Georgia’s NEET Challenge: Why Young Women and Graduates Are Most at Risk of Being Left Out

GILS Research Team

Editor: Prof. Giorgi Pkhakadze, MD, MPH, PhD

Georgian Institute of Labour Studies · GILS Analysis

2 October 2026

Roughly three in ten young Georgians aged 15–29 have been found to be neither in employment, education nor training (NEET). Among teenagers the NEET share has been falling, mainly because more young people stay in education. But as young Georgians move through their twenties, the problem changes character: it becomes concentrated among young women outside the labour force and, unusually, among graduates. This analysis argues that Georgia’s NEET challenge is less a teenage dropout problem than a failed transition from education to work — and that it is gendered.

Updated 2 October 2026: this analysis now includes Geostat’s NEET data for 2024 and 2025.

1. Introduction

The NEET rate — the share of young people not in employment, education or training — is a broader measure of youth exclusion than the unemployment rate, because it includes young people who are inactive as well as those searching for work. It has become a standard indicator in the European Union and in the Sustainable Development Goals.

A companion GILS analysis shows that Georgia’s falling youth unemployment rate reflects, in part, young people leaving the labour force. This analysis focuses on a different question: who are Georgia’s NEETs, and why? Our thesis is that the stereotype of the NEET as a teenage dropout is misleading in Georgia. The core of the problem lies in the twenties, among young women and among graduates — groups for whom the transition from education to work is failing.

2. Data

This analysis draws on the World Bank’s study of the gender profile of NEETs in Georgia and Armenia (World Bank, 2019), PMCG Research’s analysis of Geostat youth data for 2020–2023 (ages 15–24), and Geostat figures cited by UNA Georgia. These sources use different age ranges and periods — 15–29 in the World Bank study, 15–24 in the PMCG analysis — so their figures are not directly comparable. They are used here to establish patterns rather than a single precise rate.

3. Findings

3.1 A high rate, falling among teenagers

Both the World Bank (31%) and Geostat (30.6% in 2019) placed the NEET rate for 15–29-year-olds at around three in ten before the pandemic. Geostat’s current NEET series begins in 2020 (35.1%) and is not directly comparable with the 2019 figure; it shows the rate falling to 23.4% by 2025. The earlier figures compare with about 11% for tertiary-educated 25–29-year-olds across OECD countries (UNA Georgia, n.d.). Among 15–24-year-olds, the NEET share has improved: it fell by 8 percentage points between 2020 and 2023, to 21%. But the improvement came from more young people studying — the share studying and not working rose by 8 points — rather than from more young people working (PMCG Research, 2024).

3.2 The gender divide

The World Bank study found NEET rates consistently higher for young women than young men in Georgia, concluding that being female is itself a risk factor for labour market exclusion. Crucially, the nature of being NEET differs by sex: for young women, the most common condition is economic inactivity due to homemaking or caregiving; for young men, it is unemployment (World Bank, 2019). A study citing the same evidence reports that at the age of 20, 37% of young women in Georgia are NEET (EPRC, n.d.).

Recent data confirm the divide. Young women’s labour force participation was on average 14 percentage points below young men’s over 2020–2023. Young men are more likely to be working and not studying, young women more likely to be studying and not working (PMCG Research, 2024). Across all ages, women’s labour force participation in 2024 was 44.9%, against 66.2% for men (Geostat, 2025).

3.3 The graduate paradox

In most countries, more education strongly protects against being NEET. Georgia and Armenia stand out as exceptions: the World Bank found that higher education does not necessarily prevent young people from becoming NEET, and that NEET rates among higher education graduates were even higher than among those with less education, especially for women. The study described this as a strong sign of mismatch between the supply of graduates and the demand for skilled labour (World Bank, 2019).

3.4 An urban phenomenon

Contrary to common assumptions, the World Bank found Georgia’s NEET phenomenon to be mostly urban. One plausible interpretation, consistent with the ILO finding that agricultural employment is almost entirely informal (Pignatti, 2026), is that in rural areas young people who are not studying are more likely to work in family agriculture, even if informally, while in cities a young person who does not find suitable work is more likely to remain outside employment altogether. This interpretation should be tested with current microdata.

4. Discussion

Argument 1: Georgia’s NEET problem is a transition problem

If the NEET share among teenagers is falling because more of them stay in education, but graduates face higher NEET risk than non-graduates, then the weakest point in the system is the transition from education to work. More education is being supplied; the labour market is not converting it into jobs. Policies focused on keeping teenagers in school address a part of the problem that is already improving.

Argument 2: The female NEET is mostly a care problem

When young women are NEET because of homemaking and caregiving, active labour market programmes designed for the unemployed will not reach them. The barrier is the availability of care services and the social expectation that young women provide unpaid care. Georgia’s NEET strategy must therefore include childcare and elder care, not only training and job search assistance.

Counter-argument: being NEET is often temporary

Some young people are NEET briefly between studies and a first job, or while caring for a newborn child. Not all NEET status signals long-term exclusion. We agree, and better data on the duration of NEET spells would help. But the evidence that young women’s NEET status is driven by inactivity rather than job search, and that graduates face higher risk, suggests that a significant share is not short-term frictional status.

Counter-argument: young people choose not to work

It is sometimes argued that NEET status reflects preferences — young people waiting for better jobs or supported by family. Preferences matter, but they are formed in response to opportunities. When only 9% of employed young people work part-time (PMCG Research, 2024) and graduate jobs are scarce, choosing to wait may simply reflect the absence of suitable options.

5. Limitations

The main sources use different age ranges and reference years, and the most detailed gender and education breakdown is from a study published in 2019. Recent Georgian NEET data broken down by sex, education and region are not routinely published, which limits analysis of current patterns. The duration of NEET spells could not be examined.

6. Conclusion

Georgia’s NEET challenge is often described as a “lost generation” of teenagers. The evidence points elsewhere: to young women in their twenties held outside the labour force by care responsibilities, and to graduates whom the labour market fails to absorb. These are problems of transition and of care, not primarily of schooling. Addressing them requires care services, graduate employment pathways and NEET data that are published regularly and broken down by sex and education.

GILS analyses are prepared with AI-assisted drafting. All figures and claims are verified against the cited primary sources and reviewed under the responsibility of the Editor.

This analysis is also published in GMJ News — Work & Health, the news service of the Georgian Medical Journal.