criteria occupy the largest part of the regulations.

3. Participation during childhood

The content attributed to the meaning of childhood largely shapes the design and implementation of public policies in each territory. The current trend has shifted from classical paternalism to modern paternalism given the rise of welfarist or protagonist visions of the role of children. The protective sphere of the welfare state means ensuring a separate sphere for children where they can develop fully. Gradually, children will be included within the public sphere and grow towards adulthood.²⁶ The way in which childhood is interpreted in society varies according to the policymaker’s approach to the stakeholders.²⁷

Children can change the world around them and this ability serves as essential learning. This ability to take part in the public space has been the subject of various. The right of children to be heard and express their opinions helps them develop their ability to defend their rights and explain their needs studies.²⁸

It is worth remembering that the CRC was made at a turning point in child protection when legislation was mid-way between modern paternalism and agency for children.²⁹ The implementation of tools for child participation varies, and progress has depended on public opinion in each nation. At this crossroads of interests and proposals for implementing the CRC, various groupings of rights—known as the 3Ps³⁰ and the 6Ps³¹—have been developed and applied to public policies.

Participation can take place from multiple perspectives and can crystallize in a variety of ways. As recognized by the CRC, it can even have social protagonism through the creation of sectoral associations. Participation can also take place directly or through organizational structures set up for this purpose. Children can also play an active role in defining the services that they receive. In the end, it is a conscious and empowered action in which the child not only expresses his or her views, but is also heard. Different visions about participation indicate the different roles of children in society.

From a critical perspective, Thomas³² asserts that while public policies seek to integrate children, they also theorize about the role of children—and children’s agency is usually held to be irrelevant in this discourse. This perceived irrelevance may lead children and adolescents to show little interest in political participation; and this suggests the need to increase engagement since participation, as a social practice, is learned and must be practiced throughout life.³³ The controversy between autonomy and dependence continues today and highlights the power asymmetries between adults and children. The literature on child participation uses the expressions of adultcentrism and tokenism to refer to these asymmetrical power situations. Adultcentrism describes adult unwillingness to share power with children and a desire to control the entire decision-making process.³⁴

Tokenism identifies symbolic participation without a real expression of children’s political rights that generates empty situations in which participation has no impact. Both Arnstein³⁵ and Hart³⁶ named tokenism as a rung on the ladder of participation. This phenomenon becomes chronic and long term, and a disengagement from the participatory experience occurs.³⁷ Maybe the inclusion of adult actors could be an indicator about these phenomena. The participation of collectives like families, education associations, and so on could be a barrier to authentic participation.³⁸

Based on the above, the following research proposals are formulated:

Proposition 5: governance actors, such as families and third-sector organizations, can be a brake to complete child participation.

III. Methodology

This work uses an interpretative qualitative method that focuses on the search for meanings and relationships through a content analysis of Spanish legislation on children’s rights. The analysis of documents as empirical material is a fundamental tool for social research that helps us understand the contextual, regulatory, and institutional aspects. In this article, we have quantified and codified the terminology used in the legislation on the understanding that language and ideas cannot be isolated from their social meaning. CAQDAS software was used to process the information, and MAXQDA 2022 was used to process the data and generate the resulting inferences.

1. Methodological procedure

The treatment of laws was conducted using two types of study units. The first is the language used, and the second is the coded segment.

Regarding content analysis, first, a dictionary of terms related to children’s policies was generated. This was accomplished by breaking down the selected texts into words directly related to children’s policies. Second, keywords detected by the researchers in the specialized literature were added. Third, they were sorted according to whether they were considered protection, participation, prevention, or provision. Fourth, content analysis was conducted through the dictionaries produced, and the data obtained were analysed to determine the way in which children are interpreted in the socio-political sphere.

The language used was analysed using a proprietary version of Ps constructed with 3Ps³⁹ and 6Ps.⁴⁰Table 1 summarizes these models. This was based on 4Ps, considering that some of items proposed in these classifications can be analysed from four categories. The clustering process was performed as shown in Figure 1.

