Journal of Management & Public Policy, Vol. 4, No.

1, December 2012

Journal of Management & Public Policy

Vol. 4, No. 1, December 2012, pp. 33-41
ISSN (Print): 0976-013X ISSN (Online): 0976-0148

Knowledge Production & Dissemination:

An Analysis in the Context of the National Youth Policy

P. Sivakumar
Post-Doctoral Fellow, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, India
E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract
Great institutions or traditional universities of Takshashila, Nalanda etc. have played a great
role in knowledge production and dissemination in societies during different stages of
civilizational transition. The institutional context has undergone dramatic changes in
modern societies. In India, for considering a specific context of knowledge sharing and
knowledge management, one of the national policies of the government is an appropriate
choice for the production and dissemination of knowledge through development
institutions. The National Youth Policy 2003 and the subsequent exposure draft of National
Youth Policy 2012, released recently by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports,
Government of India, recognizes that an inter-sectoral approach is a pre-requisite for
dealing with youth-related issues. It, therefore, advocates the establishment of a
coordinating mechanism among the various Central Government Ministries and
Departments and the community-based organizations and youth bodies for facilitating
convergence in youth-related schemes, developing integrated policy initiatives for youth
programmes. This paper examines the policy perspective of development institutions in
India in the context of the National Youth Policy and its contribution towards knowledge
production and dissemination for the development of the nation. This paper tries to find
the answer to critical questions like what sort of knowledge is being produced by
development institutions and how it reflects in society by following the dictum: knowledge
for development, and what changes institutions were able to make through the National
Youth Policy.

Introduction and Background

In every society’s growth, developmental institutions – whether it be Plato’s Academy or
traditional universities, such as the Nalanda and the Takshashila or Taxila – played a great
role. The exercise of knowledge production and dissemination was considered pivotal in
advancing the society. The institutional context has undergone dramatic changes in modern
societies. The role played by development institutions in understanding how societies
acquire and adapt knowledge and thus placing knowledge at the centre of development has
led to paradigm changes in development process. The duty of every development institution
is to place knowledge at the centre of development and disseminating the same in such a
way that it is easily accessible by underprivileged sections in the society, because it is the
33
 Journal of Management & Public Policy, Vol. 4, No. 1, December 2012

poor and the underprivileged who suffer a lot when they fail to acquire and use information
in their lives. In today’s society, the gap between the poor and the rich is widened by
information as it is easier for the rich to gain knowledge than it is for the poor. The growing
literature of World Bank Publications rightly points out that in order to attack poverty, the
window of learning should be opened to the poor. To tackle such issues, policy frameworks,
which are formulated by governments and adapted by development institutions, mainly
focus on minimizing vulnerability and decreasing poverty through expansion of knowledge,
the foundation of development. The basic purpose of knowledge dissemination through
development institutions is the upliftment of vulnerable sections of the society who lack
accessibility to knowledge.

Policy as a Tool for Knowledge Production and Dissemination

Policies are imperative for growth and development. Policies are created, disseminated,
updated, and enforced for development of an organization, a community, or a country. A
policy at the government level is a vision document that also deals with plan of action for
knowledge dissemination. Public policies objective is to achieve a desired goal that is
considered to be in the best interest of all the members in a society (Torjman, 2005: 4). A
public policy is a document that shows inherent commitment of government and is a
planning guide directing a country’s development. The overall aim of public policy is to
improve services available to all and to provide an easily accessible source of information,
advice, and guidance to the citizens. Development institution’s role is to disseminate such
information so that it is accessible to all sections of the society. It is considered to be an
effective medium to provide equal access to the disadvantaged and the excluded groups.
Thus, it is a kind of knowledge dissemination through government policies. It is also the
fastest and the best available strategy for knowledge production and knowledge
dissemination since it has far reaching effects through public involvement.

This paper focuses on the National Youth Policy (NYP) 2003 and the subsequent exposure
draft of NYP 2012. The reasons for considering the youth policy is that it serves the purpose
of developing youth in various socio-economic and cultural spheres and encourages the
involvement of development institutions in preparing the young people to tap the growing
stock of global knowledge and assimilating and adapting it to local needs. There has been an
increasing concern about the youth population all over the world and especially in the Asian
countries in view of their numerical importance and growing problems of development and
welfare. In many Asian countries, youth population had doubled in the 40 years between
1960 and 2000 and this has accelerated the pressure on many services – education,
employment, health, and so on (Saraswathi 2008).

