Labour Market Policies and University Lifelong … Market Policies and University Lifelong Learning...

| Institute for Advanced Studies | Stumpergasse 56 | 1060 Vienna | Tel: +43 1 59991-0 | www.ihs.ac.at | www.equi.at |

Labour Market Policies and

University Lifelong Learning

for people in mid-life

Lorenz Lassnigg

([email protected]; www.equi.at)

Keynote to final conference of the EU Lifelong learning programme project

“THEMP. Tertiary Education for people in midlife” Barcelona, 14th November 2013


Agenda

Two still separate things…

…should be brought together…

…by focusing on…

…and considering

2

University Lifelong

Learning Employment & Labour market

Social risks management


Agenda

(How) might this be achieved by Tertiary/University Lifelong

Learning (T/ULLL)?

– understanding and some reflexions on the material from the THEMP project

– ‚Transitional labour markets‘ as a rationale of social risks management

Which problems arise in this untertaking of T/ULLL?

– some thoughts about the development of universities and tertiary education

– some reflexions about policy experience in my country (Austria)

3


Reflexions on TLM:

Transitional labour markets

4


TLM

complex concept, normative and analytical

Complexity of concept: main meaning/message not so easy to

grasp…

…a broader combination of security and flexibility (‚secu-bility‘)…

– (a) ‚modernization‘ of full-employment and (b) ‚fundamental‘ reconciliation of

efficiency and equity through a socio-economic perspective

(a) flexibility: from static to dynamic view, focus from ‚states‘ to ‚transitions‘ > allowing

transitions

(b) security: ‚making transitions pay‘ by a broad set of financing and governing ideas and

proposals > securing transitions

…based on arrangements of ‚social insurance‘ (risk+solidarity) and

‚reflexive governance‘ (goals+evaluation)

Problems, issues

– some oscillation of normative/political and theoretical/analytical aspects

strength or weakness?

– very demanding in realization for the political process

‚neoliberal environment‘, clear preference for flexibility over security

competition with ‚flexicurity‘-concept, more simple at first sight

Conclusion: rather illuminating/generative than operative concept

5


TLM, illustration of the basic framework,

based on Ralf Rogowski 2008, p.11

6

accepting transitions

securing transitions

Source: Rogowski, Ralf, ed. (2008) The European Social Model and Transitional Labour Markets. Law

and Policy. Surrey: Ashgate.

Income

support

Income

security

Income

capacity

Income

replacement

Income

maintenance


TLM, extended inclusive illustration

based on writings by Günther Schmid

C o m b i n.

e m p l o y m .

& o the r

a c tiv itie s

F is c a l

inc e nti v e s

fa v o u r

e m p l o y m .

V a lid

e ntit le m .

to w a rd s

c ho ic e s

C o m b i n.

o f

inc o m e

s o u rc e s

S o lid a ri ty

L M -E M P L O Y M E N T

P O L IC Y

In d iv id u a l

a u to no m y

E ff ic a c y

W E L F A R E

P O L IC Y

E ff ic ie nc y

E m p o w e r m e nt

o f ind iv i d u a ls

C o o rd i na tio n o f

d e c is io n m a k i n g

S u s ta ina b ilty o f

fi na nc i n g

C o o p e ra tio n

in ne t w o rk s

IN S T IT U T IO N A L D IV E R S IT Y

IN S T . C O M P L E M E N T A R IT Y

IN S T IT U T . C O N G R U E N C Y

http://www.equi.at/dateien/TLM-LLL-lifecourse.pdf

7









TLM, extended inclusive illustration

C o m b i n.

e m p l o y m .

& o the r

a c tiv itie s

F is c a l

inc e nti v e s

fa v o u r

e m p l o y m .

