Gender Inequality in Youth Labour Market Transitions: Evidence from Kazakhstan

2026

Full text Open access: Hybrid Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.47703/ejgs.v3i1.108
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Youth unemployment remains one of the key structural problems of the transition economy, shaped by institutional, regional, and socio-economic factors. The aim of the study is to assess differences in the results of youth participation in the labor market of Kazakhstan, with an emphasis on the dynamics of unemployment and the NEET (hereinafter – youth not engaged in education, employment or training). The methodological base includes methods of descriptive statistics, comparative and correlation analysis using data from the Bureau of National Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the International Labor Organization and the World Bank for 2020-2025. The results show a steady presence of differences in labor market participation. The youth unemployment rate decreased from 7.1% to 3.1% for men and from 7.9% to 3.3–3.5% for women. At the same time, the share of NEET decreased from 5.8% to 5.5% for men and from 7.5% to 6.2% for women, but the gap persists throughout the period. Regional analysis shows higher unemployment rates in the southern regions (Turkestan: 6.9% for men and 7.8% for women; Shymkent: 6.5% and 7.3%) compared to large cities (Almaty: 4.7% and 5.4%; Astana: 4.5% and 5.2%). The results indicate that the identified differences are persistent and are due to structural factors, including the discrepancy between the education system and the requirements of the labor market, the prevalence of informal employment and regional differentiation.