To address these issues NYP 2003 stresses that the youth of the country should enjoy
greater participation in the processes of decision making and execution at local and higher
levels. Such participation would be facilitated by identifiable structures, transparent
procedures, and wider representation of the youth in appropriate bodies, with the emphasis
being more on working with the youth than for the youth. The primary role of the
development institutions in youth development is that of creating, disseminating,
implementing, and updating vital sources of knowledge pertaining to youth development.
The role of the youth in contemporary society is decisive factor for development; as young
34
 Journal of Management & Public Policy, Vol. 4, No. 1, December 2012

people can act as strong force in receiving, carrying out, and imparting as well as
disseminating knowledge for development. Young people hold the key to society’s future.
Their ambitions, goals, and aspirations for peace, security, development, and human rights
are often in accord with those of society as a whole (United Nations 2005).

Knowledge Economy and Development Institutions

Knowledge economy is being defined as an economy in which knowledge is being created,
acquired, transmitted, and used more effectively by institutions, individuals, and
communities for economic and social development (World Bank 2000). In today’s
competitive economy, the crucial factor for sustained growth is the strength of the
foundation of the knowledge base of the economy. In the process of widening knowledge
base, government will have to encourage private parties in the knowledge-making exercise.
But the issue lies in the fact that if knowledge is publicly available, so that it can be accessed
and used by public, the private parties will lose interest because of less return from the
exercise (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development 2000). To counter this
issue, developmental institutions in the public sector should work in tandem with
government for production of knowledge to make knowledge production and dissemination
a publicly available activity (Nelson 1959). Knowledge assets is considered as untapped
human capital that is capable of giving increased returns than assets such as land, labour,
and capital that gives diminishing return (Malhotra 2000).

The notion of a knowledge economy is not new or foreign to India. The country’s past
achievements in science, philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy reinforce the notion that
India has for millennia been a leading knowledge society (Dahlman and Utz 2005). But
India’s contribution to knowledge stream weakened because of different political contexts
over the course of time. But today’s India is at the threshold of a knowledge revolution
because of innovations in science and technology. Moreover, India’s demographic condition
gives us a new horizon of hope as India will be one of the youngest nations in the world. In
order to strengthen the country’s youth, we need to strengthen the youth development
institutions. India may not be able to benefit from its investments in education, ICT, and
research and development unless our broader institutional and incentive regime stimulates
the most effective use of resources in these areas, permits their deployment to the most
productive uses, and allows entrepreneurial activity to flourish to contribute better to
India’s growth and overall development (ibid).

Importance of Development Institutions in Knowledge Production and Dissemination

The major shift from energy creation and traditional factors of production to knowledge
assets and intellectual capital (Malhotra 2003) is a landmark event in the history of all
developmental institutions. This stress on knowledge assets and human capital paved way
for increased social benefits and better functioning of markets (World Bank 1999).
Development is a continuing process that occurs when individuals, enterprises, and
organisations effectively use knowledge for optimum utilisation of resources (World Bank
2007). Creating facilities to access knowledge is the fundamental way of increasing
opportunities to reach out to the individuals and groups (National Knowledge Commission
2007). Knowledge played a crucial role in shaping growth and knowledge as personified in
human capital and technology was an important ally of growth. This human intellectual
35
 Journal of Management & Public Policy, Vol. 4, No. 1, December 2012

capital will be the greatest source of an economy’s growth (National Knowledge

Commission 2008).

There is increasing pressure over researchers and development institutions to produce

socially relevant, accountable, and transferable knowledge, which is productive in
addressing socio-economic problems of the society. This pressure raised concerns over the
role of development institutions, for instance universities’ role in knowledge production and
dissemination. The important question to be addressed here is that will public investments
in development institutions like universities contribute adequately to the society? How well
they are disseminating the quantum of knowledge?

These questions are well addressed by international scholars working on knowledge

production. They argue that the production of knowledge and the research process are in a
transformative stage and there is a paradigm shift in the institutional context of knowledge
production and about the kind of knowledge that is being produced (Gibbons et al. 1994).
Most development institutions where the research is being carried out produce mode 1
knowledge, known as ‘traditional knowledge’. Characteristics of such knowledge are that it
is formal and strictly discipline based - generated within a specific discipline. Whereas mode
2 knowledge, which is context-driven, problem-focused and interdisciplinary,points out that
the production of knowledge is a trans-disciplinary activity, which is generated mostly
outside the academic institutions pertaining to social and economic contexts.