The shared points of the 3Ps and the 6Ps have been expressed in a model designed for this research and termed the 4Ps. This is a more operative and effective model for studying Spanish legislation. The substantive content of Spanish legislation is uniquely structured into rights and public policies through four items: protection; participation; prevention; and provision of public services. While protection is typical of a more paternalistic vision, participation has a symbolic charge related to protagonist approaches. Both prevention and service provision are values of the welfarist approach.

This work was used to generate the following dictionary grouped into categories (see Figure 2).

The codification of the laws was conducted after an initial reading of the entire norm for the study of participation. Then, the parts of the text where reference was made to this concept in any of its forms were selected. After that, we generate a codebook and we codify after. The coding was reviewed by the research team. Finally, tables and graphs were generated, and the corresponding analyses were performed.

The formulation of the codes was used to study participation from the perspective developed above (see Table 2). The code system has been immersed in the nuances of child participation, and to this end, it develops the objectives set out in the standard. The different stakeholders involved in children’s policies and types of participation depend on where they take place. These codes consider the development of two instrumental facets of public policies that are developed with the 6Ps, such as the processes (developed through the objectives and forms of participation), as well as the partnership.

The following items of Spanish legislation are studied:

1. National Act 8/2021 of 4 June on the Comprehensive Protection of Children and Adolescents against Violence. This is a state legislative act for the whole nation.

2. Andalusian Regional Act 4/2021 of 27 July on Childhood and Adolescence for the Andalusia Region.

3. Madrid Regional Act 4/2023 of 22 March on Rights, Guarantees, and Comprehensive Protection of Children and Adolescents for the Madrid Region.

4. Navarre Regional Act 12/2022 of 11 May on the Care and Protection of Children and Adolescents and the Support of their Families, as well as Rights and Equality for the Navarre Region.

5. Valencia Regional Act 26/2018 of 21 December on the Rights and Guarantees of Children and Adolescents for the Valencia Region.

These were chosen because they were the ultimate laws approved to regulate child policy. These laws were developed after the second big devolution was made to Autonomous Communities in 2000. Many subestatal entities have not yet legislated child policy. Therefore, they represent and advance if we compare with the previous norms.

The Spanish regions discussed in this article (Andalusia, Madrid, Navarre, and Valencia) are required to bring their own legislation into line with the National Act 8/2021.

Therefore, the responsibility for protection, guardianship, support, and regulation of childhood corresponds to the national and regional public administrations.

IV. Results and discussion

This section provides the main results obtained from the sample. To facilitate a comprehensive overview, the main categories covered are the lexicon used; legislative aims; governance system; and participation. This was divided in categories of participation: information; structures of participation; partnerships; quality of public services; direct participation; and social and family participation (Table 3).

1. Lexicon used

The dictionary shown in Figure 2 has made it possible to calculate the frequency of the words used per legislative act and per code (Table 4). The national legislative act stands out as the most protectionist with respect to the other variables analysed, which is explained by the fact that its main aim is protection against violence. From among the regional acts, two main groupings can be distinguished according to the linguistic terminology used. What differences are the orders of priority: (i) the acts from Navarre and Madrid emphasize a vocabulary based on protection and public services; and (ii) the lexicon in the acts from Valencia and Andalusia is centred on public services and protection.

The legislation from the four regional states is focused on protection, participation, and prevention/education through the provision of public services. Child protection and the provision of public services are the most extensive institutional actions—and this reflects the fact that these are essential rights and some children face real dangers. Moreover, public intervention is oriented towards the support of children’s rights and the empowerment of children to develop in an adult world (without renouncing the social value of childhood). The legal texts analysed emphasize prevention/education and participation activities in alignment with the new paradigm of childhood. An examination of the terminology reveals two distinct spheres of action: the first, aimed exclusively at children; and the second, which intends to help children but is aimed at adults. The children’s sphere is safeguarded by the public administrations to minimize threats to children. The second sphere involves proactive actions by adults to provide public services that favour the full development of children. Protective services are complemented by preventive measures that anticipate situations that may harm children’s rights. The legislative acts recall the role of children as future citizens and create instruments for citizen participation. Children who take part thereby learn to become involved in the decisions that affect them, and this improves their reasoning skills. In this way, children are taught, according to their abilities, governance activities and actions.⁴¹

The language used confirms the existence of a hybrid approach in which the protection of children and care for their well-being is paramount. The policymakers look to create a separate sphere for children to develop towards adulthood through the protection and provision of public services that ensure their well-being. Accordingly, state action is situated between a paternalistic and a welfarist approach.⁴² The adaptability of this approach enables the development of competences through training and participation, which de facto recognizes the active role of children in society.

