Youth-driven evidence can reframe Europe’s response to AI

Strasbourg has a unique way of making democracy feel tangible whether through its history or its symbolic role as a bridge between two nations, German and French, once at war.

During this year’s World Forum for Democracy, held under the theme “Democracy at Risk: How Can We Revive It?”, the Council of Europe turned the city into a chamber for ideas, anxieties, and competing visions of the future. Among policymakers, researchers, and civil servants, young people stood out.

Across panels, labs, and hallway conversations, the topic of AI prevailed. What youth participants consistently brought was the thing that Europe’s approach to AI is in need: evidence grounded in reality. Through youth-led research, civic-tech experimentation, and grounded experiences, they showed how Europe might rebuild trust and reshape governance in an AI-enabled age.

This piece highlights those insights particularly from Debating Europe’s youth research and from initiatives like Parliament.fyi (Austria) and Open Cities Lab (South Africa) to show how youth-driven evidence can inform a more democratic, human-centred AI strategy.

Debating Europe’s recent surveys across young people, led by Alessandra Cardaci, the unit’s Head of Programs, show that young Europeans do not fall neatly into categories of “AI optimists” or “AI alarmists.” Instead: “The emotions are quite mixed. Across Europe, young people express a combination of curiosity, optimism, and concern, but there’s no single dominant feeling..”

This complexity matters. It challenges political narratives that frame young people as either blindly enthusiastic about AI or paralysed by risk.

A striking finding: Three-quarters of respondents in Italy, France, and Poland say their political opinions remain unaffected by AI-generated content, whereas 41% of young Danes acknowledge an influence. The contrast reveals how context and media cultures shape AI perception more than generational clichés.

“Across the board, ‘using AI’ to counter societal divisions is the least popular idea. Youth are cautious about over-reliance on technology to solve complex social problems,” Cardaci notes.

Diversely, participants in the same survey by Debating Europe, overwhelmingly choose improving education as their first line of defence against societal divisions(from 39% in Denmark to a striking 82% in Germany).

One moment at the Forum captured the gap between institutional language and lived experience: a young participant bluntly asking an AI founder from Indonesia, “So, what exactly is your business model?”, a question too often left unasked in official settings.

Cardaci summarises this difference: “Young people tend to be very honest about their uncertainty… Many feel undereducated or under-informed.”

And that honesty shapes what they demand: education, including democratic literacy, participation, not symbolic consultation, regulation, grounded in fairness and transparency.

Across the countries surveyed (Poland, France, Denmark, Germany, Italy) the message is consistent: young Europeans are demanding meaningful inclusion.

A quote from a Polish survey participant asked about her civic engagement motivation highlights that ‘’I would be motivated to vote if I felt my vote had a real impact on the future of my country’’.

Despite engagement, young perspectives are still marginalised in long-term policymaking. “Housing, healthcare, pensions, digital skills, and future-of-work policies rarely fully integrate youth input,” Cardaci explains.

This democratic gap becomes even more problematic as AI begins to shape labour markets, information flows, and access to public services. Youth-led evidence offers a way to close that gap, taking the shape of governance infrastructure.

1. Parliament.fyi (Austria): Turning politics into public knowledge

Co-founded by Christina Helf, Parliament.fyi makes Austrian parliamentary processes understandable and accessible, especially for young people.

At WFD, Helf explained how the platform uses AI (ChatGPT-4) to analyse more than 10,000 parliamentary speeches and 900 resolutions, identifying trends, arguments, and political dynamics across legislative cycles. This provides clear, digestible summaries of complex political debates.

In a context where AI often fuels confusion, Parliament.fyi does the opposite: it brings clarity, transparency, and political education back into citizens’ hands.

“We do everything with open data that the national Parliament and the city of Vienna makes available, but we would like to get access to more data,” Helf notes, highlighting a common challenge for civic-tech innovators.

The platform also serves as a valuable educational tool supporting teachers, students, politicians and researchers in making sense of political processes. They recently celebrated its 1 year-old anniversary.

2. Open Cities Lab (South Africa): Community-driven data for democracy

Represented in Strasbourg by product manager Ella Alcock, Open Cities Lab brings an approach Europe urgently needs: data tools co-created with communities, not imposed on them.

Their participatory governance platforms and community dashboards show how AI and civic data can: improve service delivery, expand local participation, and redistribute power rather than centralising it.

In a Europe grappling with trust deficits, Open Cities Lab demonstrates a simple principle: design technology around real community needs, not institutional assumptions.

This directly mirrors Cardaci’s findings: youth support AI when it enables inclusion and transparency, and reject it when it reinforces inequality or opacity.

In a recent project, OCL co-creates a more faire water and electricity tariff for the citizens in collaboration with the eThekwini Municipality, the largest city in the Kwa-Zulu Natal province and the third largest city in South Africa. Using real consumption data, the tool allows cities to test different pricing options, compare their impact on households and businesses, and balance affordability with financial sustainability.

When organisations ask young people for input, their response is consistent and urgent: “They want participatory democracy that goes beyond voting.”

They are weary of consultations that produce no change, advisory boards with no influence, and decision-making spaces designed without them in mind.

Yet from Vienna to Durban, Strasbourg made one thing clear:young innovators are already building the democratic tools institutions say they lack.

The World Forum for Democracy reminded us that Europe’s most valuable AI resource is not regulation or technology, but its young people.

If Europe wants AI that strengthens democracy rather than undermines it, the path is clear:

• invest in youth-led evidence
• fund civic-tech solutions that scale participation
• embed young people in decision-making spaces
• treat digital rights and democratic skills as public goods

Most importantly, youth-led initiatives show that democracy does not need to fear AI. It simply needs to retain agency over it. Young people are ready to help build a transparent, participatory, and human-centred digital future. The question is whether Europe will give them the power to lead it.