This paper argues that policy agendas and proposals about social change and wellbeing are evident in the implementation of applied theatre projects through technologies such as evaluation practices and funding applications and effect public discourse about who the participants are and why they are or are not 'being well'. Like public policy, applied theatre for social change cannot 'get to work' without first establishing a problem that needs to be solved. We consider the ways in which the discourses of funders, governments and communities call on applied theatre practitioners to frame particular issues and/or groups of people as problematic and the implications of doing so within neoliberalised policy contexts. This issue relates to existing debates about the extent to which the conceptions and models of change that underpin many forms of applied theatre are affected by funders and governments. This paper engages with this critique as it explores current donor and public policy discourses related to well-being in Australia and New Zealand. It draws on specific policy documents and funding schemes in the two contexts to discuss the mechanics and politics of 'change' as a key character in the work of applied theatre and performance in each country. The paper attempts to understand the way the field might navigate systems, technologies, policies, and public understandings of wellbeing, social change, personal change, and social good to produce work with and for participants within neoliberal structures.

INTRODUCTION:Emerging from a flourishing field of practice overseas, the growing evidence base for participatory arts engagement demonstrates numerous benefits for young people's health and wellbeing. In Aotearoa New Zealand, participatory arts engagement is under-valued and under-resourced despite local practice examples suggesting that it deserves further attention. METHODS:Focusing on a case example from an Auckland-based creative arts participation project geared to promote the positive mental health and wellbeing of marginalised young people, two focus groups were conducted to explore how participants felt arts engagement contributed to their wellbeing. Participatory arts activities were integrated within the focus group process to enable creative expression of their voices. FINDINGS:The youth voices unearthed through this research indicate that an arts-based approach can be used as a powerful tool in promoting youth wellbeing and this offers a significant promise for addressing local policy priorities. CONCLUSION:We suggest that participatory arts engagement deserves further investment and research to explore further application in social practice in Aotearoa New Zealand.

No abstract