2nd NEXT-UP Living Lab Workshop: Emerging Insights on Youth Education–Employment Transitions [20.04]

The presentation by Dr Renze Kolster (University of Twente) shared initial findings from WP 5, Task 5.1, which maps youth employability policies across EU-28 and EFTA countries (2019–2022). By framing the discussion around key policy dimensions – namely active labour market policies, educational policies, employment incentives (demand-side measures), and training/education (supply-side measures) – the presentation encouraged participants to reflect on how different countries position themselves within this policy space.

Around 700 policies were identified, with a strong dominance of financial measures such as subsidies. While all countries responded to similar challenges, there is no single European model: policy mixes vary significantly across contexts.

A central interactive component of the session was the mapping exercise, where participants were invited to place countries along these dimensions based on their perceptions. The outcomes of this exercise were notably diverse, with no clear or consistent patterns emerging across the included countries. This lack of consensus was, however, a meaningful result in itself. It highlighted the complexity of youth employability policies and the extent to which stakeholder perceptions are shaped by partial knowledge, national contexts, and professional backgrounds. The only relatively consistent observation concerned Poland, which participants tended to position towards the side emphasizing employment incentives over education and training. This suggests that while shared perceptions may exist in some cases, they are far from universal.

By making these differences in perception visible, the Living Lab exercise pointed towards the necessity of systematic analysis such as that undertaken in Work Package 5. We need an evidence-based understanding of policy mixes, which can support policymakers and stakeholders in identifying effective policy interventions. Moreover, it opens up space to question policy preferences and path dependencies.

From an engagement perspective, the mapping exercise proved to be an effective tool for involving a diverse group of stakeholders. It fostered dialogue, reflection, and a sense of co-creation, all of which are central to the living lab methodology. Building on this experience, similar interactive approaches will be valuable in future sessions to deepen stakeholder involvement and enhance the relevance and impact of the project’s outcomes.

Please also see the WP5 blog post:
“Carrots, sticks or sermons? Countries’ policies for youth employability”
https://www.nextup-project.eu/carrots-sticks-or-sermons-countries-policies-for-youth-employability/

Looking ahead, WP5 will focus on analysing policy effectiveness, organising a policy co-creation workshop, and producing policy briefs to inform decision-making.

The presentation by Alexandra Seehaus introduced initial findings from Work Package 2, which explores how young people experience transitions from education to work and how they define adulthood. The analysis is based on 125 longitudinal qualitative interviews conducted across Estonia, Finland, the Netherlands, Germany, and Spain . It focuses on the increasing complexity of youth transitions, characterised by diversity, reversibility, and non-linear pathways.

The presentation introduced initial findings from Work Package 1, examining how education–labour market relations have evolved in the context of COVID-19. The analysis suggests that recent developments largely reflect an intensification of pre-existing challenges rather than a fundamental transformation, with persistent mismatches between education systems and labour market demands .

The stakeholder discussion provided important contextualisation of these findings. When asked whether current challenges are new or long-standing, participants emphasised continuity, noting that existing issues have deepened rather than fundamentally changed. As one participant reflected, “I don’t know if these are new problems or just old problems that have worsened.” This reinforces the interpretation of post-COVID developments as an acceleration of structural tensions.

In discussing expectations and realities of the labour market, participants highlighted the complexity of transitions. While opportunities such as internships may be available, they do not necessarily translate into preparedness for work. As one contribution noted, “we have more internship offers than students, so students can choose.” At the same time, the discussion pointed to a broader mismatch between formal opportunities and the ability to navigate them effectively.

A recurring theme concerned the gap between education and practice. Participants consistently emphasised the difficulty of translating theoretical knowledge into applied skills. As one participant put it, “we are taught a lot, but not how to operationalise that knowledge.” This suggests that the challenge lies not only in what is taught, but in how learning is connected to real-world application.

Finally, the discussion addressed structural and institutional barriers shaping access to opportunities. Recruitment practices and informal criteria were seen as significant factors. One participant observed that “cultural fit goes beyond language. It’s about who you know and where you studied.” These perspectives highlight how access to employment is mediated not only by skills, but also by institutional arrangements and social networks.

Overall, the session confirmed that education–labour market mismatches remain a persistent and multi-layered issue. The combination of research findings and stakeholder perspectives underscores the need to strengthen connections between education and work, particularly in relation to applied learning, expectation alignment, and equitable access to opportunities.

A key concept discussed was “yo-yo transitions” – repeated movements between education, employment, and unemployment—which reflect prolonged instability and delayed independence, particularly in contexts with weaker institutional support . At the same time, stakeholder feedback highlighted that linear transitions remain common in some regions and socio-economic groups. This points to an important tension between continuity and change: while transitions are becoming more fragmented for some young people, more stable pathways persist for others. Understanding these differences, especially in relation to socio-economic background, region, and structural conditions, emerged as a key analytical priority.

Stakeholder input also emphasised a growing mismatch between young people’s expectations and what employers can realistically offer, particularly regarding salaries, working conditions, and work-life balance. On the Padlet, participants noted that young people increasingly aspire not only to financial independence and material stability, but also to meaningful work, well-being, and balance between professional and personal life.

Socio-economic background was consistently identified as one of the most decisive factors shaping transitions, influencing access to education, resources, and networks, as well as the ability to navigate periods of instability. Health and disability were also highlighted as critical factors, alongside culture, gender, and migration background.

