"Kids like us don't normally help out in other countries!” Using youth-centered capacity building initiatives to foster local and international development

Economic downturns have a direct impact on social life, creating unemployment, increasing criminal behaviors and decreasing social support and networks (Auslander & Litwin, 2001). One of the most vulnerable groups during economic downturns is the urban minority youth (Winchester, 2008), disproportionately affected by the 2008-2009 socio-economic crisis and global financial collapse. One positive result of this crisis is that it created room for creative solutions, calling for original social interventions and policies to protect vulnerable groups and foster entrepreneurship (Lustig & Stern, 2000; Schramm, 2009). Disconnected urban youth need skills to be empowered and create positive change in their lives, neighborhoods, and global community. Thus, they create social mobility pathways and social networks (Robb, 2000).

Founded in 2007, Global Potential (GP) is an original volunteer-run grassroots program aiming to give a voice to the poor and build community capacity and youth leadership. GP pairs New York City low-income youth groups with poor youth in rural villages of developing countries. Local schools and community programs are sought out to identify and recruit “high-potential” youth from low-income communities. These youth then participate in a three-stage program: (a) an intensive 16-week training on social entrepreneurship and leadership; (b) a 6-week immersion program of capacity building and peer mentoring in rural development projects in a developing country, and © upon return, a 9-month social enterprise application in their own low-income neighborhoods.

GP carries out innovative youth survey data. To date, the positive impact on quality of life indicators (self-esteem, leadership, increased awareness) has been monitored on 50 youth from NYC and 150 youth from the Dominican Republic; experiences of poverty are contextualized. The preliminary findings from this data show that industrialized and developing countries can work coherently to create alternative youth-centered development models. There are many implications for future directions in policy and program development.