National Youth Policy: Key for Youth Development

The ultimate criterion for development is determined by the extent in which each individual
in a society is provided with opportunities to contribute to and gain from the development
and advancement of the society. The youth plays an integral role in this process as future
citizens and as individuals full of energy and enthusiasm. But the youth faces a series of
disparities that cripples them from participating in the development process. The situation
of the youth in today’s world is riddled with uncertainties because of the age as well as the
changing socio-economic structures - as they considered to be in a transition stage from
adolescence to adulthood, facing many aspects of vulnerability.

In countries with weak growth, youth faces the difficulty of school-to-work transition and
unemployed school dropouts are a vocal, frustrated, and volatile group (World Bank 2005).
Every country needs effective strategies to help young people participate in all spheres of
society (UNESCO 2004). The effective strategy includes formulation of a youth policy aiming
for their empowerment. A youth policy is a document that represents a declaration and
commitment of the priorities, directions, and practical support that a country intends to
provide for the development of its young men and women (UNICEF 2007). To stress this
point, UNESCO remarks that a progressive national youth policy obliges traditional decision
makers to work not only for young people, but with them and let their experiences inform
the development of appropriate interventions and services. It is essential role of
governments to ensure that the concerns of young people are taken into account in all areas
of government policy and decision making, and not just those deemed to be ‘youth issues’;
and that young people’s views, priorities, and desires are encouraged, listened to, and acted
upon (UNESCO 2004).
36
 Journal of Management & Public Policy, Vol. 4, No. 1, December 2012

National youth policies aim to cover two basic objectives (ICNYP 2003):
(1) To set forth an inspirational vision and an advocacy plan for a national youth policy
(2) To add an operational plan to implement the vision, policy, and programme at local
and national levels for, by, and with the young people.

The formulation of a national youth policy needs to have a bottom-up approach in which
vast arrays of social actors are involved. In formulating national youth policy, due attention
and focus may be given to youth not only as beneficiaries but also as larger segment of
society and to the role youth can play in ensuring sustainable development. Youth are
known as critical segment of any society, who can contribute in making larger consensus in
different issues in the background of diverse settings that exists in India.

National youth policy holds that a nation’s development is directly related with the
development of its young women and men. Nearly half of the Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs) are directly related to youth and all MDG’s are indirectly related to youth. So
investment in youth is a crucial factor for development and not investing in youth will prove
to be very costly. World Bank points out that youth in critical circumstances are more likely
to be a drain on public and private resources because of their lower economic productivity,
their higher rates of school dropout and unemployment, and the higher health and social
welfare costs they impose on society (as a result of higher crime and conviction rates, early
pregnancy and its associated risks, greater substance abuse, and other risky behaviours)
(World Bank 2005).

Investments in young women and men denote three important categories (United Nations
2007):
(1) improving their health prospects
(2) expand education and employment opportunities
(3) provide opportunities for participation in all aspects of development.

National youth policy is an important document which mobilizes all stakeholders and outline
strategies for development, and any development addressed to youth is addressing
development in a sustainable way.

An Assessment of Indian National Youth Policies

National youth policy is a planning document outlining the country’s approach towards
youth development. The policy document reflects the commitment that a country is
showing towards its future citizens in shaping them as responsible adults. The policy
responds to the changing conditions of young people and prepares them to face the
challenges of time. A national youth policy is a document of national significance. It
represents a nationally agreed formula for meeting the needs and aspirations of young men
and women and provides a framework for youth development. It is both an
acknowledgement of specific needs of young people as well as a formal recognition of their
potential and unique contribution to national development (ICNYP 2003).

The first National Youth Policy of India was formulated in the year 1988 commemorating
International Year of Youth - 1985, as declared by the United Nations. The most important
37
 Journal of Management & Public Policy, Vol. 4, No. 1, December 2012

component of the NYP 1988 was to implement programmes for the removal of
unemployment, rural and urban, educated and non-educated. But the policy spelled out a
weak strategy to address the above issue. In the policy it was planned for a Committee on
National Youth Programmes (CONYP) to bring together the various representatives of
concerned ministries, departments and national youth organisations, to advise the Ministry
of Youth Affair and Sports in discharging its duties in the effective implementation of the
National Youth Policy. But CONYP could not materialize in realizing the objectives of NYP
1988.

