Search

One of the biggest challenges currently facing European society is the dramatically high level of youth unemployment. Commonly, political solutions and strategies can be found in those countries that have been able to keep youth unemployment low in spite of the financial and economic crises. Austria is such a case. On the basis of European Union Member State data, the article gives a multifactorial explanation of youth unemployment and asks whether these factors can explain relatively low youth unemployment in Austria. With the country's 'youth safety net' presented in detail, it is shown that active labour market policy reduces youth unemployment in Austria. The article also points out the limitations of cross-country comparisons of youth unemployment rates and proposes the use of a greater number of indicators. Finally, the article argues for economic policies to stimulate demand, which have to be based on a political and social commitment to full employment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Due to the limited relevance of traditional labour market indicators for youth unemployment, researchers and policy-makers focus on an indicator known as not in employment, education or training (‘NEET’). The underlying assumption is that NEET indicates young people with a high risk of social exclusion. For political solutions, it is necessary to consider the heterogeneity of the NEET group. This paper examines the socio-structural attributes that characterise NEET youth in Austria, the main reasons for the NEET situation and whether NEET status, once assigned to an individual, is permanent or temporary. Latent cluster analyses identify seven subgroups of NEET youth, all of which face different challenges. The data source used is the Austrian Labour Force Survey (micro census) from the years 2008–2010, and young people between 16 and 24 years old are analysed. A panel data-set is created to analyse NEET permanence. Drawing on the identified reasons for a permanent NEET situation, this paper argues for more job and training opportunities that fit the needs of young people, especially those with illnesses. Finally, this study asks whether the definition of NEET should be adapted to exclude young mothers with care responsibilities who are not actively looking for a job. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]