2. Legislative objectives

One of the important elements in any policy is what it wants to achieve, as it embodies the wishes of the policymaker in the design of a regulation. Table 5 presents the main objectives pursued by the regulations.

State regulation is the most focused on generating a series of legal goods related to the protection of minors and is complemented by activities of multiple natures. In this sense, it emphasizes the following:

[State] The law aims to guarantee the fundamental rights of children and adolescents to their physical, psychic, psychological and moral integrity against any form of violence, ensuring the free development of their personality […]

The Community of Madrid combines a framework in which children’s participation is related to their duties and the protection of the child sphere. In terms of duties, minors are civic citizens because:

[Madrid] […] They have the right to know and responsibility to respect their town or city as a way of enjoying the urban environment.

In this way, institutions play an important role in protecting child rights.

[Madrid] To ensure, within the scope of the competences of the Community of Madrid, the necessary guarantees for the exercise of the rights recognized for minors by the Constitution, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the legal system as a whole.

Regarding participation, a generic mention of the right and its protection is made. This was complemented by the inclusion of references to institutional participation from a formal perspective.

[Madrid] Likewise, they encourage and articulate the social participation of children and adolescents residing in their spheres, and contribute to the expression and direct knowledge of their interests and needs.

Navarre regulation has an approach in which public institutions are fundamental and the child is an active subject in terms of his or her protection and compliance with community standards. In this sense, its preamble recognizes that the special sphere of childhood of any child must be safeguarded.

[Navarre] The first, aimed at the group of children and adolescents who […] have the right to obtain from the Public Administration of Navarre, in a coordinated manner, a comprehensive protection that implies not only recognizing but also ensuring the effective enjoyment of the rights attributed to them by the Convention […].

Participation is subject to the protection of minors and the adaptation of public plans and programs to their needs. This protection must also be in line with the needs of vulnerable groups and those at risk of social exclusion. For this reason, it contains rhetorical elements that enable public authorities to protect those in need.

[Navarre] To have at their disposal the means to facilitate their social inclusion based on respect for their cultural and language identity and to be provided with the means to maintain social relations and participate in activities under the same conditions as their peers.

Finally, this regulation includes a catalogue of duties in which minors must become aware of the duties of adult life related to schooling, civic behaviour, the home, the environment, heritage, and public property.

Andalusian law has an approach like Navarre’s law, and combines multiple objectives based on a protagonist conception (participation and equal opportunities) with a modern paternalistic vision. Thus, this regulation considers the need for public authorities to carry out special protection of children and protective tasks:

[Andalusia] This law was born with the vocation of guaranteeing protection for children and adolescents in Andalusian territory, attending both to the needs that already existed and those that have arisen in more recent times; furthermore, it is a law based on the promotion of rights and prevention, with special attention to situations of risk and to minors in situations of greater vulnerability.

Like the laws of Madrid and Navarre, it lists a series of duties for the child, regulating them in a specific title. The justification is based on the idea that any individual must have rights and duties, as can be seen in the following fragment of the preamble:

[Andalusia] The novelty of this title is that its duties are regulated because, although its dimension is more moral than legal, what is intended is to educate children and adolescents on the assumption of their responsibilities, and limitations and reservations are regulated in relation to certain actions that may collide with the rights of children and adolescents.

