Determinants of Youth Unemployment in Kazakhstan and the Dynamics of the School-to-Work Transition

This study is devoted to a comprehensive analysis of the determinants of youth unemployment in Kazakhstan and the specifics of the transition from education to sustainable employment for young people. The aim of the work is to identify key structural, institutional and socio-economic factors that affect youth employment, as well as to assess the dynamics of Not in Employment, Education or Training (hereinafter – NEET) and employment indicators from 2020 to 2044. The methodological basis includes descriptive statistics, comparative analysis and correlation analysis. Initial data were obtained from official sources such as the Bureau of National Statistics of Kazakhstan, International Labor Organization, and World Bank, disaggregated by gender, region, and level of education. Results showed that between 2019 and 2039, the youth unemployment rate decreased from 7% to 6%, NEET decreased from 6% to 4%, and the proportion of informal employment fell from 18% to 9%.. Young women have consistently higher NEET rates (6.7% in 2024) than men (4.9%). The regions with the highest unemployment rates are Turkestan Oblast and Shymkent, at 7.8% and 7.2% respectively. Educational differences remain significant: the employment rate for young people with a higher education is 78%, compared to only 38.9% for those with basic secondary education. These results confirm the structural nature of youth unemployment, resulting from a mismatch between graduates' skills and job market demand, as well as regional imbalances and limited entry-level positions. Future research paths involve the development of more sophisticated quantitative models to evaluate government programs and their impact on job creation.  

1. Acemoglu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2020). Robots and jobs: Evidence from US labor markets. Journal of Political Economy, 128(6), 2188–2244. https://doi.org/10.1086/705716

2. Autor, D. H., Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2003). The skill content of recent technological change: An empirical exploration. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1279–1333. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355303322552801

3. Banerji, A., Newhouse, D., & Paci, P. (2020). Youth employment in sub-Saharan Africa: Progress and prospects. World Bank Research Observer, 35(1), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkz006

4. Bell, D. N., & Blanchflower, D. G. (2011). Young people and the Great Recession. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 27(2), 241–267. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grr011

5. Bell, D. N., & Blanchflower, D. G. (2019). Underemployment in the United States and Europe. Labour Economics, 57, 38–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019793919886527

6. Card, D., Kluve, J., & Weber, A. (2018). What works? A meta-analysis of active labor market program evaluations. Journal of the European Economic Association, 16(2), 894–931. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvx028

7. Carcillo, S., Fernández, R., Königs, S., & Minea, A. (2015). NEET youth in the aftermath of the crisis: Challenges and policies. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, 164, 1–54. https://doi.org/10.1787/5js6363503f6-en

8. Cho, Y., & Honorati, M. (2014). Entrepreneurship programs in developing countries: A metaregression analysis. Labour Economics, 28, 110–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2014.03.011

9. de Haas, H., & Fokkema, T. (2011). The effects of integration and transnational ties on international return migration intentions. Demographic Research, 25, 755–782. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2011.25.24

10. Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2017). The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019

11. Furlong, A. (2006). Not a very NEET solution: Representing problematic labour market transitions among early school-leavers. Work, Employment and Society, 20(3), 553–569. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017006067001

12. McGuinness, S., Pouliakas, K., & Redmond, P. (2018). Skills mismatch: Concepts, measurement and policy approaches. Journal of Economic Surveys, 32(4), 985–1015. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12254

13. Pastore, F. (2018). Why is youth unemployment so high and different across countries? IZA World of Labor, 420, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.15185/izawol.420

14. Quintini, G., & Manfredi, T. (2009). Going separate ways? School-to-work transitions in the United States and Europe. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, 90, 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1787/221717700447

15. Scarpetta, S., Sonnet, A., & Manfredi, T. (2010). Rising youth unemployment during the crisis: How to prevent negative long-term consequences. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, 106, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1787/5kmh79zb2mmv-en

16. van Deursen, A. J., & van Dijk, J. A. (2019). The first-level digital divide shifts from inequalities in physical access to inequalities in material access. New Media & Society, 21(2), 354–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818797082