V a lid

e ntit le m .

to w a rd s

c ho ic e s

C o m b i n.

o f

inc o m e

s o u rc e s

S o lid a ri ty

L M -E M P L O Y M E N T

P O L IC Y

In d iv id u a l

a u to no m y

E ff ic a c y

W E L F A R E

P O L IC Y

E ff ic ie nc y

E m p o w e r m e nt

o f ind iv i d u a ls

C o o rd i na tio n o f

d e c is io n m a k i n g

S u s ta ina b ilty o f

fi na nc i n g

C o o p e ra tio n

in ne t w o rk s

IN S T IT U T IO N A L D IV E R S IT Y

IN S T . C O M P L E M E N T A R IT Y

IN S T IT U T . C O N G R U E N C Y


8

prescriptive principles

of TLM arrangements

basic criteria for labour market and employment policy

generic principles for welfare policy, applied to LMEP

generalised strategies

essential for risk

management

APPRENTICESHIP

as a paradigm case of

a transitional labour

market









Understanding and embedding TLM

by the THEMP project…

…very creative and inclusive theoretical approach…

…combining TLM with capability and extended capital approaches

…and considering the dimension of quality of work/life

Consequences:

– extending risk management by conversion of learning outcomes into forms of

capital that can be used in employment and the labour market

9


Understanding the THEMP project, and points

for discussion

Source: Materials from THEMP Project

http://themp.eu/

10

Theory very broad and inclusive

understanding of the

relationship between LLL

(T/ULLL) and

employment and the LM

- TLM

- Capability

- Capital

- Employability and

quality of life/work

Basic mechanism

conversion of learning

outcomes into capital

Priorities

Mid-life learners in university as tertiary environments

Focus on the relationship between T/LLL and employment and

the LM (as mediators for quality of life)

Policy/Practice of T/ULLL (inclusive checklist for

structuring policy and practice at four dimensions)

LEARNERS -LM-transitions

-capital

-access

STRUCTURES -mission

-organisation/gov.

-management/tasks

-networking

TEACHING/

PROVISION -certificates

-access

-RPL

-teachers

-ped.methods

RISK -consultancy

-funding

-evaluation

http://themp.eu/

http://themp.eu/


Some reflexions about basic issues of


11


Some reflexions about basic issues of


How is university/H.E. considered in LLL in Austria? We see the

separation

some more specific points

– status of TLLL within ET and LLL: aggravating the ‘Matthew Principle‘?

– differentiation of HE and labour market: conflicts between priorities in h.e.?

– explorations of the ‚3rd mission‘: basis for the social role of the university?

– research results about an educational leave programme: ‚Mattew‘ and weak

economic outcomes – is employment and the labour market a good rationale for

the support of adult education?

12


Policy experience in Austria

about LLL and university

Background: broad government LLL strategy, developed since 10-

15years, published 2011, partly implemented until now

– Four ministries responsible (education, science, labour, economy)…

– …going through the ET-cycle from pre-primary to adult education…

– …10 ‚action lines‘, broken down by measures are key strategic elements…

preprimary, compulsory, 2nd chance, youth transition, new orientation and WLB,

community education, work environment, adult training, retired people, NQF

– …basically cooperative bottom-up strategy (platform of players, task force from

ministries, no money in advance)

– …focus on improvement/support for disadvantaged groups/positions

University/H.E. LLL only marginally included in original structure;

because of one responsible actor, proposals/measures being

developed:

– development/extension/creation of regular study programmes for employed

people

exist formally in polytechnics; informally majority of university students are working

– open access possible but not taken, development of recognition under way

– autonomous universities are developing institutional LLL-strategies (3rd mission)

13


Comment on the project from the point of view

of Austrian policy experience

Some Action lines related to T/ULLL, but university not considered:

– 2nd chance x

– New orientation > taken up in limited way

– Working environment x

– Older people x

Overall policy under big resource constraints (mainly PES invests

considerably) > focus on the more severely disadvantaged…

– Youth transitions, training guarantee, permeability for apprentices

– People without or with low qualifications (literacy, vocational qualifications)

– Immigrants, recognition, language

…upward mobility from mid-level positions mainly not sponsored

and/or need substantial private contributions

– ‚Maturity examination‘ for university H.E. access

– ‚Professional‘ programmes, kinds of non academic professional grades

mostly very expensive, ‚positional goods‘ for status competition

Source: http://www.bmwf.gv.at/fileadmin/user_upload/aussendung/Strategie_zum_lebensbegleitenden_Lernen_in_OEstereich.pdf

