Youth unemployment presents one of the most complex economic and social challenges faced by governments worldwide. The consequences of high youth unemployment rates extend beyond immediate economic implications, with research indicating long-term adverse effects on career progression, earnings potential, and broader social cohesion. In response, countries have developed various innovative models to address this challenge through targeted employment initiatives. While South Africa’s SAYouth platform and the Basic Education Employment Initiative (BEEI) represent significant efforts to combat youth unemployment in the South African context, numerous comparable schemes operate globally, each with distinctive approaches tailored to their specific socioeconomic environments.
This article examines several major youth employment programs operating around the world, analyzing their structure, implementation approaches, funding mechanisms, and effectiveness. By exploring these alternative models, we gain valuable insights into different approaches to youth workforce integration and their potential adaptability to various contexts. This comparative analysis provides a foundation for understanding how diverse policy frameworks address the common challenge of youth unemployment across different economic, social, and cultural environments.
The Youth Employment Service (YES) Program in South Africa
Overview and Structure
The Youth Employment Service (YES) represents South Africa’s prominent private sector-led youth employment initiative, operating alongside the government-driven SAYouth platform and BEEI program. Unlike these public sector initiatives, YES functions as a non-profit organization focused specifically on collaboration with businesses to create quality work opportunities for young people. Launched in 2018 by President Cyril Ramaphosa, the program takes a market-oriented approach to addressing youth unemployment.
The YES model centers on incentivizing businesses to create 12-month quality work placements for unemployed young South Africans. In exchange for their participation, businesses receive tangible benefits through improved Business-to-Business Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) scorecards, which can translate to competitive advantages in South Africa’s regulatory environment. This creates a dual-value proposition where businesses enhance their compliance standings while simultaneously contributing to youth employment objectives.
Implementation Approach
What distinguishes YES from government-centric programs like BEEI is its business-driven implementation framework. Companies participating in YES can choose to either host youth directly within their organizations or sponsor placements through implementation partners. The program maintains a strong focus on quality placements that provide meaningful skills development rather than merely temporary positions.
The program leverages the expertise of over 2,200 partner companies to identify sustainable employment opportunities. Through this network, YES has created more than 158,000 work experiences and injected approximately R8.3 billion in salaries into the South African economy. These positions span various sectors including television, film, sports, information and communications technology (ICT), and creative industries, providing young people with diverse career pathway options.
Funding and Sustainability
Unlike SAYouth and BEEI, which receive direct government funding, YES operates independently of government financial support. Its sustainability model relies on corporate investment motivated by the B-BBEE incentives and business benefits of workforce development. This market-based approach aims to create self-sustaining employment pathways rather than temporary subsidized positions.
Companies like MultiChoice exemplify this approach, having invested R192 million in youth employment initiatives through YES. These investments have created 1,585 job opportunities and achieved a 95% placement rate with host employers, with 32% of participants transitioning to permanent employment. This success demonstrates the potential effectiveness of private sector-led approaches to complement government initiatives.
The European Union’s Youth Guarantee
Overview and Structure
The European Union’s Youth Guarantee represents one of the world’s most comprehensive regional approaches to youth employment. Established through a Council Recommendation in 2013 and reinforced in 2020, this initiative commits EU member states to ensuring that all young people under 30 receive a quality offer of employment, continued education, apprenticeship, or traineeship within four months of becoming unemployed or leaving formal education.
Unlike South Africa’s BEEI, which focuses specifically on placements within the education sector, the Youth Guarantee adopts a broader sectoral approach, emphasizing diverse pathways to employment across the economy. The program’s reinforced version expanded its target age range from under 25 to under 30, widening its reach to more young adults facing employment barriers.
Implementation Approach
The Youth Guarantee operates through a decentralized implementation structure, with each EU member state developing national implementation plans tailored to their specific labor market conditions. These plans outline timelines for youth employment reforms, define the roles of various stakeholders, and establish financing mechanisms. This federative approach allows for adaptation to diverse national contexts while maintaining common objectives and standards.
