Youth unemployment — all countries

Youth unemployment — Central Asia

Youth unemployment in Central Asia in 2025 — 8.93%. Since 1991, the indicator has risen by 6.35 pp.

2025 8.93% +0.35 pp vs 2024
World rank
Period maximum 21.72%1999
Period minimum 2.58%1991

Trend over time

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

Youth unemployment — Central Asia, 1991–2025010203019911995199920032007201120152019202320251991: 2.58%1992: 3.41%1993: 5.17%1994: 11.88%1995: 15.01%1996: 18.86%1997: 19.2%1998: 21.37%1999: 21.72%2000: 20.3%2001: 18.05%2002: 16.49%2003: 14.72%2004: 13.74%2005: 12.27%2006: 10.87%2007: 9.17%2008: 8.73%2009: 8.98%2010: 8.89%2011: 8.31%2012: 8.24%2013: 8.31%2014: 8.63%2015: 8.69%2016: 8.76%2017: 9.42%2018: 9.08%2019: 9.02%2020: 9.86%2021: 10.06%2022: 8.79%2023: 8.54%2024: 8.58%2025: 8.93%
Change over the period: +6.35 pp Annual average: 0.19 pp

Comparison, 2025

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

Central Asia 8.93%
World 13.41%
Youth unemployment — Central Asia, by year Central Asia All countries CSV XLSX
Year % Change, pp
2025 8.93 +0.35 pp
2024 8.58 +0.04 pp
2023 8.54 −0.25 pp
2022 8.79 −1.26 pp
2021 10.06 +0.2 pp
2020 9.86 +0.84 pp
2019 9.02 −0.06 pp
2018 9.08 −0.34 pp
2017 9.42 +0.66 pp
2016 8.76 +0.07 pp
2015 8.69 +0.06 pp
2014 8.63 +0.32 pp
2013 8.31 +0.07 pp
2012 8.24 −0.08 pp
2011 8.31 −0.58 pp
2010 8.89 −0.09 pp
2009 8.98 +0.24 pp
2008 8.73 −0.44 pp
2007 9.17 −1.7 pp
2006 10.87 −1.4 pp
2005 12.27 −1.47 pp
2004 13.74 −0.99 pp
2003 14.72 −1.76 pp
2002 16.49 −1.56 pp
2001 18.05 −2.25 pp
2000 20.3 −1.42 pp
1999 21.72 +0.35 pp
1998 21.37 +2.17 pp
1997 19.2 +0.34 pp
1996 18.86 +3.85 pp
1995 15.01 +3.13 pp
1994 11.88 +6.72 pp
1993 5.17 +1.76 pp
1992 3.41 +0.83 pp
1991 2.58

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.