(in German)

14

http://www.bmwf.gv.at/fileadmin/user_upload/aussendung/Strategie_zum_lebensbegleitenden_Lernen_in_OEstereich.pdf

http://www.bmwf.gv.at/fileadmin/user_upload/aussendung/Strategie_zum_lebensbegleitenden_Lernen_in_OEstereich.pdf


Reflexions on TLLL 1:

status of TLLL within ET and LLL

basic propositions of TLLL

– ageing populations, demand for lifelong learning, and tensions in employment

and labour market for older people (45+, and preparation 40+)

– support of employablity and quality of work/life for mid-aged groups

– social functions of universities

essential points of the approach

– going beyond a simplistic economic rationale in devising policies

– developing measures for success

– developing organisational/institutional models

Questions concerning the status of TLL within overall education and

training and lifelong learning

– participation gaps in employment and et for older and lower educated people

‚Matthew Principle‘, aggraveated by support of TLLL?

– big neglected issue: demand for career changes and/or new orientations in mid-

life

Data-Source: own calculations from OECD Education at a Glance

15


16

8179

74

61

56

72

90

73

50

44

40

27

21

39

61

4148

42

37

2320

38

59

38

16

11

7

2 3

9

19

9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

25-34y 35-44y 45-54y 55-64y . <up.sec. up+post.sec Tert. . 25-64y

All levels of education . 25-64y . Total

Sweden

New Zealand

United States

Canada

OECD average

EU19 average

Australia

Korea

Hungary

Participation gaps in adult education

by age, education (non EU)

age education

EU-Max

EU-Min


17

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

25-34y 35-44y 45-54y 55-64y . <up.sec. up+post.sec Tert. . 25-64y

All levels of education . 25-64y . Total

Sweden

New Zealand

Switzerland

Finland

Norway

United Kingdom

United States

Germany

Netherlands

Slovak Republic

Denmark

Estonia

Canada

Austria

Slovenia

OECD average

Belgium

EU19 average

Australia

Czech Republic

France

Spain

Korea

Portugal

Italy

Poland

Greece

Hungary

Participation gaps in adult education

by age, education (EU)

age education


18

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64

<up.sec. up.Sec.+post.nt Tert.

Sweden

New Zealand

Switzerland

Finland

Norway

Austria

Belgium

Czech Republic

Denmark

Estonia

Germany

Netherlands

Portugal

Slovak Republic

Slovenia

United Kingdom

United States

France

Canada

Australia

Italy

Spain

Poland

Korea

Greece

Hungary

OECD average

EU19 average

Participation gaps (EAG 2012)

adult education by age and education


19

2925

22

14

46

4139

28

6563

61

47

2724

20

12

4641

37

25

65 6360

43

7

3 31

15

10

6

2

23 2320

9

67

64

54

49

7578

74

61

96

9092

79

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64


OECD average

EU19 average

Hungary

Sweden

Participation gaps (OECD, EU19)



20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64


New Zealand

United States

Canada

Australia

Korea

OECD average

EU19 average

Hungary

Sweden

Participation gaps (non EU)



21

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64


Sweden

Switzerland

Finland

Norway

Austria

Belgium

Czech Republic

Denmark

Estonia

Germany

Netherlands

Portugal

Slovak Republic

Slovenia

United Kingdom

France

Italy

Spain

Poland

Greece

Hungary

OECD average

EU19 average

Participation gaps (EU19)




Differentiation of HE and labour market

‚Theorem‘ of Elite>mass>universal higher education: organisational

change vs. differentiation

– [Europe] change of established institutions: ‚elite university‘ > ‚mass university‘

– [US] different kinds of institutions evolving, change of system,

elite+mass+universal h.e.institutions

research university, (4y) state university, (2y) community colleges

Question: what does this theorem mean for TLLL?

– is differentiation of h.e. towards different types of institutions necessary?

