TheNEETphenomenon.Acomparativeanalysis.

GiuliaAssirelli

Abstract
TheNEETcategory,firstadoptedinEnglandinthemid90s,hasgeneratedagreatinterestinthelast
years'Italianandsupranationalresearch.IthasbeenonefocusnotonlyofISTATandCNEL,butalso
of EC and OECD reports, attracting public, political and journalistic attention. The NEET group
includes those young people (aged 1524 or 1529, depending on the definition adopted) Not in
education, employment or training, i.e. unemployed and inactive (for reasons other than study)
individuals.Theaimofusingthiscategoryisoutliningyouthdiseasebyauniquemeasure,inorderto
facilitatethequantitativecomprehensionoftheirexclusionfromdifferentlabourmarkets.Thepurpose
ofthisresearchistodeepentheNEET argument, mainlyin twodirections.Ononeside, Iwilltryto
exacerbatethecrosscountrydifferencessearchingthedeterminantsnotonlysociodemographic,but
alsoconcerninginstitutional,economicalandpoliticalsettingsoftheNEETphenomenon.Forthis
part of the research I'm going to adopt crosssectional methods and use LFS data provided by
EUROSTAT. On the other side, using EUROSILC longitudinal data and making an event history
analysis, I willtrytoidentifytheconsequencesof aNEETperiodover thefuturecareer pathways of
individuals,againtryingtofocusondifferencesamongtheEuropeancountries.

WhoareNEETs?EvidencefromUKandEurope
ThecategoryofNEETappearedforthefirsttimeinEngland,inthemid90s,asacontributeto
identifyingnewassessmentcriteriaofyoungpeople'svulnerabilityinthelabourmarket,greatly
increasedbythefactthatyouthunemploymenthadquietlydisappearedbythepublicdebateand
politicalpractice.
Inlate'80stheBritishwelfaresystemhadbeendrasticallyshrunkattheexpenseofyoungpeople,
cuttingunemploymentbenefitsforthemajorityofindividualsundertheageof18andreducing
theavailabilityofsubsidiesfortheunder25.
Thischangeinbenefit'spoliciesnotonlyimpliedthatyoungpeople missingapaidjobwere
deprivedofanykindofState'ssupport,butalsothattheirunemploymentstatewasnolonger
acknowledged(Furlong,2006).

It was in this context that studies on the subject began to proliferate, seeking alternative
definitionsallowingtorecognizetheconditionofweaknessinwhichmanyyoungpeoplefound
themselves.
ThetermobtaininggreaterconsensusinthescientificcommunitywastheacronymNEET,staying
for"NotinEducation,EmploymentorTraining".
Usedinanofficialdocumentforthefirsttimein1999,inthereport"BridgingtheGap"(Social
ExclusionUnit,1999),ittriedtoidentifythoseindividualsmostatriskofnotparticipatinginthe
schoolsystem,norinthelabourmarket.
Thereport'saimwastoestimatetheeconomicandsocialcostsinducedbyyoungpeoplelivingin
theNEETstatus,andpossibleinterventionstosupporttheminthechallengingtransitionfrom
schooltowork.
TheNEETcategoryincludedpeoplebetween16and18notholdingajob,notinvolvedinthe
educationalsystem,norinanyotherformoftraining.Thesecriteriamatched9%oftheyouthin
thisagerange,accordingtotheSocialExclusionUnit'sreport.
ThedecisionofdefiningNEETthiswayreflectedBritishschoolsystem'speculiarities:inEngland,
in fact, compulsory education ends at 16, then young people have to opt between further
educationorenteringthelabourmarket.Theperiodfrom16to18yearsis,clearly,themost
criticalandproblematicforwhatconcernstheabilitytoeffectivelyfacethischoice.
The report highlightedthat factors most frequently associated with nonparticipation referred
eithertoindividualexperienceineducation(badexperiencesatschool,learningdifficulties,lack
ofmotivation),ortofamiliarstatus(NEETscomemorefrequentlyfrompoor,needyfamilies,
holdinglowhumanandsocialcapital.).
Thereportalsoobservedthatwomen,individualsfromethnicminorities,peoplesufferingfrom
physicalormentaldisabilitiesweremoreatriskofnonparticipating.
ItalsoshowedtheconnectionbetweennonparticipationandthestructuralweaknessofBritish
educationalsystem.
BridgingtheGapalsostressedthenegativeconsequences,notonlyeconomic,thatbeingNEET
canentailfortheindividual,hisfamilyandthewholesocialsystem:thehastyconclusionof
individualeducation,followedbyaperiodofexclusionfromlabourmarket,adverselyaffects
subsequentjobperformanceandsalary.
Moreover, it highlighted the sense of estrangement and alienation frequently experienced by
youngNEET,notparticipatingtopeergroup'stypicalactivities.
Again, reference was made to the economic costs burdening on NEET's families, forced to
prolongedmaintenanceofchildren,withnopossibilityofrelyingonothersourcesofincome.
In conclusion, talking of social costs in the broadest sense, the report remarked the loss of

