In a time of acute political and social polarization, and with mounting evidence of a mental health crisis that may affect how and whether young adults engage with their communities, now is an important time to think expansively about civic activity and its relationship with well-being.

Young adults ages 18 to 24 are pivotal in advancing our democracy through civic engagement. With increased political autonomy and significant life changes, they are uniquely positioned to engage with their communities and society more broadly. But young adults also face the burden of building a better future in a present they did not create, and that can affect how they define and participate in civic engagement. 

Mainstream definitions of civic engagement typically focus on community service, volunteering, and political participation, but young adults don’t always engage in those activities. They traditionally have the lowest rates of voter turnout, especially among young adults of color.

In addition, racially marginalized young people may have understandings of civic knowledge and engagement that differ from mainstream definitions. This disconnect can prompt them to resist operating within dominant institutions to bring about change. Instead, they may choose system-challenging forms of engagement, known as critical engagement.

To better understand how young people engage with their communities and how doing so affects them, we asked 20 young adults of varying racialized identities and self-reported levels of civic engagement living in the DC area what they think it means to be a “good citizen.” 

Here’s what we learned about the actions young people take to address pressing social issues, how they feel those actions have affected or will affect their lives, and the support they need from government and community leaders to meaningfully engage in civic activities. 

How do young adults define a good citizen?

Some of the 20 young adults who participated in our semistructured individual interviews described the mainstream definition of a good citizen, focusing on politically oriented participation such as not breaking the law and voting in elections. One interviewee said that to be a good citizen, “You need to obey the law at all times.” 

Several participants described good citizens as engaging in participation-based and community-oriented activities. One participant mentioned taking an approach of “contributing back to your community. . . [and] giving as much as you’re taking.” Other interviewees relayed similar sentiments, emphasizing the importance of being informed, displaying respect and empathy, and helping out when they can. Many participants found comfort in organizing, and one participant highlighted that it taught her “how [she] fits into society [and] the larger community.”

Being a good citizen means engaging politically, getting to know my neighbors and . . . the people in my broader community.

Some participants also shared challenges associated with being a good citizen. One interviewee said, “It’s difficult to be a good or a bad citizen in a society where society itself is not good.” Another shared a similar message: “I think it’s hard [to be a good citizen] when the rules themselves don’t necessarily make you a good person.” Another interviewee felt they had a larger societal responsibility to “build a political system that is morally righteous,” but noted that’s a large burden for one person to feel responsible for.

How do young adults’ definitions of a good citizen affect how they engage with their communities? 

Our interviews suggested mainstream definitions of a good citizen may not resonate with young adults’ visions for effecting positive change in their communities. Young people engage based on how they feel about the issues that affect them, linking their definitions of a good citizen to their personal empowerment and civic opportunities available to them. Participants who held a justice-oriented definition of civic engagement, for example, more often discussed protesting, activism, and testifying—or feeling discouraged from participating at all.

As the young adults we spoke with have begun carrying out and reflecting on their own definitions of civic engagement, many indicated feeling overwhelmed and having to “work harder to resist apathy,” as one interviewee put it. When they choose where and how to engage, they often have to think critically about what their role is, how to be efficient, and what gives them hope. That means their ideas of a good citizen may influence not only the civic activities they engage in but also the burden they face in trying to improve their communities.

Our interviews suggest young people from marginalized backgrounds, particularly people of color, may shoulder a larger burden to address systemic inequities than those not in marginalized groups. Studies have also shown that many young people report stress as a consequence of antiracism activism.

But the burden of discrimination and inequity is also what pushes young people to participate in critical engagement. Young adults who are Hispanic/Latine, women, and sexual minorities have reported higher levels of sociopolitical stress, with many experiencing increased devaluation and denial of their contributions. As young people begin to lose hope, their capacity for civic engagement diminishes. 

The buck needs to stop here. . . . There’s something to be said about a sense of duty that has been neglected in the past, and young people are now picking that up. It’s a whole bundle of emotions that is very complex.

What support do young people need to be good citizens?

Now more than ever, young people play an important role in eliminating systemic inequities that have long prevailed throughout society, but doing so can be challenging.

To lessen this burden, community and government leaders could consider the following strategies:

• listening to young people to better understand how they participate in civic engagement and how doing so affects them
• providing more structured entry into community and government spaces where young adults can discuss and make plans to address social issues
• providing more social, financial, and government support for young adults’ agendas

These supports could make it easier for young people to engage with their communities by lessening the mental and emotional toll that critical engagement can have on their well-being, and community-level health may improve as a result.