In the same way, the regulation is committed to safeguarding equity, as Navarre’s law does:

The Administration of the Junta de Andalucía guarantees the universalization of rights for all minors in the territory of the Autonomous Community of Andalusia, regardless of their socioeconomic situation, their situation, or not, of vulnerability, social exclusion, nationality, or origin […]

Together with this declaration of social justice, there is a clear commitment to participation as a way of generating an enabling framework and the recognition of rights:

This law also incorporates the regulation of the rights and duties that attend to minors and defines the scope of competence of the Administration of the Junta de Andalucía in this matter, creating scenarios for child participation and defining a system of information and indicators of childhood and adolescence.

Finally, the case of the Valencian Community is different from the previous ones in that it emphasizes participation as an element that shapes the creation of equity and a protective environment.

Thus, it refers to protection, but has an empowered child decision-maker:

[Valencia] […] For the first time, children and adolescents were recognized as active citizens with full rights in the Valencian Community, and their participation in all areas of the public and private spheres was promoted as one of the fundamental objectives of this regulatory project.

As in the previous case, the aim is to ensure that any child, regardless of his/her origin or status, can develop as an active citizen without any problem of equity:

[Valencia] The law also aims to establish a new framework of support for children and adolescents and their families, where work is done from all spheres for equity in access to their rights, equal opportunities, and the fight against the intergenerational transmission of impoverishment.

3. Governance

In the current governance framework, it is essential to refer to the stakeholders who collaborate in the design and implementation of public policies for children, such as families, professionals, private companies, NGOs, government departments, and inter-administrative cooperation agencies. These are the main stakeholders that appear recurrently in the legislation. Figure 3 and Table 6 show the Spanish governance system for childhood, highlighting the family and cooperation with public administrations. We begin by commenting on the family (the socializing institution par excellence). Spanish legislation highlights the family’s role as a provider of welfare, a nuance typical of the Mediterranean model of the welfare state in which the family is the main unit of provision (Esping-Andersen, 2002). Thus, the following terms are used:

[Valencia] The social inclusion and restitution of the rights of children and adolescents […] should involve their direct participation, and seek the collaboration of their families and public and private institutions.

[State] All family policies should adopt a positive approach to family intervention to strengthen the autonomy and ability of families and banish the idea that only most vulnerable families need support when they are not functioning adequately.

The family appears as the appropriate context for the proper development of children.

[Andalusia] The family is the main context for the cognitive, emotional, and social development of children and adolescents, and is the best preventive agent for a healthy, positive, and balanced development of childhood and adolescence.

Legislation in Madrid and Navarre strives to strengthen the family:

[Madrid] Firstly, it emphasizes a firm commitment, translated into specific measures, to support families in their parental responsibilities.

[Navarre] Navarre will collaborate with families in the education of children.

The legislation creates a system of responsibilities for municipalities as the administrations closest to the public. The creation of administrative bodies, specialized participation committees, and representative structures with the participation of multiple actors are also mentioned. This is the case of the observatories for childhood and adolescence in the cases of the national state and Valencia, or the use of commissions and committees in which various public institutions take part. Behind the will to create such instruments, there is an interest in organizing governance and systematizing monitoring and control tools.

The governance system highlights the regulation of state bodies at each level of government dedicated to children and adolescents. As well as regulating the main functions, and setting up procedures and an organizational structure, the legislative acts create a series of important organizations. Thus, for example, Valencia regulates the functioning of family meeting points:

[Valencia] family meeting points are an instrument for enabling the right of children to keep their family relationships.

Andalusia designs a system of governance in which local organizations have a significant weight due to the number of municipalities and their considerable size.

[Andalusia] The public administrations of Andalusia will create comprehensive public policies aimed at the full development of children and adolescents.

This contrasts with Navarre, where the regional government centralizes all decisions in the governance system, while Madrid organizes its governance into a network of commissions and strategic organizations.

Social initiatives through NGOs are also covered in the legislation since the experience and ability of NGOs helps in the management of the complex problems affecting children. The regulations give NGOs a leading role in all phases of the public policy cycle and provide for participation through associations and social organizations. In Andalusia, the importance of the whole of society being involved in the development of children is stressed.