National Youth Policy (2003)

The preamble of India’s National Youth Policy mentions that the Policy is based on the
recognition of the contribution that the youth can, and should, make to the growth and
well-being of the community. The policy endeavours to ensure effective co-ordination
between the policies, programmes, and delivery systems of the various ministries,
departments and other agencies. The NYP 2003 points out that youth development in India
has been hampered because of lack of adequate research on youth. Even though India is
becoming one of the youngest nations in the world, thanks to demographic dividend, there
were no efforts to coordinate research based on youth. To address these issues, Rajiv
Gandhi National Institute of Youth Development (RGNIYD) was established in the year 1993
as an apex information and research centre on youth development issues.

NYP 2003 is a refined version of NYP 1988 and the thrust of the Policy centres on ‘Youth
Empowerment’ in different spheres of national life. To achieve this end, the policy
elaborates on the thrust areas and identifies key sectors of youth concern as well as priority
target groups.

Though the NYP 2003 is a departure from the earlier NYP 1988, it could not advance further
as even though the policy spelled out an implementation mechanism, the later events
showed that there was less clarity about the implementation mechanism. It was mentioned
in the NYP 2003 that the policy will be reviewed after five years from the date of
commencement of implementation. But the review process was a rather weak mechanism.

Exposure Draft of National Youth Policy 2012

The exposure draft of the NYP 2012 was unveiled by Minister for Youth Affairs and Sports on
31st May 2012. There are a number of departures from NYP 2003 as it recognizes youth as a
heterogeneous group and most importantly, the draft policy proposes to bring down the
target age group from 13–35 to 16–30 years and divides the age group into three subgroups
so that effective mechanism for addressing the concerns can be identified.

A major departure from the NYP 2003 is that the draft policy not only spells out the
objectives but also elaborates the details of desirable interventions and identifies partners
accountable for realizing the objectives enshrined in the draft policy. Another added feature
is the introduction of Youth Development Index (YDI) with sub-indices like Youth Health
Index, Youth Education Index, Youth Work Index, Youth Amenities Index, and Youth
Participation Index. The draft policy mentions that YDI would help to recognize youth as a
population category that needs separate consideration and the development of a summary
38
 Journal of Management & Public Policy, Vol. 4, No. 1, December 2012

index would help to make comparisons across regions. The policy further states that apart
from measuring achievements made, the YDI would help in advocating youth development.

Knowledge Dissemination and National Youth Policy: Role of Youth Development

Institutions
Effective policy making is one of the important ways to streamline knowledge sharing and
dissemination. Every aspect of policy is directly linked with the purpose of improvement in
learning and development of all sections of society. Most importantly, public policies help to
translate or carry out intentions of government into action.

National youth policy aims to promote youth participation in nation-building process. As

youth is in a transformative stage, the issues of knowledge gaps can be addressed
effectively through youth. The duty and function of development institutions working for
and working with young people is to produce socially accountable knowledge, which can be
easily accessible by marginalized and vulnerable communities. The basic foundations
development institutions in the public sector are laid on the fact that their accountability
rests in the production of socially accountable knowledge. A policy in the public sector like
the National Youth Policy of India is a vision document in this aspect and it has three
important elements: (1) political context, (2) evidence from the field, and (3) linkages.

The political context: In India’s context, the political setting plays an important part. With
regard to research – policy link - in the context of the draft NYP 2012, the policy makers
should strengthen the research work on youth development. It is more relevant in today’s
context as India is experiencing ‘demographic dividend’ and more than 40 percent of the
population falls in the youth category. Efforts need to be taken to give more thrust to the
skill development in the draft NYP 2012. A permanent mechanism should be envisioned in
the draft NYP 2012 to address the skill requirement and employment opportunities.

Evidence: The NYP 2003 rightly points out that youth development efforts in India have
been hampered by lack of adequate information and research base on youth development.
There needs to be some mechanism in the policy to identify and strengthen local agencies in
the field level to collect quality data on youth development, which can support effective
policy formulation and review process. The draft NYP 2012 aims to address this aspect as
provision is made for setting up a resource centre for information related to youth.