A distinctive feature of the Youth Guarantee compared to programs like SAYouth is its comprehensive integration of education, training, and employment services. The initiative emphasizes early intervention and personalized pathways, addressing individual barriers through tailored support. The reinforced version further prioritizes digital and green skills development in recognition of evolving labor market demands.
Funding and Outcomes
The Youth Guarantee receives substantial financial backing through multiple EU funding streams. The Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) served as a dedicated financial instrument, complementing European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) resources. For the 2021-2027 period, all EU member states must allocate an appropriate portion of their ESF+ resources to youth employment actions, with those having above-average NEET rates required to dedicate at least 12.5% of their allocation to youth initiatives.
Since its inception until before the COVID-19 pandemic, the Youth Guarantee contributed to reducing the number of young people neither in employment nor in education or training (NEETs) by approximately 1.7 million across the EU. The program has facilitated over 24 million young people registered in Youth Guarantee schemes to start offers of employment, education, apprenticeships, or traineeships. Youth unemployment in the EU had fallen to a record low of 14.9% by February 2020, prior to pandemic-related disruptions.
The UK Kickstart Scheme
Overview and Structure
The United Kingdom’s Kickstart Scheme, launched in September 2020, represented a direct response to the anticipated surge in youth unemployment resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. With an initial budget of £2 billion, the program aimed to create high-quality, six-month work placements for young people aged 16-24 who were claiming Universal Credit and at risk of long-term unemployment.
Unlike the ongoing BEEI program in South Africa, Kickstart was designed as a time-limited intervention with applications closing in December 2021 and all placements concluding by June 2022. This temporally bounded approach reflected its nature as an emergency response to pandemic conditions rather than a permanent structural solution to youth unemployment.
Implementation Approach
The Kickstart Scheme operated through direct funding to employers who created new job placements for eligible young people. The government fully subsidized each position by covering the relevant National Minimum Wage for 25 hours per week, along with associated employer National Insurance contributions and automatic enrollment pension costs. Additionally, employers received £1,500 per placement for setup costs, support, and training.
A distinctive feature of Kickstart’s implementation model was its gateway structure for smaller businesses. While organizations creating 30 or more placements could apply directly, those offering fewer positions were required to apply through intermediaries such as local authorities or chambers of commerce. This approach aimed to streamline administration while ensuring quality standards across placements.
Outcomes and Lessons
The Kickstart Scheme demonstrates the challenges of rapid deployment under crisis conditions. While originally targeting 250,000 placements, the program ultimately supported approximately 168,000 young people. The Public Accounts Committee noted significant implementation challenges, describing early delivery as “chaotic” and highlighting inadequate monitoring mechanisms for measuring outcomes and value for money.
The National Audit Office further identified limitations in the scheme’s ability to ensure additionality (whether jobs would have existed without the subsidy) and in targeting those most in need of support. These critiques highlight the importance of robust design, clear targeting criteria, and comprehensive monitoring frameworks—elements that more established programs like the EU Youth Guarantee have developed over longer implementation periods.
Australia’s Transition to Work Program
Overview and Structure
Australia’s Transition to Work (TtW) program represents a specialized employment service designed specifically for young people aged 15-24 who face barriers to labor market entry. Unlike South Africa’s BEEI, which creates direct placement opportunities within schools, TtW focuses on providing intensive pre-employment support to develop young people’s skills, confidence, and work readiness for broader labor market integration.
The program primarily targets early school leavers and those who have had difficulty entering employment after completing education. This focused approach allows for specialized interventions tailored to the particular challenges faced by these vulnerable youth cohorts.
Implementation Approach
Transition to Work operates through a network of contracted service providers across Australia who deliver personalized support to eligible young people. Each participant is paired with a dedicated Youth Coach or Mentor who works with them to develop practical skills, confidence, and career pathways. This individualized case management approach distinguishes TtW from mass employment programs.