productivity for the entire economic system, resulting from the non occupation of these
individualsand,whatismore,themorefrequentinvolvementoftheseindividuals,excludedby
definition,indeviantorcriminalactivities,withtheconsequentimpactonStatebudget.
Following thepublication of Bridging the Gap, a flourishing multidisciplinary researchfield
begantodevelopinEngland,whosegoalsandresultsfittedessentiallytothoseofgovernment.
The main theme of this researches, about which authors haven't found great consensus, is
interpretingtheconsequencesofhavingbeenNEETonfuturejobandsalaryperformance.
If,generallyspeaking,researchersdoagreethatindividualsthathavebeenNEETwillhavemore
difficultiesinfittingwellinlabourmarket,andprobablywillachievelowereconomicresults,no
researchappearstogiveanunequivocalanswertothefollowingquestion:havingbeenNEETand
achievinglowerjobandsalaryresultsthanpeoplenothavingbeenNEET,arecorrelatedbecause
thetwofactsareinsomewaydependentonotherproblematicfactors?Ordoesexperimentinga
periodasNEETcreateanadditionalsourceofdisadvantage?
InthefirstyearsofthenewmillenniumtheNEETthemebegantobesystematicallytackledat
Europeanlevel,thankstostatisticselaboratedbysupranationalinstitutions,suchasOECDand
EuropeanCommission,whichallowustostudythisissueinacomparativeperspective.
Inrecentyearsboththeinstitutionshavecollected,inseveralcountries,acertainamountofdata
on the phenomenon of young people Not in Education, Employment or Training; adopting a
uniformdefinitionofthecategory.
Thisinnovativecategory,inconjunctionwiththetraditionalonesofunemploymentandinactivity,
givesananswertotheneedofhavingsomemetricof joblessness,whichbestfitsthecurrent
situationofyoungpeople(not)inthelabourmarket.Inthisregard,QuintiniandMartin(2006)
pointoutthat,althoughunemploymentratecontinuestobeanimportantandusefulindicator,
moreandmoreyoungpeoplewhofacedifficultiesenteringemploymenttakerefugeininactivity
(consideredhere,ofcourse,forreasonsotherthanstudy).
IntheseinternationalstudiesthecategoryofNEETisconsideredmuchwiderthanitwasinthe
firstUKresearches:OECDreferstotheagegroup1524,whiletheEuropeanCommissionextends
the definition of NEET phenomenon (and, more generally, the integration of youth into the
labourmarket)toindividualsof29years.
The adoptionof such abroad agerangesallows, ofcourse, the analysis of the phenomenon
regardless of the specificity of the educational system and labour market structure in each
country.
Furthermore,comparedtoBritishresearches,thisdefinitionbroadensthehorizonofanalysis:the
focusisnolongeronlyontheperiodimmediatelyfollowingtheendofcompulsoryeducation,

