Youth unemployment — all countries

Youth unemployment — Latvia

Youth unemployment in Latvia in 2025 — 12.95%. Ranked 92 in the world out of 182. Since 1991, the indicator has risen by 7.92 pp.

2025 12.95% −0.66 pp vs 2024
World rank 92of 182
Period maximum 38.26%1996
Period minimum 5.03%1991

Trend over time

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

Youth unemployment — Latvia, 1991–202501020304019911995199920032007201120152019202320251991: 5.03%1992: 12.11%1993: 30.56%1994: 34.32%1995: 35.02%1996: 38.26%1997: 27.64%1998: 26.95%1999: 23.53%2000: 21.27%2001: 24.16%2002: 25.25%2003: 20.42%2004: 21.8%2005: 15.14%2006: 13.62%2007: 10.56%2008: 13.65%2009: 33.43%2010: 36.24%2011: 31.07%2012: 28.56%2013: 23.24%2014: 19.6%2015: 16.32%2016: 17.27%2017: 16.97%2018: 12.19%2019: 12.42%2020: 14.87%2021: 14.79%2022: 15.27%2023: 12.32%2024: 13.61%2025: 12.95%
Change over the period: +7.92 pp Annual average: 0.23 pp

Comparison, 2025

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

Latvia 12.95%
World 13.41%
Northern Europe computed 15.5%
High-income countries computed 11.17%
Youth unemployment — Latvia, by year Latvia All countries CSV XLSX
Year % Change, pp
2025 12.95 −0.66 pp
2024 13.61 +1.29 pp
2023 12.32 −2.95 pp
2022 15.27 +0.48 pp
2021 14.79 −0.08 pp
2020 14.87 +2.45 pp
2019 12.42 +0.22 pp
2018 12.19 −4.78 pp
2017 16.97 −0.3 pp
2016 17.27 +0.96 pp
2015 16.32 −3.28 pp
2014 19.6 −3.64 pp
2013 23.24 −5.33 pp
2012 28.56 −2.51 pp
2011 31.07 −5.17 pp
2010 36.24 +2.81 pp
2009 33.43 +19.78 pp
2008 13.65 +3.09 pp
2007 10.56 −3.06 pp
2006 13.62 −1.53 pp
2005 15.14 −6.66 pp
2004 21.8 +1.38 pp
2003 20.42 −4.83 pp
2002 25.25 +1.09 pp
2001 24.16 +2.9 pp
2000 21.27 −2.27 pp
1999 23.53 −3.42 pp
1998 26.95 −0.69 pp
1997 27.64 −10.61 pp
1996 38.26 +3.23 pp
1995 35.02 +0.71 pp
1994 34.32 +3.76 pp
1993 30.56 +18.45 pp
1992 12.11 +7.08 pp
1991 5.03

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.