Youth unemployment — all countries

Youth unemployment — Jamaica

Youth unemployment in Jamaica in 2025 — 10.81%. Ranked 80 in the world out of 182. Since 1991, the indicator has fallen by 3.65 pp.

2025 10.81% +0.43 pp vs 2024
World rank 80of 182
Period maximum 27.23%2013
Period minimum 9.99%2023

Trend over time

1991–2025 · % of labor force aged 15–24

Youth unemployment — Jamaica, 1991–20255101520253019911995199920032007201120152019202320251991: 14.46%1992: 14.89%1993: 14.74%1994: 15.04%1995: 15.13%1996: 15.77%1997: 16.01%1998: 16.39%1999: 16.55%2000: 16.6%2001: 16.55%2002: 16.6%2003: 16.55%2004: 16.71%2005: 16.84%2006: 16.95%2007: 17.01%2008: 17.18%2009: 18.55%2010: 20.45%2011: 20.36%2012: 23.4%2013: 27.23%2014: 26.35%2015: 25.78%2016: 24.66%2017: 21.69%2018: 18.06%2019: 15.96%2020: 20.09%2021: 16.84%2022: 13.12%2023: 9.99%2024: 10.38%2025: 10.81%
Change over the period: −3.65 pp Annual average: -0.11 pp

Comparison, 2025

How the value compares with the world and the groups this territory belongs to: Jamaica

Jamaica 10.81%
World 13.41%
Youth unemployment — Jamaica, by year Jamaica All countries CSV XLSX
Year % Change, pp
2025 10.81 +0.43 pp
2024 10.38 +0.39 pp
2023 9.99 −3.13 pp
2022 13.12 −3.72 pp
2021 16.84 −3.25 pp
2020 20.09 +4.13 pp
2019 15.96 −2.1 pp
2018 18.06 −3.62 pp
2017 21.69 −2.98 pp
2016 24.66 −1.12 pp
2015 25.78 −0.57 pp
2014 26.35 −0.88 pp
2013 27.23 +3.83 pp
2012 23.4 +3.04 pp
2011 20.36 −0.09 pp
2010 20.45 +1.9 pp
2009 18.55 +1.37 pp
2008 17.18 +0.17 pp
2007 17.01 +0.06 pp
2006 16.95 +0.11 pp
2005 16.84 +0.14 pp
2004 16.71 +0.16 pp
2003 16.55 −0.05 pp
2002 16.6 +0.05 pp
2001 16.55 −0.05 pp
2000 16.6 +0.04 pp
1999 16.55 +0.16 pp
1998 16.39 +0.38 pp
1997 16.01 +0.25 pp
1996 15.77 +0.64 pp
1995 15.13 +0.09 pp
1994 15.04 +0.3 pp
1993 14.74 −0.15 pp
1992 14.89 +0.43 pp
1991 14.46

About the indicator

The share of the economically active population aged 15–24 that is unemployed. In almost every country youth unemployment runs two to three times above the overall rate: the young have no experience, and their first entry into the labor market puts them up against more qualified workers. A sharp gap with the overall rate points to structural problems in the transition from school to work.

Source: ILOSTAT (ILO), license CC BY 4.0.