alsoconsideredapeculiarlycriticalmomentinayoungperson'slife;rather,itseekstoprovidea
measureoftheoveralllevelofdiscomfortsufferedbytoday'syouthinthehardtransitionfrom
schooltowork.
EspeciallyinterestingisthestudysponsoredbyOECDin2006,ledbyQuintiniandMartin;they
showthat,averagingtheconsideredcountries,theNEETgroupcountsforabout17%of young
adults (2024 years) and 8% of teenagers (1519 years), obviously related to the compulsory
educationlegislation.Italy,withGreeceandsomeeastern Europeancountries,ranksabovethe
averageofOECDcountriesforbothagegroups(about10%ofNEETteenagersandnearly25%
amongolderpeople);ontheotherside,northern Europeancountries(Denmark,Norwayand
Sweden)showthelowestNEETrates.Finally,statisticspresentedbytheEuropeanCommission
(2007),showapercentageof18%NEETamongyoungpeoplebetween25and29years,asan
averageforthewholeEU.
The observation of such a high portion of individuals, even among older people, who are
excludedfromboththeeducationalandlabourarenas,furtherlysupportstheassertionthatthe
NEETcategoryisatriskofsocialexclusionasthedifficultyoffindingajobcaneveninduce
someindividualstoabandonthelabourmarketandthereforeshouldbeafocuspointofpolicy
making.
QuintiniandMartinalsoanalyzethepersistenceintheNEETstatus:consideringthe1524age
range,theycomparethenumberofindividualswhohavebeenNEETatleastoncefrom1997to
2001tothatofthosewhohavebeencontinuallyNEETinthesameperiod.Theratioofthesetwo
percentagesprovidesameasureofturnoverintheNEETgroup.Thetwoauthorsemphasizethe
importanceofsupplementingthecrosssectionalanalysiswithastudyoflongitudinaldata:itcan
bearguedthatifaperiodofexclusionfromthelabourmarketattheendofstudiesisanormal
experienceformanyyoungpeople, therealproblem coreisinthedurationoftheexclusion
(Quintini,MartinandMartin,2007).Theiranalysisshowsthatthisconditionismostlytransitory,
althoughyoungMediterraneanpeoplesufferadegreeofdisadvantage(forexample,theshareof
"alwaysNEET"risesto30%inItalyand20%inGreece).
BoththementionedreportsandtheanalysisconductedbyOECDandEuropeanCommissionover
theyears,highlightsomeofthefactorsmosteasilyrelatedtotheconditionofNEETinallthe
considered countries. In particular, they point out the major disadvantage suffered by young
women,individualswhohaveabandonedstudiesearly,orwhohavelowereducationlevels,and
byforeigncitizens.
Clearly, the averages often hide significant differences between the considered countries: in
SouthernandEasternEurope,infact,allreportsdealingwiththisissuenotonlyshowhigher
percentagesofNEET,butalsogreatergapsbetweenmenandwomen,nativesandforeigners,

moreorlesseducated people.Alowergradeofyouthexclusionisfoundinsteadinnorthern
Europe.

Researchquestions,dataandmethods
But which are the characteristics shared by NEETs? Are they similar in different European
countries,orshouldtheexclusionof youngpeopleindifferent countriesbeimputedtolocal
problems?
The analysis on Italy, carried on by ISTAT in recent years1 show that the features mostly
associatedwiththeNEETstatewhichcountsabouttwomillionyoungpeoplein2009and2010
are thesameoutlinedbyOECD:theindividualsmostdisadvantagedarewomen,havelow
educationalqualifications,haveforeignnationalityandcomefromfamilieswithloweconomic
andculturalcapital.ThesamedualityseenbetweennorthandsouthEuropeispresentinthe
Italiancontext,whereterritorialdualismaddsuptonationaldisease,sothatsouthernyoung
peoplesuffersmajordisadvantagescomparedtotheirpeersofcentralandnortherndistricts.
ISTAT, as OECD, stresses the negative impact of remaining in the NEET status, over future
employmentchances:longtermNEETrepresentinginItalyawiderfractioncomparedtoother
Europeancountriesaremoreatrisksofsocialexclusion,aslongastheirabilityto(re)enterthe
labourmarketisadverselyaffectedbythedurationoftheirNEETstatus.
Aselfconductedcrosssectionalanalysis, preliminary carriedouton ISTAT2009LabourForce
Survey data, and on ISFOLPLUS data from 20082, shows that although the aforementioned
featuresarecommontoallItalianNEETs,theimpactthatthesefactorshaveoveryoungpeople's
employment conditions has not the same depth for all the population. To better outline this
phenomenon,weneedtomaketwodistinctionsatleast.
First.Conductingseparateanalysisbyage,acleardistinctionappearsamongyoungpeoplefrom
thethreetypicalyouthagegroups,i.e.1519,2024and2529years.Summarizingtheresults,it
couldbearguedthat,intheage1519,genderdifferences,theNorthSouthdivide,thegaps
betweenItalianandforeigncitizensandmoreorlesseducatedindividualsarestillpresent,but
withsubstantiallyreducedrelevance:intheteenagers'grouptheNEETconditionappearstobea
temporaryone,frictional,somehow"physiological",duetoschoolworktransition,whichusually
resolvesinamediumperiodforthosewhochoosenottoprolongtheirstudies.
Amongthe2024ages,theaforementioneddifferencesstarttakingagreaterimportance:thatof
1 See Istat (2010) e Istat (2011).
2 The impact of variables related to family origin and individual educational path has been evaluated using ISFOLPLUS data, in substitution of information missing in ISTAT data sets (not published for privacy reasons).