Links: To implement the policy’s perspectives on youth development, more emphasis may
be given on establishing links with various agencies working in the field. There should be a
platform to share the views and opinions of researchers and policy makers, and develop
possible course of action in formulating and implementing National Youth Policy. The role
played by civil society organizations is very crucial in this aspect.

Conclusion
The draft NYP 2012 mentions that the policy would be reviewed in 2022 after collation with
the data generated through census 2021. The review process will be highly beneficial if it is
established on evidence-based policy making. Evidence-based policy making is the effective
strategy to implement a policy and with valid output from the end users. In fact, World
39
 Journal of Management & Public Policy, Vol. 4, No. 1, December 2012

Development Report 2007 mentions that policies addressed to youth often fail because of
three main reasons.
(1) Countries are not taking a coherent approach to establish clear lines of
accountability for youth outcomes. Many countries’ national youth policies fail to
set priorities or coordinate action. The youth policies are not coherently matched
with national development policy.
(2) Young people lack voice in the formulation and the implementation of policies
that affects them.
(3) There are few models to adopt.

Evidence-based policy making is an effective strategy to address all these issues as, from
policy formulation to policy implementation, the stake holders are consulted for appropriate
measures. An evidence-based youth policy will ensure youth participation. Major benefits of
evidence-based youth policy are as follows:
(1) An evidence-based youth policy promotes development of young people.
(2) It leads to better services.
(3) It promotes the learning of essential skills and competencies in the youth.
(4) It broadens learning environments for the youth.
(5) It is a powerful tool for social integration.

In an evidence-based policy making, the evidences from research are incorporated into the
policy which in turn, when implemented, will be an integrated one.

References
Dahlman, Carl and Utz, Anuja (2005). India and the knowledge economy: Leveraging
strengths and opportunities. Washington DC: The World Bank.
Gibbons et al. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge. London: Sage.
GoI. (1988): “National Youth Policy 1988”, Department of Youth Affairs, Ministry of Youth
Affairs and Sports, accessed from http://www.nyks.org/1988/1988_intro.htm
GoI. (2003): “National Youth Policy 2003”, Department of Youth Affairs, Ministry of Youth
Affairs and Sports, accessed from http://www.youthpolicy.com/
policies/IndiaNATIONALYOUTHPOLICY2003.pdf
GoI. (2012): “Exposure Draft National Youth Policy 2012”, Department of Youth Affairs,
Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports.
ICNYP (2003) ICNYP/UNDP Sub regional Seminar on National Youth Policy – Final Report.
Ethiopia: UNDP.
Malhotra (2000) “Knowledge Assets in the Global Economy: Assessment of National
Intellectual Capital,” Journal of Global information management. July-Sept 2000.
Malhotra (2003) “Measuring knowledge assets of a nation: knowledge systems for
development,” Paper presented at United Nations, New York at the advisory meeting of
the Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Public Administration and
Development Management, September 4-5.
National Knowledge Commission (2007) Report to the Nation 2006. New Delhi: National
Knowledge Commission.
National Knowledge Commission (2008) More quality Ph Ds. New Delhi: National Knowledge
Commission.
40
 Journal of Management & Public Policy, Vol. 4, No. 1, December 2012

Nelson (1959) “The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research,” Journal of Political
Economy, 67:3, Jan 1959, p. 297.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2000) Knowledge Management
in the Learning Society. Paris: OECD.
Saraswathi, S (2008) Indian Youth in the New Millennium. Sriperumbudur: RGNIYD.
Torjman, Sherri (2005) What is policy? Canada: The Caledon Institute of Social Policy.
UNESCO (2004) Empowering Youth through National Policies. Paris: UNESCO.
UNICEF (2007) Development of a Youth Policy in Somaliland. Somalia: UNICEF.
United Nations (2005) World Youth Report 2005.Geneva: United Nations Publications.
United Nations (2007) World Youth Report 2007. New York: United Nation.
World Bank (1999) World Development Report 1998/99. Washington DC: The World Bank.
World Bank (2000) Republic of Korea – Transition to Knowledge Based Economy.
Washington DC: The World Bank.
World Bank (2005) Children and Youth – A Resource Guide. Washington DC: The World Bank.
World Bank (2007) Building Knowledge Economies – Advanced strategies for Development.
Washington DC: The World Bank.

41
Copyright of Journal of Management & Public Policy is the property of Management Development Research
Foundation and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.