Gender Inequality in Youth Labour Market Transitions: Evidence from Kazakhstan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47703/ejgs.v3i1.108Keywords:
Gender, Gender Inequality, Young Women, Youth Unemployment, Unemployment, Human Capital, Labour Market, Workforce InclusionAbstract
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.
References
Acemoglu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2020). Robots and jobs: Evidence from US labor markets. Journal of Political Economy, 128(6), 2188–2244. https://doi.org/10.1086/705716
Bell, D. N. F., & Blanchflower, D. G. (2011). Young people and the Great Recession. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 27(2), 241–267. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grr011
Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2017). The gender wage gap: Extent, trends, and explanations. Journal of Economic Literature, 55(3), 789–865. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20160995
Card, D., Kluve, J., & Weber, A. (2018). What works? A meta-analysis of active labor market program evaluations. Journal of the European Economic Association, 16(3), 894–931. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvx028
Cho, Y., & Honorati, M. (2014). Entrepreneurship programs in developing countries: A meta regression analysis. Labour Economics, 28, 110–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2014.03.011
Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2017). The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019
Furlong, A. (2006). Not a very NEET solution: Representing problematic labour market transitions among early school-leavers. Work, Employment and Society, 20(3), 553–569. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017006067001
ILO. (2023). Global employment trends for youth 2023: Investing in transforming futures for young people. Retrieved December 15, 2025 from https://www.ilo.org
McGuinness, S., Pouliakas, K., & Redmond, P. (2018). Skills mismatch: Concepts, measurement and policy approaches. Journal of Economic Surveys, 32(4), 985–1015. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12254
OECD. (2010). How to prevent negative long-term consequences. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, 106, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1787/5kmh79zb2mmv-en
Pastore, F. (2018). Why is youth unemployment so high and different across countries? IZA World of Labor, 420, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.15185/izawol.420
Rahmani, H., & Groot, W. (2023). Risk factors of being a youth not in education, employment or training (NEET): A scoping review. International Journal of Educational Research, 120, 102198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2023.102198
Scarpetta, S., Sonnet, A., & Manfredi, T. (2010). Rising youth unemployment during the crisis: How to prevent negative long-term consequences on a generation. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 106. https://doi.org/10.1787/5kmh79zb2mmv-en
van Deursen, A. J., & van Dijk, J. A. (2019). The first-level digital divide shifts from inequalities in physical access to inequalities in material access. New Media & Society, 21(2), 354–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818797082
World Bank. (2025). World development indicators. Retrieved December 15, 2025 from https://data.worldbank.org
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Eurasian Journal of Gender Studies

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.