Rankings and ‚global research universities‘ and innovation in the the ‚knowledge economy‘

How does Bologna relate to this theorem? (1st-2nd-3rd cycle)

– what does it mean for different functions of the h.e.system?

differentiation of research and teaching?

different forms of teaching? graduate programmes; further education programmes

– What does this mean for the social dimension of h.e.?

different degrees of selectivity in different kinds of institutions?

Source: http://www.equi.at/dateien/3FFF-Endb.pdf (in German)

22

http://www.equi.at/dateien/3FFF-Endb.pdf





is this

paradigmatic

in the long run?

what does it

mean for TLLL?

– counter-

movement?

– too weak?

23

Elite Mass

Uni-

versal

US Higher education, stylized view



Results about the ‚third mission‘ of university

Two understandings of differentiation: institutions change (Europe)

or differentiate (US)

Globalisation of science and research: global research university,

what are the consequences? contribution to the global research enterprise?

What does the 3rd Mission mean? Where is it situated? Mode 2 of knowledge production, transdisciplinarity

24

DIFFERENTIATION Functional Research Teaching 3rd Mission

Institutional

Research university, graduate school

Elite main main

State university 4 yr.univ

Mass some main

Community college 2 yr univ

Universal only


„global research universities“

beyond national scale?

„[…] the great research universities. These are genuinely

international institutions, educating students from around the world,

contributing to the international research literature, interacting with

firms and governments from many countries, and employing on their

faculties internationally recognized intellectual leaders from around

the world.” (Lester 2007, S. 20)

„5* (five star) Quality that equates to attainable levels of

international excellence in more than half of the research activity

submitted and attainable levels of national excellence in the

remainder.” (Day 2004, S. 7)

„Cambridge has the highest proportion of outstanding research in

the UK. The university submitted 2,040 staff, 71% of whose work

was deemed to be world-leading or internationally excellent,

compared with 70% of 2,246 Oxford staff's research. Both

universities submitted work in 48 disciplines.“

25



Results from an educational leave evaluation

In Austria a educational leave programme (‚Bildungskarenz‘) has

been created and evaluated that is quite instructive for TLLL

For employed people, up to one year, subsidy for living expenses,

training mandatory

Originally developed for older people, and main purpose was to

support low qualified employees…

…turned out as an important support for TLLL…

…however, ‚objective‘ economic results disappointing, but subjective

assessment very positive…

..conclusion: LMP-measure used as a kind of ‚study grant‘

Source: presentation Engl. http://www.equi.at/dateien/ecer-cadiz12.pdf; report in

German: http://www.equi.at/dateien/evaluierung_der_bildungskare.pdf

26

http://www.equi.at/dateien/ecer-cadiz12.pdf




http://www.equi.at/dateien/evaluierung_der_bildungskare.pdf

http://www.equi.at/dateien/evaluierung_der_bildungskare.pdf


Heterogenity: Typology of participation

90% classified

27

Typ (in %)

nicht zugeordnet 9

Überberuflich 4

Beruf Wirtschaft, Recht 4

Beruf: Ingenieur, Herstellung, Bau 2

Beruf: Gesundheit, soziale Dienste 10

Formal: Meisterprüfung 9

Formal: Studienberechtigung 13

Formal: Hochschulstudium 28

Initiative vom AG 21

Initiative Arbeitgeber

FORMAL: Hochschule

FORMAL: Studienberechtigung

FORMAL: Meister

NON-FORMALBerufliche Weitberbildung

Wirtsch.Recht

Ing.Herst.Bau

Gesundh.Sozial

überberufliche WBnicht zugeordnet

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Bildungskarenz - Typologie

not classified

NF-cVET: busin.law;

tech; health

FORMAL: appr.mast

HE-access exam

HE

Employer‘s initiaitve

Soft skills, IT, language


Employers' initiative

28

Typ (in %)