NEETstillisconfiguredasatemporarycondition,withpossiblymultipleepisodes,mostlydueto
theunemployedfraction.MostNEETofthisage,infact,areyoungpeoplecaughtinaprecarious
labourmarket, whoexperienceseveralepisodesofunemploymentduetoinstabilityofthejobs
theyhold.
Especiallyamongyoungpeoplefrom25to29theabovementionedfactorshaveamajorimpact.
In this age are emerging, especially, the sex differences (particularly important is the female
inactivity opposed to male unemployment), only partially contained by a rise in educational
qualifications.
Second. If you lead separate analysis on the unemployed and inactive NEET groups, further
differencesemerge:whiletheunemploymentcorrelatedfeaturesremainnearlyconstantinallthe
threeagegroups, inactivity seemstobestatisticallyrelatedtoessentiallydifferent factors. In
youngerpeople, disheartenment seemstobe a frequentattitude.Olderpeopleactsomekindof
"decisionmaking":the taking over of family commitmentsisa main contributortostatistical
femaleinactivity.
So,it'sclearthattheamplecategoryofNEET,inItaly,enclosesmanynuances,differentlifepaths
andvariousproblems.
Thefirstquestiontoput,then,iswhetherthesedifferentiationshavethesamerelevanceinother
Europeancountries.WebelievethatadoptingtheNEETcategoryallowsauniquemeasureto
estimateyouthexclusioningeneral,butwecanassumethatthewaysinwhichitshowsupvary
fromcountrytocountry,dependingoninstitutionalandsocioeconomicalfactors,typicalofeach
country.
To answer these questions we could conduct a crosssectional analysis, comparing European
LabourForceSurveydata,collectedbyEUROSTAT.Wecouldchoose,forexampletoanalyzedata
between 2005 and 2009. This could help, on the one hand, pinpointing the common
characteristicsofNEETyoungpeoplethroughoutEuropeandthosewhicharetypicalofcertain
(groupsof)countries. Ontheotherhand,itcouldpermittooutlinetheconsequencesofthe
economicalcycleonyouthemploymentcondition.
Inadditiontoassessingtheimpact,onyouthemploymentstatus,oftheusualsociodemographic
factors,ofthoserelatingtothepersonalandfamiliarexperiences,wemightalsoaskhowthe
frequencyofNEETstatusiscorrelatedtocontextandinstitutionalfactors.
Breen (2005) gives some advice, stating that the performance of young people in the labor
marketmaybeinfluenced,ontheonehand,bythelevelofregulationofthelabormarketitself
and,ontheotherhand,bythedegreetowhichthecountries'educationalinstitutionsareableto
signal to potential employers the skills and competencies of young people seeking (first)
employment.

