Finland http://oe.cd/youth-finland Monika Queisser , Head of Social - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
finland
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Finland http://oe.cd/youth-finland Monika Queisser , Head of Social - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Aug 19, 2023 330 likes •668 views

Investing in Youth Helsinki, 7 May 2019 Finland http://oe.cd/youth-finland Monika Queisser , Head of Social Policy Division Veerle Miranda , Senior Economist OECD work on youth Jobs for Youth reviews (2006 - 2010): 16 countries

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Monika Queisser, Head of Social Policy Division Veerle Miranda, Senior Economist

Investing in Youth Finland

Helsinki, 7 May 2019 http://oe.cd/youth-finland

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

Jobs for Youth reviews (2006 - 2010): 16 countries

  • Youth-friendly employment policies and practices

Investing in Youth reviews (2014 - 2019): 12 countries

  • Special focus on disadvantage youth / NEETs
  • Employment, social and education policies

Society at a Glance 2016: A Spotlight on Youth

OECD work on youth

slide-3
SLIDE 3

INVESTING IN YOUTH FINLAND CONTEXT AND CHALLENGES

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

Relatively low youth employment

Employment rates among 15-29-year olds, 2017

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 % Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

High youth unemployment

Unemployment rates among 15-29-year olds, 2017

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 % Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

Strong demand for high-skilled workers

Share of employment in high demand, by skill level (2016 or latest year)

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 %

High-skilled Medium-skilled Low-skilled

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

Low-educated youth encounter difficulties

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

by highest level of educational attainment NEETs as a share of 25-29-year olds (2017)

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 %

All Less than upper secondary Upper or post-secondary Tertiary

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

Motives for inactivity differ by gender

Self-reported main reason for being inactive (2017 or latest available)

10 20 30 40 50 60 Sickness or disability Other reasons Discouraged Men aged 15-29 % 10 20 30 40 50 60 Caring/family responsibilities Other reasons Sickness or disability Women aged 15-29 %

Finland OECD

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

Long NEET spells are not so frequent

Distribution of youth across NEET durations, 2012-15

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Finland OECD 1-6 months 29% 1-6 months 49% 7-12 months 18% 7-12 months 18% Over 12 months 53% Over 12 months 33%

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

slide-10
SLIDE 10

INVESTING IN YOUTH FINLAND MAIN POLICY CONCLUSIONS

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

Two main policy areas

EDUCATION POLICY

  • School dropout prevention
  • Outreach services
  • Tertiary education admission
  • Vocational education

SOCIAL POLICY

  • Fragmentation of benefit

system

  • Activation of benefit recipients
  • Provision of integrated

services

  • Administrative and regional

government reform

slide-12
SLIDE 12

EDUCATION POLICY CHALLENGES

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

Completion rates in upper secondary education

Graduation rates in upper secondary programmes within two years after expected graduation, 2015

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 %

General programmes VET programmes

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

Improving completion rates

Major strengths of the system:

  • Strong financial incentives for education providers
  • Widely used student counselling
  • Wide range of support networks outside schools

Possible improvements:

  • Monitor impact reform and adjust if needed
  • Cross-age peer counselling
  • Expand support networks and digital services
  • Raise the compulsory schooling age to 18 years
slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

Highly selective admission system

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

Applicants to first-degree tertiary education by application status, 2016

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 %

Proportion of applicants accepted and studying Proportion of applicants accepted, not studying Proportion of applicants rejected

slide-16
SLIDE 16

16

Highly selective admission system

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

Applicants to first-degree tertiary education by application status, 2016

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 %

Proportion of applicants accepted and studying Proportion of applicants accepted, not studying Proportion of applicants rejected

slide-17
SLIDE 17

17

Reform of study financial aid system

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

Panel A: Recipients of student finacial aid Panel B: Average monthly amount (in EUR)

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Study grant Government guarantee for student loans Share of students in total youth population

% 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Study grant Government guarantee for student loans

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

Reform of study financial aid system

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

Panel A: Recipients of student finacial aid Panel B: Average monthly amount (in EUR)

