Youth unemployment — all countries

Youth unemployment — Southern Asia

Youth unemployment in Southern Asia in 2025 — 15.06%. Since 1991, the indicator has fallen by 2.58 pp.

2025 15.06% +0.24 pp vs 2024
World rank
Period maximum 22.67%2018
Period minimum 14.57%2023

Trend over time

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

Youth unemployment — Southern Asia, 1991–202512.51517.52022.52519911995199920032007201120152019202320251991: 17.64%1992: 17.63%1993: 17.7%1994: 17.6%1995: 17.53%1996: 17.38%1997: 17.5%1998: 17.57%1999: 17.66%2000: 17.72%2001: 17.86%2002: 18.09%2003: 17.93%2004: 18.04%2005: 18.34%2006: 18.36%2007: 18.6%2008: 19.03%2009: 19.46%2010: 19.55%2011: 19.81%2012: 20.83%2013: 20.92%2014: 21.01%2015: 21.54%2016: 21.81%2017: 22.25%2018: 22.67%2019: 20.49%2020: 22.01%2021: 19.15%2022: 16.49%2023: 14.57%2024: 14.82%2025: 15.06%
Change over the period: −2.58 pp Annual average: -0.08 pp

Comparison, 2025

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

Southern Asia 15.06%
World 13.41%
Youth unemployment — Southern Asia, by year Southern Asia All countries CSV XLSX
Year % Change, pp
2025 15.06 +0.24 pp
2024 14.82 +0.25 pp
2023 14.57 −1.91 pp
2022 16.49 −2.66 pp
2021 19.15 −2.87 pp
2020 22.01 +1.52 pp
2019 20.49 −2.18 pp
2018 22.67 +0.41 pp
2017 22.25 +0.44 pp
2016 21.81 +0.27 pp
2015 21.54 +0.53 pp
2014 21.01 +0.09 pp
2013 20.92 +0.09 pp
2012 20.83 +1.02 pp
2011 19.81 +0.26 pp
2010 19.55 +0.09 pp
2009 19.46 +0.43 pp
2008 19.03 +0.43 pp
2007 18.6 +0.24 pp
2006 18.36 +0.02 pp
2005 18.34 +0.3 pp
2004 18.04 +0.11 pp
2003 17.93 −0.16 pp
2002 18.09 +0.23 pp
2001 17.86 +0.13 pp
2000 17.72 +0.06 pp
1999 17.66 +0.09 pp
1998 17.57 +0.07 pp
1997 17.5 +0.11 pp
1996 17.38 −0.15 pp
1995 17.53 −0.07 pp
1994 17.6 −0.1 pp
1993 17.7 +0.07 pp
1992 17.63 −0 pp
1991 17.64

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.