nicht zugeordnet 9

Überberuflich 4

Beruf Wirtschaft, Recht 4

Beruf: Ingenieur, Herstellung, Bau 2

Beruf: Gesundheit, soziale Dienste 10

Formal: Meisterprüfung 9

Formal: Studienberechtigung 13

Formal: Hochschulstudium 28

Initiative vom AG 21

Initiative Arbeitgeber

FORMAL: Hochschule

FORMAL: Studienberechtigung

FORMAL: Meister

NON-FORMALBerufliche Weitberbildung

Wirtsch.Recht

Ing.Herst.Bau

Gesundh.Sozial

überberufliche WBnicht zugeordnet

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Bildungskarenz - Typologie

Sub-Typen IAG (in % v.total)

nicht zugeordnet 2%

Überberuflich 4%

BERUFLICH Hauptbereiche 10%

FORMAL 6%

FORMALzusammen

BERUFLICHHauptbereiche

überberuflich

nicht zugeordnet

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%Bildungskarenz -Sub-Typologie bei Initiative derArbeitgeber

not classified

NF-cVET: busin.law;

tech; health

FORMAL: appr.mast

HE-access exam

HE

Employers‘ initiaitve

Soft skills, IT, language


Employment participants & comparisons 00-09

29

80,7%82,9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b02-04b07-09

Befr.TN Vgl.Gr.

83,4%

91,2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b02-04b07-09

Befr.TN männl Vgl.Gr. Männl

78,7%76,8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b02-04b07-09

Befr.TN weibl Vgl.Gr. Weibl

8993

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b04/02b09/07

Befr.TN Vgl.Gr.

88

99

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b04/02b09/07


8988

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b04/02b09/07


2009/04

2004=100

93

89

99

88

89

88

total

men

women

INDICATOR:

share of days in

employment p.yr. INDEX


Y.income participants & comparisons 00-09

30

80,7%82,9%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b02-04b07-09

Befr.TN Vgl.Gr.

83,4%

91,2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b02-04b07-09


78,7%76,8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b02-04b07-09


8993

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b04/02b09/07

Befr.TN Vgl.Gr.

88

99

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b04/02b09/07


8988

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b04/02b09/07


€ 28.074€ 28.348

€ 0

€ 5.000

€ 10.000

€ 15.000

€ 20.000

€ 25.000

€ 30.000

€ 35.000

JEk00

JEk01

JEk02

JEk03

JEk04

JEk05

JEk06

JEk07

JEk08

JEk09

JEk 02-04

JEk 07-09

Befr.TN Vgl.Gr. € 33.628€ 32.279

€ 0

€ 5.000

€ 10.000

€ 15.000

€ 20.000

€ 25.000

€ 30.000

€ 35.000

JEk 00

JEk 01

JEk 02

JEk 03

JEk 04

JEk 05

JEk 06

JEk 07

JEk 08

JEk 09

JEk 02-04

JEk 07-09

Befr.TN m Vgl.Gr. m

€ 24.351€ 24.171

€ 0

€ 5.000

€ 10.000

€ 15.000

€ 20.000

€ 25.000

€ 30.000

€ 35.000

JEk 00

JEk 01

JEk 02

JEk 03

JEk 04

JEk 05

JEk 06

JEk 07

JEk 08

JEk 09

JEk 02-04

JEk 07-09

Befr.TN w Vgl.Gr. w

123127

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 04/02 09/07

Befr.TN Vgl.Gr.

141135

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 04/02 09/07

Befr.TN m Vgl.Gr. m

112117

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 04/02 09/07

Befr.TN w Vgl.Gr. w

2009/04

2004=100

127

123

141

135

117

112

total

men

women

INDICATOR:

yearly income (€) INDEX


Typology: employment and income

31

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b02-04b07-09

Initiative vom AG (N=12) Formal: Hochschulstudium (N=80)

Formal: Studienberechtigung (N=56) Formal: Meisterprüfung (N=34)

Beruf: Gesundheit, soziale Dienste (N=62) Beruf: Ingenieur, Herstellung, Bau (N=5)

