Youth unemployment — all countries

Youth unemployment — South Asia

Youth unemployment in South Asia in 2025 — 15.4%. Since 1991, the indicator has fallen by 3.46 pp.

2025 15.4% +0.26 pp vs 2024
World rank
Period maximum 24.26%2018
Period minimum 14.9%2023

Trend over time

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

Youth unemployment — South Asia, 1991–202512.51517.52022.52519911995199920032007201120152019202320251991: 18.86%1992: 18.91%1993: 18.98%1994: 18.89%1995: 18.83%1996: 18.74%1997: 18.85%1998: 18.87%1999: 18.94%2000: 18.99%2001: 19.1%2002: 19.33%2003: 19.27%2004: 19.54%2005: 19.77%2006: 19.83%2007: 20.26%2008: 20.8%2009: 21.31%2010: 21.31%2011: 21.72%2012: 22.26%2013: 22.69%2014: 22.94%2015: 23.21%2016: 23.49%2017: 23.89%2018: 24.26%2019: 21.62%2020: 23.44%2021: 20.03%2022: 17.1%2023: 14.9%2024: 15.14%2025: 15.4%
Change over the period: −3.46 pp Annual average: -0.1 pp

Comparison, 2025

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

South Asia 15.4%
World 13.41%
Youth unemployment — South Asia, by year South Asia All countries CSV XLSX
Year % Change, pp
2025 15.4 +0.26 pp
2024 15.14 +0.25 pp
2023 14.9 −2.2 pp
2022 17.1 −2.93 pp
2021 20.03 −3.41 pp
2020 23.44 +1.82 pp
2019 21.62 −2.64 pp
2018 24.26 +0.37 pp
2017 23.89 +0.4 pp
2016 23.49 +0.28 pp
2015 23.21 +0.26 pp
2014 22.94 +0.26 pp
2013 22.69 +0.43 pp
2012 22.26 +0.54 pp
2011 21.72 +0.4 pp
2010 21.31 −0 pp
2009 21.31 +0.51 pp
2008 20.8 +0.54 pp
2007 20.26 +0.43 pp
2006 19.83 +0.07 pp
2005 19.77 +0.23 pp
2004 19.54 +0.27 pp
2003 19.27 −0.06 pp
2002 19.33 +0.23 pp
2001 19.1 +0.11 pp
2000 18.99 +0.06 pp
1999 18.94 +0.07 pp
1998 18.87 +0.02 pp
1997 18.85 +0.11 pp
1996 18.74 −0.09 pp
1995 18.83 −0.06 pp
1994 18.89 −0.09 pp
1993 18.98 +0.07 pp
1992 18.91 +0.04 pp
1991 18.86

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.