The regulations refer to the involved professionals both in terms of the activities they must undertake and the requirements they must meet.

Finally, the legislation of the national state, Valencia, Andalusia, and Navarre specifically mentions the participation of private companies in the management of these services.

The collaboration of various public and private actors in the definition of public policies reflects its complexity.⁴³ Hence, numerous actors are needed to cover the wide range of legislative aims. However, the involvement of families, professionals, NGOs, and private companies, squeezes children’s participation in public policy decision-making. This situation generates an adult-centric environment in which decision-making is marked by an asymmetrical power relationship between adults and children.⁴⁴

4. Participation

The new paradigm of childhood cannot be conceived without participation and Spanish legislation reflects this fact. The legislation uses numerous instruments to foster children’s gradual participation in public affairs and decision-making. Table 3 shows the main evidence for participation broken down into the following codes: information; participation structures; partnerships; quality of public services; direct participation; and social and family participation. Together they form a coherent unit that legitimizes the new rights of children. In this section on participation, we begin by examining each of these codes in the order shown in Table 3.

The first code we refer to is information and this brings together documented evidence on improving the information channels that affect children’s rights in education, training, and awareness.

Valencia emphasizes the need for transparency for genuine participation:

[Valencia] Children cannot be excluded from the general criterion of transparency, and the potential subjects of a regulation must be actively involved in its drafting.

This idea is in line with those approaches that affirm that effective direct participation is impossible without a minimum of information. Likewise, awareness-raising activities are aimed at children and adults to disseminate public policies on children to the whole of society. Awareness-raising and training activities help resist the prevailing adultcentrism and social paternalism and generate a favourable climate for children’s participation and development as citizens.⁴⁵

[Andalusia] The promotion of the welfare of children and adolescents is understood as actions aimed at fostering knowledge, dissemination, and exercise of their rights, raising society’s awareness of the needs of children and adolescents, and encouraging their participation in decisions that affect them.

This commitment materializes in the creation of observatories, as spaces to study, measure, and disseminate data on childhood. The Madrid legislation establishes this obligation in the following terms:

[Madrid] The results of reports produced by the observatory will be published annually, and other reports may be published for specific issues.

The second code in Table 3 refers to the regional and municipal participation structures that are one of the novelties of the Spanish regulatory framework. The creation of such structures represents an innovation for legitimizing the presence, participation, and representation of children and young people.

[Valencia] This is an organization for child and adolescent participation at a regional level, whose functions are established and the basis for determining its composition is laid down …

The legislation also creates administrative bodies to manage sectoral public policies or specific aspects such as, for example: the Child and Adolescent Protection System Council (Valencia), the Family Support Commission (Madrid), the Commission for Participation by Children and Adolescents (Madrid), and the Observatory for Children and Adolescents (Valencia, Madrid).

Both the collection of information and the creation of regional and municipal structures are the result of the need of institutions to obtain data for the definition of political-administrative programs and to coordinate the parties to generate common frameworks of understanding.⁴⁶ The use of administrative bodies enables an adequate allocation of resources and avoids duplication and conflicting aims, which is conducive to the well-being of children.

The formation of partnerships and associations is also one of the main pillars of guidelines of the Spanish regulatory framework on childhood, in line with Article 15 of the Convention on the Rights of Children, which de facto implies the autonomy to create associations. For this recognition, public institutions are responsible for encouraging the conditions and resources necessary to enable this right to association.

[Andalusia] The public administrations of Andalusia will support child and youth associations, which will include the right to form and belong to associations and will ensure that the legal system is respected and facilitates the learning of democratic principles and values.

[Madrid] The Region of Madrid will support the constitution of associations and social organizations for children and adolescents and will adopt the appropriate measures to enable children to exercise their rights of assembly and association.

Following the order in Table 3, and under the umbrella of child protection, the quality of public services appears as a fundamental and shared responsibility of state services (including healthcare, education, leisure, sport, and culture).

[Valencia] The regional government must support the full participation of children and adolescents in school life, in accordance with their level of maturity, and create accessible channels of participation that help their involvement in democratic decision-making processes.

