Towards a coordinated, strategic approach and accompanying flexibility in implementation.
We are now more than halfway through the ‘European Year of Youth,’ and there is, on the political and institutional stages, an international silence instead of a deafening crescendo concerning the situation of NEETs. Perhaps not silence, but stasis. How much longer can the smokescreens of a pandemic, the Russia-Ukraine conflict and spiralling inflation be used as excuses for the lack of integrated, positive action to improve the lot of youth categorised under the NEET sobriquet?
The PR machinery of the EU and UN have been in overdrive in what amounts to defensive arguments or, at best, displays of strong intent. Young people not in Education, not in Employment or Training continue to be the focus of increasing attention from academics and policymakers. The alarming levels of youth unemployment in several European Union countries, as well as the increasing NEET rate, which reached a peak after the 2008 economic crisis, led to a concerted European response, marked by good intentions. As part of this response, the Youth Guarantee (YG) initiative was launched in 2013, aiming to ensure that everyone aged 15 to 24 would have an opportunity of education, employment, or training. So far, so good.
Past studies suggested that the implementation of the YG at the European Members States faced many challenges and downsides related to the lower levels of NEETs’ involvement in the proposed projects/activities (Tosun, 2017), a mismatch between the measures implemented and the real needs of NEETs (Tosun & Shore, 2017), as well as to the diversity among NEETs (e.g., in terms of education and attainment, gender, immigrant background, geographic disparities) (Simões, 2018)
The NEET concept has been widely used as an indicator to inform youth-oriented policies on employability, education, training and also social inclusion in the EU Member States since 2010. However, NEETs emerged as one of the most vulnerable groups following the 2008–2013 recession. Youth unemployment soared above 40% in many EU countries, highlighting how young people are more vulnerable to economic recession than other age groups.
The major concern now is how these young people will again be affected by the economic fallout from COVID-19 and the current cost of living crisis. The statistics scream the realities. In 2021, 14.5 % of young women aged 15–29 in the EU were NEETs, while the corresponding share among young men was 2.7 percentage points lower, at 11.8 %. The proportion of 15-29-year-olds in the EU neither in employment nor in education and training in 2021 ranged from 5.5 % in the Netherlands to 23.1 % in Italy.
Eurofound carried out an online survey on Living, working and COVID-19 from April– July 2020 and February–March 2021 to establish the initial impact of the pandemic on the lives of EU citizens. Their findings revealed that young people in Europe are feeling the strong impact of pandemic restrictions as they cope with the lowest levels of mental well-being and high levels of loneliness. Young men also appear most affected by job loss in the current crisis.
A new EU Youth Strategy was adopted in 2018 and sets out a framework for cooperation with Member States on their youth policies for the period 2019–2027. The strategy focuses on three core areas of action, centred around the words ‘engage, connect, empower’. Meanwhile, COVID-19 is had a grave impact on apprenticeships and training. To aid the economic recovery from the pandemic, on 1 July 2020 the Commission launched a Youth Employment Support package to provide a ‘bridge to jobs’ for the next generation. The Commission put forward a proposal for a Council Recommendation on ‘A Bridge to Jobs – Reinforcing the Youth Guarantee’, to replace the 2013 Recommendation. It extends the age range covered by the Youth Guarantee from age 24 to 29.
What is missing in all this is a coordinated, strategic approach and accompanying flexibility in implementation. There have been good ideas forwarded:
- Mapping and trackingNEETs can enable a better understanding of the characteristics of NEETs at a macro level and where they are primarily located, thus allowing for more targeted measures at the micro level. The characteristics of the NEET population are very diverse and hence the approach to reaching out to and engaging with them varies across Member States.
- Developing a strategic approachto outreach at national level helps ensure consistency, coordination and common standards. Overarching national strategies with a flexible local aspect to delivery help to ensure that the activities can be responsive to the situation on the ground and deliver the services needed.
- Early intervention and preventionare primordial to help avoid young people from becoming inactive and distancing themselves from the labour market. Outreach professionals can work with local schools to identify pupils at risk and take preventative measures to ensure that they receive timely support to avoid them becoming hard-to-reach youth in the future. ‘Early warning systems,’ with attendant early advice and guidance for potential early school leavers can prevent young people from becoming disillusioned and dropping out.
- Trackingyoung people on the journey from education to employment demands a coordinated and integrated approach. Inclusive multi-agency partnerships play an important part in delivering appropriate methods to identify, reach out to, engage and activate NEETs and these partnerships need to be delivered in a co-ordinated way to ensure that young people do not get ‘lost’ within a system.
- Strong and formalised co-operationand information/data sharing between all stakeholders is critical to ensure that young people are not falling through the cracks.
There is so much good work being done by all of you, with your pertinent projects in this sector financed by the EEA and Norway Grants Funds for Youth Employment. You continue to work at the coalface of the different plights and injustices. This work deserves higher recognition and reward, not for self-gratification and kudos, but to make that work visible and valuable as the basis for a sustained, realistic approach to the highest levels. I have often called for a harmonised, integrated advocacy exercise, aimed at the institutional and political powers to help develop a strategic, coordinated, comprehensive approach to alleviating the NEETs different dilemmas. Perhaps the second half of the European Year of Youth is the time for such a campaign.
Thomas McGrath