In terms of challenges and facilitators, participants pointed to the importance of family and social networks, transversal skills, and institutional conditions. Key challenges include lack of work experience, unrealistic expectations, cost of living pressures, recruitment practices, and mental health issues. At the same time, strong public education systems, labour market regulation, and social protection mechanisms were seen as crucial facilitators of more stable and equitable transitions.

Finally, adulthood was commonly associated with autonomy, self-determination, and responsibility, often linked to financial independence and leaving the parental home. However, both the empirical findings and stakeholder reflections suggest that adulthood is increasingly understood as a gradual and subjective process rather than a fixed set of milestones.

Overall, the session confirmed the value of combining in-depth qualitative data with stakeholder perspectives. It highlighted the need to better account for structural inequalities and differing transition patterns, while also recognising changing aspirations and expectations among young people.

The WP3 presentation approaches the transition from education to employment as a measurable, multi-dimensional process. It defines transition as the period between completing education and entering stable employment, focusing on young people aged approximately 18–29. Within this framework, transition is measured through four main dimensions:

– Transition speed (e.g. time to first employment, unemployment duration)
– Labour market status (employment, unemployment, NEET)
– Job quality (contract type, wages, working time, satisfaction)
– Education–job match (alignment between education and occupation)

These dimensions are analysed using large-scale comparative datasets, including:

– European Union Labour Force Survey (EU-LFS)
– Eurograduate Survey (2022)
– Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC)

Together, these sources provide complementary insights into graduates’ labour market integration across Europe and support comparative analysis of post-COVID developments, institutional influences, and inequalities in transition trajectories.

Stakeholder feedback from the Living Lab activity “Co-Designing Indicators for Graduate Transition to Employment: What should we measure?” reveals a predominantly outcome-oriented understanding of the transition from education to employment. Participants frequently defined transition in terms of achieving stable, adequately paid, and contract-based employment, often associated with economic autonomy and independence. This reflects a largely linear and normative conception of transition, centred on the successful completion of education followed by entry into full-time employment. At the same time, several contributions highlighted the importance of alignment between education and employment, particularly in terms of skills and field-job matching, indicating a strong concern with employability and the adequacy of qualifications. Fewer responses conceptualised transition as a dynamic process, although some references to the “testing” of skills and the role of labour market conditions suggest an implicit recognition of its complexity.

In terms of measurement, stakeholders proposed a range of indicators focused primarily on employment outcomes, including time to first job, type of contract, wage levels, job stability, and field-job alignment. While these indicators provide a solid basis for operationalisation, they also reveal a limited attention to processual dimensions, such as job search dynamics, intermediate transitions, or institutional support mechanisms. Overall, the results highlight a gap between the conceptualisation of transition as a potentially complex and multi-stage process and its measurement, which remains largely anchored in final employment outcomes. This underscores the need to further develop process-oriented indicators capable of capturing the temporal, relational, and experiential dimensions of transition.

The WP5 presentation develops a coherent argument that the future of skills cannot be reduced to digitalisation or AI readiness alone. It positions technological change as one component within a wider transformation of labour markets, where the central issue lies in how skills systems respond to shifting economic, social, and institutional conditions.

The narrative begins with a diagnosis of persistent misalignment between education and labour market demand. Labour markets are evolving quickly, while education systems tend to change incrementally. This produces a range of imbalances—shortages, gaps, and mismatches—between the skills available in the workforce and those required by employers. To examine this, the work package combines large-scale labour market data on job vacancies and skills with data on educational content, using machine learning tools to compare demand and supply across countries and regions. The objective is to identify where mismatches emerge and how they develop over time.

The empirical analysis suggests that jobs are becoming more complex and skill-intensive. The average number of skills required per occupation is increasing, particularly in professional and technical roles. At the same time, skill demand is diversifying. Digital competencies are important, yet they appear alongside a broader set of capabilities, including analytical thinking, creativity, adaptability, and interpersonal skills. Skill profiles are therefore increasingly hybrid and context-dependent.

These developments are embedded in wider structural transformations. The presentation highlights four interconnected megatrends: technological change, demographic shifts, environmental pressures, and geopolitical dynamics. Their interaction reshapes both labour markets and education systems, creating cumulative and sometimes unintended effects. This reinforces the need to analyse skills within a broader systemic context.

A critical strand of the argument concerns how skills are conceptualised and taught. The presentation questions the effectiveness of generic approaches to transversal skills such as critical thinking or communication. It draws on learning research to show that such skills are developed most effectively when grounded in specific disciplinary or professional contexts. In practice, this implies a shift towards more integrated forms of learning, where domain knowledge and transferable skills are developed together.

The presentation also addresses structural changes in labour markets, particularly increasing polarisation. There is growth in high-skill, high-value occupations alongside expansion in lower-skill service roles, while middle-skill routine jobs decline. This results in a segmented labour market, with uneven access to stable and rewarding employment. Skills, in this context, are closely linked to patterns of inequality and labour market stratification.

The proposed response is explicitly systemic. Effective adaptation requires coordination across multiple actors. Individuals are expected to engage in continuous learning and career adaptation. Educational institutions need to redesign curricula and strengthen connections with labour market needs. Employers are called to invest in training and adopt skills-based approaches to recruitment. Policymakers play a role in creating frameworks that support reskilling, mobility, and inclusive transitions. The emphasis is on alignment across these actors to address skill mismatches more effectively.

Overall, the presentation frames the future of skills as a dynamic and relational process shaped by interacting forces. Skills are understood as evolving combinations of knowledge and capabilities that gain value within specific labour market contexts. Addressing current challenges therefore requires moving beyond isolated interventions towards a more integrated understanding of how education systems, labour markets, and broader societal transformations co-evolve.