Do Youth Employment Programs Improve Labor Market Outcomes? A Systematic Review
Jochen Kluve (),
Olga Susana Puerto (),
David Robalino,
Jose Romero,
Friederike Rother (),
Jonathan Stöterau (),
Felix Weidenkaff () and
Marc J. Witte ()
Additional contact information
Jochen Kluve: KfW Development Bank
Olga Susana Puerto: Youth Employment Network (UN, ILO, World Bank)
Friederike Rother: World Bank
Jonathan Stöterau: RWI
Felix Weidenkaff: ILO International Labour Organization
Marc J. Witte: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
No 10263, IZA Discussion Papers from Institute of Labor Economics (IZA)
Abstract:
This study reviews the evidence on the impact of youth employment programs on labor market outcomes. The analysis looks at the effectiveness of various interventions and the factors that influence program performance including country context, targeted beneficiaries, program design and implementation, and type of evaluation. We identify 113 counterfactual impact evaluations covering a wide range of methodologies, interventions, and countries. Using meta-analysis methods, we synthesize the evidence based on 2,259 effect sizes (Standardized Mean Differences, or SMD) and the statistical significance of 3,105 treatment effect estimates (Positive and Statistically Significant, or PSS). Overall, we find that just more than one-third of evaluation results from youth employment programs implemented worldwide show a significant positive impact on labor market outcomes – either employment rates or earnings. In general, programs have been more successful in middle- and low-income countries; this may be because these programs' investments are especially helpful for the most vulnerable population groups – low-skilled, low-income – that they target. We also conjecture that the more-recent programs might have benefited from innovations in design and implementation. Moreover, in middle and low income countries, skills training and entrepreneurship programs seem to have had a higher impact. This does not imply, however, that those programs should be strictly preferred to others; much depends on the needs of beneficiaries and program design. In high-income countries, the role of intervention type is less decisive – much depends on context and how services are chosen and delivered, a result that holds across country types. We find strong evidence that programs that integrate multiple interventions are more likely to succeed because they are better able to respond to the different needs of beneficiaries. We also find evidence about the importance of profiling and follow-up systems in determining program performance, and some evidence about the importance of incentive systems for services providers.
Keywords: impact evaluations; active labor market policy; youth employment; systematic review; meta-analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: E24 J21 J48 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 69 pages
Date: 2016-10
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-edu, nep-ent, nep-lma and nep-mac
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (26)
Published - published as 'Do youth employment programs improve labor market outcomes? A quantitative review' in: World Development, 2019, 114, 237 - 253
Downloads: (external link)
https://docs.iza.org/dp10263.pdf (application/pdf)
Related works:
Working Paper: Do Youth Employment Programs Improve Labor Market Outcomes? A Systematic Review (2016) 
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:iza:izadps:dp10263
Ordering information: This working paper can be ordered from
IZA, Margard Ody, P.O. Box 7240, D-53072 Bonn, Germany
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in IZA Discussion Papers from Institute of Labor Economics (IZA) IZA, P.O. Box 7240, D-53072 Bonn, Germany. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Holger Hinte ().