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Study grant Government guarantee for student loans Share of students in total youth population

% 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Study grant Government guarantee for student loans

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

Limited use of apprenticeships

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

Upper secondary students in vocational programmes and use of combined school- and work-based programmes among all upper secondary students

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Vocational programmes Combined school- and work-based programmes

%

slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

Collaboration with employers

The main question is how to engage employers for this new workplace learning model. Promoting collaboration with employers:

  • Involvement of social partners in policy development
  • Fair competition between apprenticeships and

training agreements

  • Benefits for employers should outweigh the costs
  • Support for employers
slide-21
SLIDE 21

SOCIAL POLICY CHALLENGES

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

High social spending

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

Public social expenditure on cash income support to the working-age population as a percentage of GDP, 2015

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Incapacity related Family Unemployment Income maintenance

%

slide-23
SLIDE 23

23

High benefit receipt among young Finns

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

Percentage of 16-29-year-olds receiving out-of-work benefits, 2017 or latest available year

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 %

Unemployment benefits Social assistance Disability benefits Any benefits

slide-24
SLIDE 24

24

Benefit coverage among NEETs

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

Panel A. Proportion of youth receiving benefits Panel B. Proportion of NEETs receiving benefits

18 6 14 35 44 77 20 40 60 80 100 All youth Finland All youth OECD average % 51 13 32 40 50 91 20 40 60 80 100 NEETs Finland NEETs OECD average %

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Panel A. Proportion of youth receiving benefits Panel B. Proportion of NEETs receiving benefits

18 6 14 35 44 77 20 40 60 80 100 All youth Finland All youth OECD average % 51 13 32 40 50 91 20 40 60 80 100 NEETs Finland NEETs OECD average %

25

Benefit coverage among NEETs

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

slide-26
SLIDE 26

26

Relatively high poverty

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

Poverty rates for different age groups, 2017 or latest available year

10 20 30 40 50 60

Youth (↑) Non-youth working age Senior

%

slide-27
SLIDE 27

27

Important benefit traps

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

Participation tax rates for a young person who has never worked when moving from inactivity to employment at 67% of the average wage, 2018

  • 20
  • 10

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Higher taxes Higher benefits Lower benefits PTR

%

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Participation tax rates for a young person who has never worked when moving from inactivity to employment at 67% of the average wage, 2018

  • 20
  • 10

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Higher taxes Higher benefits Lower benefits PTR

%

28

Important benefit traps

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

slide-29
SLIDE 29

29

Limited activation

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

Activation rates: ALMP participants in % of all jobseekers and ALMP participants, 2008-17

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Total Under 25 Under 30 25-49 Over 50 Over 55

%

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Activation rates: ALMP participants in % of all jobseekers and ALMP participants, 2008-17

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Total Under 25 Under 30 25-49 Over 50 Over 55

%

30

Limited activation

Source: Investing in Youth: Finland, OECD (2019)

slide-31
SLIDE 31

31

Government reform

The administrative and regional government reform was not making the social policy challenges easier. Important elements to consider:

  • Incorporate a benefit reform to tackle the

fragmentation and activation challenges;

  • Ensure that the underlying funding mechanisms

guarantee sufficient investment in prevention and early intervention services;

  • Invest in monitoring and evaluating policy reforms;
  • Study other countries’ experiences with outsourcing
  • f public health, social and employment services.
slide-32
SLIDE 32

32

Overview of policy conclusions

Social policy

  • Make work pay for every young person
  • Streamline the benefit system
  • Strengthen the activation of benefit recipients
  • Revise the administrative and regional government reform

Education policy

  • Raise the compulsory schooling age to 18 years
  • Reform the highly selective tertiary education admission

system

  • Expand capacity of tertiary education
  • Engage employers for the new workplace learning model
slide-33
SLIDE 33

33

Contacts: Monika Queisser (Monika.Queisser@oecd.org) Veerle Miranda (Veerle.MIRANDA@oecd.org) Website: http://oe.cd/youth-finland Twitter: @OECD_social

Closing remarks

Finland should do more to improve job prospects of youth in Finland, especially low- skilled youth.