In a groundbreaking study poised to redefine approaches to youth development in emerging economies, researchers Meem J.J. and Hossain M.K. delve into the multifaceted nature of resilience capacities among youth populations, proposing a novel eclectic framework designed to facilitate transformational development. Published in Humanities and Social Sciences Communications in 2025, their work emerges at a critical juncture, as nations with burgeoning youth demographics grapple with the dual challenges of socio-economic vulnerabilities and climate-induced disruptions.
The core revelation of the study is the imperative to transcend traditional, monolithic perspectives on youth resilience, which often isolate singular vulnerabilities or adopt unidirectional resilience paradigms. Instead, Meem and Hossain advocate for an integrated approach that harmonizes multidimensional vulnerability perspectives with resilience thinking, emphasizing absorptive, adaptive, and transformative capacities. This triadic continuum acknowledges the complexity of youth experiences, particularly in dynamically evolving socio-economic landscapes characteristic of emerging economies.
Central to this discourse is the Humanitarian–Development Intervention Continuum, a conceptual scaffold grounding the authors’ argument that resilience must be understood as a process extending beyond immediate coping strategies. While absorptive capacity enables survival amidst shocks, such as environmental disasters or economic downturns, the study critically highlights that without viable alternatives, this capacity may merely manifest as conditioned responses reflecting systemic entrapment rather than genuine resilience. Hence, the strategic imperative shifts toward fostering adaptive and transformative capacities that empower youth to transcend vulnerability cycles and drive systemic change.
The importance of adopting an intersectional lens figures prominently in the researchers’ analysis. They contend that youth populations are far from homogenous; varied factors including gender, socio-economic status, cultural context, and occupational engagements intertwine to create complex vulnerability profiles. Ignoring these nuanced distinctions risks the design of development programs that are ineffectual or, worse, exclusionary. By drawing on intersectionality theory, the framework champions tailored interventions that resonate with the lived realities of diverse youth subgroups, ensuring greater equity and efficacy.
Despite the study’s qualitative scope, which naturally circumscribes statistical generalizability, it nevertheless pioneers a robust foundation for understanding intersectional resilience within two geographically distinct coastal districts in Bangladesh. These regions serve as microcosms for the broader climatic and socio-economic challenges confronting marginalized youth in emerging economies globally. The selection strategy enables analytical generalizability, capturing a spectrum of vulnerabilities and adaptive strategies reflective of similar contexts worldwide.
Meem and Hossain’s qualitative methodology facilitates deep, contextualized insights into resilience capacities, revealing how cultural, environmental, and economic variables coalesce to shape youth development trajectories. Such methodological rigor enhances the credibility of their eclectic framework, which deftly accommodates variables often sidelined in quantitative research — for instance, cultural norms influencing gender roles or the socio-political implications of land ownership policies.
One of the study’s salient contributions lies in its critique of current youth development paradigms that overemphasize absorptive capacity while underinvesting in adaptive and transformative resilience-building. The authors argue for policy prioritization of high-impact interventions like digital literacy and vocational training programs oriented toward green and emerging industries. By equipping youth with future-proof skills, such programs catalyze a transition from survivalist mindsets to innovation-driven growth, fostering sustainable economic inclusion and resilience.
Moreover, the research underscores the potential of youth-led social enterprises and innovative ventures in tackling systemic vulnerabilities such as climate change and resource inequities. Institutional support, ranging from dedicated funding streams to mentorship programs, emerges as pivotal for nurturing these entrepreneurial agents of change. These findings align with contemporary development economics research suggesting that youth-driven innovation is a cornerstone of resilient, adaptive economies in flux.
Crucially, the study advocates for moving beyond generic youth policies toward an explicitly intersectional policy framework. This translates into programming that addresses the intersecting spectrums of vulnerability—gender-inclusive policies combating child marriage, economic empowerment initiatives targeting marginalized young women, and climate-resilient strategies supporting male youth in agrarian and fishing sectors. The inclusivity of such frameworks ensures interventions are contextually calibrated and socially just.
An understated yet impactful observation within the paper is the disconnect between institutional stakeholders’ perceptions of youth vulnerability and the actual lived experiences of the youth themselves. This mismatch points to systemic gaps in policy responsiveness, which the authors suggest can be mitigated by institutionalizing participatory mechanisms. Youth advisory councils, geographically diverse consultations, and transparent feedback loops are posited as essential structures for embedding youth voices in policymaking, thereby validating and reinforcing resilience strategies from the ground up.
To extend the framework’s applicability and refine its components, the authors call for future quantitative research initiatives incorporating surveys and measurement scales developed around their theoretical model. Such empirical work would enable statistical generalization and identification of causal relationships between resilience capacities and transformational development indicators, markedly enhancing policy design and impact assessment.
The paper also highlights the necessity of comparative research across different emerging economies and diverse socio-economic milieus within Bangladesh. These studies would illuminate context-specific resilience dynamics and test the framework’s versatility, likely uncovering novel pathways and catalysts for youth transformational development unique to varied environments and cultural settings.
Another forward-looking research agenda involves longitudinal studies tracking resilience capacities and their evolution over time in response to shifting socio-political contexts and intervention outcomes. Such research promises to unpack the complex causal pathways underpinning systemic change, while participatory action research (PAR) methods could involve youth and stakeholders as co-creators of solutions, ensuring reflective practice and iterative adaptation of development models.
In tandem with these strategic shifts, the study stresses the reinforcement of institutional support mechanisms essential to fostering youth resilience at scale. Investment in quality education, accessible healthcare, and robust technological infrastructure, particularly in climate-vulnerable zones, is prioritized. Equally vital are reforms in land ownership and financial regulations, designed to dismantle barriers that exacerbate youth precariousness. Combating corruption and governance deficits is underscored as fundamental, given its corrosive effect on trust and institutional effectiveness.
In sum, Meem and Hossain’s eclectic framework represents a sophisticated synthesis of resilience theory, intersectionality, and development praxis tailored for emerging economies’ youth. Their work not only challenges prevailing paradigms but offers a comprehensive blueprint for scholars, policymakers, and practitioners seeking to harness the demographic dividend through equitable, transformative youth empowerment. As emerging economies confront escalating global challenges, this research provides a timely, urgently needed roadmap for sustainable and inclusive youth-driven developmental futures.
Subject of Research: Resilience capacities of youth populations for transformational development in emerging economies, with a focus on multidimensional vulnerability perspectives and intervention frameworks.
Article Title: Resilience capacities of youth population for transformational development in emerging economies: in search of an eclectic framework.
Article References:
Meem, J.J., Hossain, M.K. Resilience capacities of youth population for transformational development in emerging economies: in search of an eclectic framework. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 12, 1692 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05953-y
Image Credits: AI Generated