Children’s participation in public services helps tailor these services to their needs and expectations, while saving costs by making their management more efficient.⁴⁷ Furthermore, participation supports the development of Article 12 of the CRC in the sense that children must be heard.

[Andalusia] The aim of foster care is to achieve the full integration and participation of children and adolescents in a family nucleus that is appropriate to their needs, and to offer an affective environment of coexistence.

[Navarre] Care should be centered on the individual by choosing the best existing resource for each minor and counting on their participation and that of their environment, with the collaboration of the organizations, services, and professionals who attend them, and with the collaboration of the relevant organizations.

In the case of the national state legislation, child participation in the development of protocols is also envisaged.

[National state] The drafting of these protocols involves the participation of children and adolescents, other public administrations, organizations, and professionals from the sectors involved in the prevention, early detection, protection, and reparation of violence against children and adolescents.

Direct political participation is another of the constituent elements in the ‘participation’ category and is characterized by involving children in political life. This type of participation is subordinated to the capacities of the child and prefigures two key ideas: (i) children are citizens who need to take part in democratic processes to develop as citizens; and (ii) children have the right to be heard and listened to.

[Comunidad Valenciana] There must be representation for children and adolescents, and this must reflect, in a balanced way, the age ranges and expressions of diversity.

However, the national state legislation makes only a brief mention of the role of children in the definition of public policies:

[State] Ensure the right to participation of children and adolescents in all decision-making that affects them.

Both Valencia and Navarre refer to the participation of children with disabilities:

[Navarre] Ensure the right to participation of children and adolescents in all decision-making that affects them.

Andalusia and Navarre recognize digital participation and Madrid commits to the use of surveys through the opinion barometer:

[Andalusia] The public administrations of Andalusia will support the creation of virtual participation spaces accessible to minors, where, as well as expressing their opinions, they can make proposals for improvement and suggestions on the actions of public administrations.

[Madrid] a barometer about children and adolescents in Madrid that gathers the opinions of children based on consultations and other independent channels of participation that are developed with plurality and represent their opinions.

The secondary role of direct participation in public decision-making suggests a timid move towards the agency of children. However, what can be seen is a paternalistic interest in maintaining differentiated spheres between children and adults, which again reinforces the paternalistic and welfarist role of limiting direct child participation as much as possible. Most of the instruments consider participation through representative formulas that enable tokenism and control of participation through intensive adult intervention.⁴⁸

Social and family participation, the last element in Table 3, names the groups that intervene in the definition of public policies. The regulatory frameworks of Valencia, Navarre, and Madrid give a legal status to non-governmental organizations, associations, and/or family members in the management of policies for children. Of these, participation in planning and representative administrative bodies are the most common. Likewise, local bodies and municipalities also take part in the design of public policies, as they are the state administrations closest to the citizen and the most receptive to contextual changes. Likewise, social participation includes those volunteers who support children in care centres.

The prominent role of the family in the definition of children’s issues is recognized in the Convention on the Rights of Children. However, in the regulations analysed, families moderate the role of children. Families can focus the diagnosis of the services that concern the child, and they may direct the decision-making process. In line with earlier evidence, the participation of families and other groups creates better governance.

Evidence for such assertions follows:

[Valencia] The body responsible for education shall support, with the participation of the local administrations, the creation of a framework to address non-enrolment, absenteeism, and dropping out of school, which shall form part of the Valencian Strategy for Children and Adolescents, the implementation and monitoring of which will be the responsibility of both local and education administrations.

[Andalusia] […] the solidarity participation of volunteers in the centers for the protection of minors.

Families play an active role in the definition of public policies and in the provision of services, with the case of Navarre worth highlighting:

[Navarre] … the participation of parents will be encouraged and there will be spaces where those with the same problems and concerns can meet, and the children themselves may participate.