Aboutthefirstfactor,Breenstressesthatastrongregulationcaninduceaclearsegmentationof
thelabormarket,withinsidersalreadyholdingaprotectedemploymentposition,withreduced
riskofdismissal,opposedtooutsiders,typicallyyoungpeoplelookingfortheirfirstjob.Giventhe
highdismissalcosts,suchrigidityofthelabormarketisgoingtodiscouragejobturnover,thus
generatingasignificantgapbetweenyouthandadulthoodbeyondthehighyouthunemployment
rate. The level of labour market regulation may be represented by data provided by OECD,
named"OverallStrictnessofProtectionAgainstDismissal",whichsumsupthedominantsystem
ofprotectionadoptedbyeachcountry.FollowingPeruginiandSignorelli(2009)wecouldchoose
nottoconsiderthe averageleveloflabourmarketregulation,buttodistinguishbetweenthe
strictnessofregularemploymentprotectionandtheoneoftemporaryemployment.Whileavery
stringentregularemploymentprotectionlegislationcannegativelyaffectsturnover,thediffusion
of temporary contractual options can stimulate flexibility, so to favor the demandsupply
matching.
Abouttherelationshipbetweenlabourmarketandeducationalsystem,Breenshowsthatevenin
particularlyrigidlabourmarkets,good"signaling"abilitywillencourageemployerstohireyoung
peoplelookingfor(first)job,thusreducingthenegativeimpactofthelabourmarketrigidity.
Breen(2005)suggeststhatthesignalingcapacityoftheschoolsystemcouldbemeasuredbythe
fraction of those enrolled in Vocational and Technical Programmes, mixing school and work
basedtraining(datasuppliedbyOECD).
Athirdfactormaybeconsidered,followingamorethantenyearolddebate,aboutthesuggested
eventualitythatovergenerouswelfaresystemswould,infact,discouragejobsearchofpeople
with low income expectations. In other words, the question is whether a fraction of the
differences in the NEET populations in various European countries may be due to varying
opportunitiesallowedbythelocalwelfaresystem.Thislastfactorcouldbeassessedstarting,for
instance,from data,providedby OECD,concerningthepublicunemploymentspending(asa
percentageofGDP).
Anotherfactor concerningthepolicysetting thatcouldbeinsertintheanalysisbutthelist
surelycouldgoonisthepublicexpenditureinactivelabourmarketpolicies,expectedtohavea
positiveeffectontheyouthaccesstolabourmarket(PeruginiandSignorelli,2009).
AfterhavingoutlinedcrosscountrydifferencesrelatedtodeterminantsofNEETstatus,itcouldbe
of significant interest conducting a longitudinal analysis of the NEET phenomenon in a
comparativeperspective.
Suchananalysiscouldbealreadycarriedon,limitedtoyoungItalians,usingtransitionmatrices

from ISTAT, which, while not making up a real panel on Italian population 3, provide useful
informationontheoccupationalmobility.
Inacomparativeperspective,onecouldinsteaduseEUSILCEuropeanUnionmember'sdata,
which,besidesallowingthecomparisonofdifferentcountries,havethefundamentaladvantage
of representing a longer survey (4 years from 2005 to 2008) compared to ISTAT's transition
matrices which provide data for only three years (the first year being covered only by
retrospectiveinformation4).
Wecouldanalyzethedifferentpathsfollowedbyyoungpeoplewho,asaninitialmatteroffact,
areNEET.Wecanimaginethreedifferentlocations:

StayinthestateofNEET;

RepeatedepisodesofNEET;

FinalexitfromtheconditionofNEET.

Aboutthelastpath,weassumetheexistenceoftwomaindifferentoutputspeeds,fastorslow,
dependingonthetimespentinthiscondition.
Wethereforeaskwhetherthecharacteristicsthatinfluencetheprobabilityofbeinginthestateof
NEETorleavingit,andthespeedatwhichthistransitionoccurs,arethesameinallEuropean
countries,orinsomeofthemtheNEETconditiontakestheformofa"trap"inwhichyoung
peoplearelikelytoremainhooked,excludedfromlabourmarketandtheproductionsystem.
We would try to understand whether the NEET condition is only transient or, instead, a
permanentsocialexclusionone.Ifweobserveaprevalenceofthetransientnature,wemightalso
askwhetherthereisacorrelation,andhowmuchstrictitis,betweenthelengthoftheNEET
periodandthesubsequentemploymentandearningschancesofindividuals.
Acomparisonbetweenthetrajectoriesofyoung(ex)NEETpeopleinlabourmarketindifferent
Europeancountries,takingintoaccounttheaforementionedinstitutionalfactors,couldprovide
usefulevidenceofwhichfactorsmaymakeiteasier,ormoredifficult,theawkwardtransitionof
youngEuropeansfromschooltowork.

