Young people in rural areas are under-represented as clients in employment and social integration services. Yet we know that full access to local services is an essential factor in work and societal integration for some youth. This is particularly true for vulnerable young people in rural areas, who face several issues that can become barriers to using available resources. In this context, what actions can we put in place to make services more attractive and accessible to young people?
Alberio and Handfield addressed this issue by examining the influence of rural living conditions on young people’s access to front-line services. The research team sent an online questionnaire to 51 practitioners from 40 organizations working with young people in the Quebec’s regional county municipality of Mitis in the Bas-Saint-Laurent region. The authors also conducted 22 semi-structured interviews with practitioners from 19 different organizations. They were employed in the fields of career development, health, education, family, and justice.
The article shows that there are a number of barriers to the use of local services. Solutions to these barriers were also suggested by the stakeholders interviewed.
First, stakeholders agree that there is a lack of awareness of the services being offered. As a solution, many reported having put in place initiatives to boost the visibility of services, such as the creation of a website and social media pages, as well as holding open days and doing street outreach. Most recognize that word-of-mouth remains the most effective way of spreading the word about services.
Fear of prejudice, apprehension of stigmatization, and lack of anonymity also discourage many young people from using services. The self-reliance and individualistic culture, in which many young people are immersed, devalues the act of seeking help when someone encounters problems. To this end, the counsellors suggested meeting in neutral places and building a bond of trust with the client.
A third barrier identified is the difficulty of commuting to the services. Lack of a vehicle, inadequate and under-utilized public transport, and high travel costs hamper the mobility of rural youth. To counter this difficulty, the practitioners suggested distributing public transit vouchers and/or compensating for gas expenses. Young people could also benefit from greater flexibility in the hours of work of the practitioners.
Some of these issues may seem daunting, but there are several recommendations that CDPs can implement at different scales to promote access to quality services for young people living in rural areas. In addition to the solutions mentioned above, the authors suggest focusing interventions on young people’s aspirations to develop their incentive to act. In concrete terms, this could take the form of mentoring, celebrating local professions, and promoting community involvement. Finally, the authors believe that it is essential for practitioners to strengthen the capacity to work within a network in order to facilitate referrals to appropriate resources.
Responses