Bringing young people into productive work is a key labor market challenge in both developing and developed economies, and a multitude of labor market interventions have been implemented to assist vulnerable youths. To assess whether these interventions have succeeded in improving young people's labor market outcomes, this study systematically and quantitatively reviews 113 impact evaluations of youth employment programs worldwide. Of a total of 3,105 effect estimates we extract from these studies, one-third are positive significant. The unconditional average effect size across all programs is small, both for employment-related outcomes (Hedges' g = 0.05, SE = 0.02) and earningsrelated outcomes (Hedges' g = 0.04, SE = 0.02). We analyze correlates of success in a meta-regression framework. We find that (i) programs are more successful in middle-and low-income countries; (ii) the intervention type is less important than design and delivery;(iii) programs integrating multiple services are more successful; (iv) profiling of beneficiaries, individualized follow-up systems and incentives for services providers matter; and (vii) impacts are of larger magnitude in the long-term. Some of these findings provide new and important insights about the design and delivery of interventions, whereas others confirm those of previous reviews. Ultimately, our findings provide practitioners with an improved evidence base about how certain design features contribute to successful youth employment programs in different contexts.

This Campbell systematic review examines the impact of youth employment interventions on the labour market outcomes of young people and business performance. The review summarises findings from 113 reports of 107 interventions in 31 countries. Included studies had to: (1) evaluate an active labour market programme (ALMP) which was designed for ‐ or targeted primarily ‐ young women and men aged between 15 and 35; (2) have an experimental and quasi‐experimental design; and (3) report at least one eligible outcome variable measuring employment, earnings, or business performance. The evidence base covers 107 interventions in 31 countries, including 55 using skills training, 15 with entrepreneurship promotion, ten using employment services and 21 using subsidized employment. Overall, youth employment interventions increase the employment and earnings of those youth who participate in them. But the effect is small with a lot of variation between programmes. There are significant effects for entrepreneurship promotion and skills training, but not for employment services and subsidised employment. Impacts on earnings were also positive but small and highly variable across programmes. Entrepreneurship promotion and skills training were effective in increasing earnings, while effects of employment services and subsidised employment were negligible or statistically insignificant. There is limited evidence of the effects of youth employment programmes on business performance outcomes, and the effect size was not statistically significant. In addition to the variation in impact across different types of programmes, some variation can be explained by country context, intervention design, and profile and characteristics of programme beneficiaries. The impacts of ALMPs are greater in magnitude in low‐ or middle‐income countries than in high‐income countries. Programmes targeting the most disadvantaged youth were associated with bigger programme effects, particularly for earnings outcomes, and effects were slightly larger for women than for men. Plain language summary Active labour market programmes for youth increase employment and earnings. Effects vary between programmes and contextThe evidence suggests that investing in youth through active labour market measures, such as offering skills training and entrepreneurship promotion, may pay off with higher earnings. The review in briefYouth are disproportionately victims of unemployment and low‐quality jobs. Active labour market programmes increase earnings and employment. But the effects vary greatly between programmes’ type, design and context. What is this review about?Youth unemployment is much greater than the average unemployment rate for adults, in some cases over three times as high. Today, over 73 million young people are unemployed worldwide. Moreover, two out of five young people in the labour force are either working but poor or are unemployed. The youth employment challenge is not only about job creation, but especially about enhancing the quality of jobs for youth.Th...

No abstract

The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent.

This paper reviews international experiences with the implementation of wage subsidies and develops a policy framework to guide their design in developing countries. The evidence suggests that, if the goal is only to create jobs, wage subsidies are unlikely to be an effective instrument. Wage subsidies, however, could have a role in helping first-time job seekers or those who have gone through long-periods of unemployment or inactivity, to gain some work experience and in the process build skills and improve their employability. If these ?learning? effects are large enough, the social benefits of wage subsidies could outweigh their cost. When wage subsidies are designed with these objectives in mind, there are important implications in terms of eligibility and targeting, how the subsidy is set, its duration, and the types of conditionalities on employers and beneficiaries. Given uncertainty regarding their impact, in all cases, programs should be piloted and evaluated prior to full scale implementation. JELs: J2, J3, J6