The relationship between diverse types of participation

The regional regulations create organizational structures and an extensive regulation of protocols. Public services reinforce the idea of protection and are oriented towards improving children’s living conditions by including various legal rights. Organizations are responsible for supporting decent living conditions that enable children to better develop as adult citizens.⁴⁹ It can be seen how public action seeks to generate well-being from a ‘welfarist’ perspective and support education because it transmits values and socialization. This trend is also shown in a proliferation of participation centred on improving the quality of public services by adapting them to the needs and expectations of children. However, in some cases, the opinion of the children must share space with third parties such as public employees and families who take part in shaping the service. Thus, in public services there is a tendency towards protection that could be misinterpreted as adultcentrism, as the inclusion of other groups in the definition of public services may lead to a narrowing of choice for children. The child is a citizen in development who is not yet mature enough to take part in public life.

Table 7 summarizes the main trends in the legislation.

V. Conclusions

This research has examined five pieces of Spanish regulatory legislation regarding children. We start from the language used in the drafting of the legislation and study the aims pursued through a systematization of the 4Ps. The CRC has marked the way in which children’s rights and their role in society are interpreted. National and regional legislation is strongly influenced by the new paradigm of childhood and the sedimentation effect. The concern of Spanish legislators to protect children in a sphere distinct from that of adults is seen, and this motivation explains why both the vocabulary and the text on protection policies are greater than the percentages on participatory policies. More specifically, the instruments have a clear Welfarist character but rely on protection and participation to go far beyond this infantile conception. The language used determines a mixed configuration of policies, in which both protection and public service provision are important. However, prevention and, to a lesser extent, participation form a child-friendly field of development. According to the regulations studied, this is adapted to the capacities, needs, and expectations of the beneficiaries of these childhood policies. Thus, it can be affirmed that the role of the child is changing, and empowerment is shaped by the implementation phases and by employees on the ground. Although it has been observed that there is a prevalence of one type of language over another, it is not possible to be categorical in confirming Proposition 1. Rather, different views on children have been combined, so we can say that Proposition 2 is fulfilled. Therefore, the data obtained indicate that Proposition 2 is fulfilled.

The legislation examined also combines different perceptions on the treatment of children. In comparative terms, Valencia, Andalusia, and Madrid are more ambitious in terms of instruments for participation than Navarre or the national state legislation. It can therefore be affirmed that both the state and Navarre’s legislation support a welfarist conception combined with protectionism. It can be said that Proposition 3 is fulfilled.

Although Valencia, Andalusia, and Madrid include in their aims the promotion of participation and children’s rights, these do not appear as essential rights. Certainly, the legislative acts specify the creation of structures, instruments, and channels for children to be heard, but the fact is that children remain in the background. Therefore, Proposition 3 is partially fulfilled as child protection measures are most prominent in the regulations.

In fact, the participation of organizations or adult administrative bodies hinders a full development of genuine participation by children because the centerpiece of regulation is protection. All other elements, values, and public services revolve around protection. Accordingly, it can be said that Proposition 4 is fulfilled.

The inclusion of actors that complement children’s participation in decision-making generates a governance environment. However, the inclusion of groups such as families, NGOs, professionals, and others can be a sign of adultcentrism if not used correctly. On the one hand, this may imply the creation of a protective sphere that allows children to participate as their capacities develop. On the other hand, it can be an attempt to control children’s decision-making. While Proposition 5 can be said to be fulfilled, more qualitative research on this subject needs to be conducted.

This study contributes scientific knowledge to the study of children’s public policies and legislation. It also adds value to the specific literature on child participation insofar as it has been possible to observe the vision of children as active subjects of policies and their role in the socio-political environment. From a societal perspective, the work carried out will enable policymakers to be much more aware of how they perceive children and how their perception can improve the formulation of administrative policy programs.

The limitations of the study include the need to collect more observations for a more wide-ranging overview of the implementation of children’s rights. This research adds value to the field of sectoral public policies dedicated to children, provides scientific knowledge about children’s legislation, and opens several avenues for future research on the role of children in the political system and public policies.

Funding

Funding support for this article was provided by the Conselleria de Innovación, Universidades, Ciencia y Sociedad Digital, Generalitat Valenciana (GV/2021/001).

Conflict of interest statement. None declared.

Footnotes