The program’s implementation model emphasizes holistic development through various support mechanisms: career planning and guidance, skills development, work experience opportunities, employer connections, and links to relevant education or training options. Providers also work closely with local employers to understand labor market needs and create appropriate matching opportunities.
Funding and Integration
As a government-funded service, TtW forms part of Australia’s broader employment services ecosystem. The program complements other initiatives within the Workforce Australia framework, providing specialized youth-focused services alongside mainstream employment support. This integration allows for coordinated pathways and transitions between different types of assistance based on individual needs.
A notable feature of TtW’s approach is the potential access to wage subsidies of up to $10,000 (GST inclusive) for employers who offer ongoing employment to program participants. This financial incentive encourages businesses to provide opportunities to young people while receiving support to offset initial training and integration costs.
Comparative Analysis
Target Demographics and Eligibility
Youth employment schemes globally show interesting variations in their target demographics. The South African BEEI program focuses on unemployed youth aged 18-34, with Phase V specifically targeting those who will not turn 35 before March 2026. Similarly, the YES program in South Africa targets unemployed youth, with a focus on creating quality 12-month work experiences.
The European Youth Guarantee initially targeted those under 25 but expanded to under 30 in its reinforced version, reflecting recognition of extended youth transition periods in modern economies. The UK’s Kickstart Scheme had a narrower focus on 16-24 year-olds claiming Universal Credit, while Australia’s Transition to Work program targets 15-24 year-olds who are early school leavers or face employment barriers.
These variations reflect different conceptualizations of “youth” across countries and different priorities regarding which youth cohorts require the most intensive support.
Placement vs. Preparation Models
A significant distinction emerges between placement-focused and preparation-focused program models. South Africa’s BEEI represents a direct placement approach, creating specific positions within schools for young people across various support roles. Similarly, the UK’s Kickstart Scheme directly funded new job placements with employers.
In contrast, Australia’s Transition to Work and aspects of the EU Youth Guarantee emphasize preparation and pathways, focusing on developing skills, confidence, and readiness before facilitating employment connections. The YES program in South Africa combines elements of both approaches, creating placements while emphasizing skills development and career progression.
These different models reflect varied theories of change regarding youth unemployment—whether the primary barrier is lack of opportunities (addressed through placement models) or lack of work-readiness (addressed through preparation models).
Public vs. Private Sector Leadership
The programs demonstrate different balances between public and private sector leadership. The BEEI program and EU Youth Guarantee represent primarily government-led initiatives, with public funding and implementation frameworks. In contrast, the YES program exemplifies a private sector-led approach, working through business networks with B-BBEE incentives rather than direct government funding.
The UK’s Kickstart Scheme and Australia’s Transition to Work represent hybrid models, with government funding and frameworks but significant private sector involvement in implementation. These variations highlight the potential for different stakeholder configurations to address youth employment challenges.
Duration and Sustainability
Program duration varies significantly across the examined initiatives. The BEEI Phase V offers six-month placements from June to November 2025, while the YES program provides 12-month quality work experiences. The UK’s Kickstart Scheme offered six-month placements but operated as a time-limited crisis response rather than an ongoing program.
The EU Youth Guarantee and Australia’s Transition to Work represent more sustained structural interventions, integrated into ongoing employment service systems rather than operating as standalone time-bound initiatives. This raises important questions about the appropriate duration of interventions to achieve lasting impact on youth employment outcomes.
Financing Mechanisms
Financing approaches show interesting variations across programs. The BEEI program and EU Youth Guarantee primarily utilize direct government funding, while the YES program leverages private sector investment motivated by B-BBEE benefits. The UK’s Kickstart Scheme represents direct wage subsidization, with government covering full wage costs plus additional support funding.