3 Transition matrices do not contain information pertaining those who change their residence after the first
interview, Actually, they only contain data about those who resided in the same county for the whole duration of
the survey. Therefore, we have evident problems of significance over the whole population, partly relieved by the
low level of territorial mobility registered in Italy.
4 Comparing the employment state at time t0 (year preceding the first wave) and at time t1 and t2 (survey years)
put some problems over method: while the first datum depends only on the self-definition of the polled
individuals, the employment status in the following two years is determined merging subjective (self-declaration)
and objective information, the latter being based on the real job search behavior put in place by the individuals.

Bibliografia
Breen, R. (2005), Explaining CrossNational Variation in Youth Unemployment. Market and
InstitutionalFactors,EuropeanSociologicalReview,21(2):125134.
Bynner,J.andParsons,S.,(2002) SocialExclusionandtheTransitionfromSchooltoWork:The
Case of Young People Not in Education, Employment, or Training NEET, Journal of Vocational
Behavior,60:289309.

Cnel,(2010),Rapportosulmercatodellavoro20092010.
Coles,B.,Hutton,S.,Bradshaw,J.,Craig,G.,Godfrey,C. andJohnson,J.,(2002), Literature
ReviewontheCostsResultingFromSocialExclusionAmongYoungPeopleAged1618,Reporttothe
DfES,SocialPolicyResearchUnit,UniversityofYork,DfES1805.
European Commission, (2007), Employment in Europe, Office for official publications of the
EuropeanCommunities,Luxembourg.
EuropeanCommission,(2010),RecentdevelopmentsintheEU27labourmarketforyoungpeople
aged1529.
Furlong,A.,(2006),NotaVeryNEETSolution:RepresentingProblematicLabourMarketTransitions
AmongEarlySchoolLeavers,Work,EmploymentandSociety,20:553569.
Godfrey,C.,Hutton,S.,Bradshaw,J.,Coles,B.,Craig,G.andJohnson,J.,(2002),Estimatingthe
CostofBeing'NotinEducation,EmploymentorTraining'atAge1618,London:DfEE.
Istance, D., Rees, G. and Williamson, H., (1994), Young People Not in Education, Training or
EmploymentinSouthGlamorgan,Cardiff:SouthGlamorganTrainingandEnterproseCouncil.
Istat,(2010),RapportoAnnualeLasituazionedelPaesenel2009.

Istat,(2011),RapportoAnnualeLasituazionedelPaesenel2010.
Maguire,S.andRennison,J.,(2005),TwoYearsOn:TheDestinationofYoungPeoplewhoareNot
inEducation,EmploymentorTrainingat16,JournalofYouthStudies,8:2,187201.
OECD(2008),OECDEmploymentOutlook,OECDPublishing,Paris.
Perugini,C.,andSignorelli (2010),M., YouthLabourmarketperformanceinEuropeanRegions,
EconomicChangeandRestructuring,43:151185.
Quintini,G.andMartin,S.,(2006),Startingwellorlosingtheirway?Thepositionofyouthinthe
labourmarketoftheOECDcountries,OECDSocial,EmploymentandMigrationWorkingPapers,
No.39.
Quintini, G., Martin, J.P. and Martin, S., (2007), The Changing Nature of the Schooltowork
TransitionProcessinOECDCountries,IZADPNo.2582,Bonn,January.
Social Exclusion Unit, (1999), Bridging the gap: New opportunities for 1618 yearolds Not in
Education,EmploymentorTraining.
Yates,S.andPayne,M.,(2006), NotsoNEET?ACritiqueofUseofNEETinSettingTargetsfor
InterventionswithYoungPeople,JournalofYouthStudies,9:3,329344.

10