Beruf: Wirtschaft, Recht (N=20) Überberuflich (N=20)

nicht zugeordnet (N=41) Total

€ 0

€ 5.000

€ 10.000

€ 15.000

€ 20.000

€ 25.000

€ 30.000

€ 35.000

€ 40.000

JEk 00

JEk 01

JEk 02

JEk 03

JEk 04

JEk 05

JEk 06

JEk 07

JEk 08

JEk 09

JEk 02-04

JEk 07-09

Initiative vom AG (N=12) Formal: Hochschulstudium (N=80) Formal: Studienberechtigung (N=56)

Formal: Meisterprüfung (N=34) Beruf: Gesundheit, soziale Dienste (N=62) Beruf: Ingenieur, Herstellung, Bau (N=5)

Beruf: Wirtschaft, Recht (N=20) Überberuflich (N=20) nicht zugeordnet (N=41)

Total

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

b00 b01 b02 b03 b04 b05 b06 b07 b08 b09 b 04/02

b 09/07

Initiative vom AG (N=12) Formal: Hochschulstudium (N=80)

Formal: Studienberechtigung (N=56) Formal: Meisterprüfung (N=34)

Beruf: Gesundheit, soziale Dienste (N=62) Beruf: Ingenieur, Herstellung, Bau (N=5)

Beruf: Wirtschaft, Recht (N=20) Überberuflich (N=20)

nicht zugeordnet (N=41) Total

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

JEk 00

JEk 01

JEk 02

JEk 03

JEk 04

JEk 05

JEk 06

JEk 07

JEk 08

JEk 09

JEk 04/02

JEk 09/07

Initiative vom AG (N=12) Formal: Hochschulstudium (N=80) Formal: Studienberechtigung (N=56)

Formal: Meisterprüfung (N=34) Beruf: Gesundheit, soziale Dienste (N=62) Beruf: Ingenieur, Herstellung, Bau (N=5)

Beruf: Wirtschaft, Recht (N=20) Überberuflich (N=20) nicht zugeordnet (N=41)

Total

2009/04

2004=100

Employment

Income

INDEX

Formal tert.ed.

Formal tert.ed.


Tentative conclusions

Within LLL demand for tertiary learning will probably increase…

…however, not clear, how urgently this demand should be supported

by public means

– equity issues

– how related to support of low educated people?

Some rather dampening arguments:

– Priorities high vs. low qualified: aggravation of ‚Matthew‘

– Priorities for development of h.e. towards research quality

global scale might push labour market beyond the national scale

– Social aspect of 3rd mission might concern rather the academic core than LLL

role of ‚mode2‘ of knowledge production

– Narrow economic rationale of LLL questionable

32


Source: THEMP 2nd draft

Core dimensions

33

Unemployment

higher education


Share of H.E. graduates among unemployed in

Austria 1987-2013 (Oct.)

34

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

19

87

19

88

19

89

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

AK-Al

>=45J AK-Al

Source: Austrian PES (AMS) Database, own calculations


Share of H.E. graduates among unemployed in

Austria 1987-2013 (Oct.)

35

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

19

87

19

88

19

89

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

AK-Al

>=45J AK-Al

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

19

87

19

88

19

89

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

AK-Al

>=45J AK-Al

AK-Al

Linear (AK-Al)

Linear (AK-Al)


Proportion of older (45+) unemployed among

ue h.e. graduates in Austria

Unemployed tertiary graduates /

all unemployed (same as

Slides 34-35)

Unemployed tertiary graduates

>=45 years / all unemployed

tertiary graduates

Source: Austrian PES (AMS)

Database, own calculations

36

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

AK-Al

>=45J AK-Al

Linear (AK-Al)

Linear (>=45J AK-Al)

25%

25%

26%

26%

27%

27%

28%

28%

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

%AK-Al >=45J

%AK-Al >=45J


www.equi.at

Material

37

www.equi.at


ANNEX: Age first tertiary entrants

OECD: 27,0

EU19: 25,0

Source: OECD, Education at a Glance

38

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0

35,0

40,0

45,0

age 80%perc. (20% of first tertiary entrants above age...)

Date post:	19-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ngohanh
View:	215 times
Download:	1 times

Labour Market Policies and University Lifelong … Market Policies and University Lifelong Learning...

Documents