Australia’s Transition to Work combines service provision funding with targeted wage subsidies, creating a dual support model for both young people and employers. These different financing mechanisms reflect various approaches to creating sustainable funding models and appropriate incentive structures for different stakeholders.
Lessons and Best Practices
Integration with Education Systems
Successful youth employment initiatives demonstrate strong integration with education systems, creating clear pathways between education and employment. The BEEI program exemplifies this through its direct placement of youth within educational institutions, creating immediate connections to the education sector. Similarly, aspects of the EU Youth Guarantee emphasize continued education options alongside employment pathways.
Such integration helps address the education-employment gap that often characterizes youth transitions, ensuring that young people develop relevant skills aligned with labor market demands. Programs could strengthen these connections through closer curriculum alignment, work-integrated learning opportunities, and structured transitions between education and employment systems.
Employer Engagement Strategies
Effective employer engagement emerges as a critical success factor across programs. The YES program’s strong business orientation creates direct connections between youth and employers, while Australia’s Transition to Work actively engages local businesses in program design and implementation. These approaches help ensure that skills development aligns with actual employer needs.
Promising strategies include employer co-design of training content, work experience opportunities, mentorship programs, and financial incentives for hiring program participants. Such engagement helps address information asymmetries and build trust between employers and young job seekers.
Appropriate Targeting and Personalization
The examined programs demonstrate variable approaches to targeting and personalization. The reinforced EU Youth Guarantee explicitly emphasizes tailored, individualized approaches for participants, particularly for hard-to-reach youth facing multiple barriers. Similarly, Australia’s Transition to Work pairs each participant with a dedicated youth coach for personalized support.
These approaches recognize that youth unemployment is not a homogeneous challenge and that different youth cohorts require different types and intensities of support. Effective programs balance scale with appropriate segmentation and personalization to address specific barriers faced by different participant groups.
Digital and Green Skills Integration
Forward-looking programs increasingly integrate digital and green skills development, recognizing the changing nature of labor markets. The reinforced EU Youth Guarantee explicitly acknowledges the opportunities provided by digital and green transitions and adapts support accordingly. Similarly, emerging versions of youth employment programs are evolving to prepare young people for future-oriented sectors.
This focus helps ensure that youth employment initiatives do not merely address immediate employment gaps but prepare participants for sustainable career pathways in evolving economies. Programs could further strengthen this dimension through targeted sectoral approaches focused on growth industries.
Robust Monitoring and Evaluation
A critical lesson from programs like the UK’s Kickstart Scheme is the importance of robust monitoring and evaluation frameworks. The Public Accounts Committee’s critique of Kickstart highlighted inadequate measurement of outcomes and impact, undermining assessment of the program’s effectiveness and value for money.
In contrast, the EU Youth Guarantee includes comprehensive monitoring through indicators developed by the Employment Committee (EMCO), enabling systematic assessment of implementation progress and outcomes across member states. Such frameworks are essential for program learning, accountability, and continuous improvement.
Conclusion
The comparative analysis of youth employment schemes globally reveals both common challenges and diverse innovative approaches to addressing youth unemployment. While programs like South Africa’s BEEI and SAYouth platform focus on creating immediate opportunities through structured placements, alternatives such as the private sector-led YES initiative, the comprehensive EU Youth Guarantee, the crisis-response UK Kickstart Scheme, and Australia’s preparation-focused Transition to Work program offer valuable complementary models.
The most effective approaches appear to combine elements of these various models—creating immediate opportunities while building longer-term employability, engaging both public and private sectors, balancing standardization with personalization, and integrating education and employment systems. As governments continue to prioritize youth employment in post-pandemic recovery efforts, these comparative insights offer valuable guidance for policy development and program design.
The global challenge of youth unemployment requires sustained commitment, innovative approaches, and collaborative efforts across sectors. By learning from diverse international experiences, policymakers and practitioners can develop more effective strategies to support young people in building meaningful and sustainable career pathways.