Youth employment, education and skills
Data extracted from the ILO–IHD joint report. Browsable tables, interactive charts, and state-wise comparisons.
Read the full chapter-by-chapter breakdown of the 342-page report. Each page contains extracted content from the ILO–IHD report.
Key findings and policy pointers at a glance.
Context, economic growth, and the employment challenge.
Labour force, employment, unemployment, underemployment, quality, and COVID-19 impact.
GVA, productivity, and sectoral analysis.
Demographics, participation, quality, and COVID-19 impact.
Education profile, returns, and mismatch.
Skills development, training, and job search assistance.
Policy agenda and the way ahead.
Combined analysis of COVID-19's impact on employment, youth, and labour market trends.
The Employment Condition Index combines multiple labour market indicators (wages, formalization, social security, unemployment, NEET rates) into a single score. Higher = better conditions.
| State | 2005 Score | 2005 Rank | 2012 Score | 2012 Rank | 2019 Score | 2019 Rank | 2022 Score | 2022 Rank | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Delhi | 0.60 | 1 | 0.70 | 1 | 0.61 | 1 | 0.79 | 1 | +0.19 |
| Himachal Pradesh | 0.56 | 2 | 0.65 | 2 | 0.57 | 2 | 0.67 | 2 | +0.11 |
| Telangana | 0.51 | 5 | 0.55 | 4 | 0.42 | 16 | 0.60 | 3 | +0.09 |
| Uttarakhand | 0.55 | 3 | 0.54 | 6 | 0.49 | 9 | 0.59 | 4 | +0.04 |
| Gujarat | 0.49 | 7 | 0.52 | 10 | 0.51 | 6 | 0.57 | 5 | +0.08 |
| Kerala | 0.34 | 20 | 0.46 | 14 | 0.50 | 7 | 0.56 | 6 | +0.22 |
| Tamil Nadu | 0.48 | 9 | 0.50 | 12 | 0.52 | 5 | 0.56 | 7 | +0.08 |
| Jammu & Kashmir | 0.53 | 4 | 0.53 | 9 | 0.52 | 4 | 0.55 | 8 | +0.02 |
| Rajasthan | 0.49 | 6 | 0.51 | 11 | 0.43 | 15 | 0.55 | 9 | +0.06 |
| Maharashtra | 0.47 | 10 | 0.54 | 5 | 0.48 | 10 | 0.55 | 10 | +0.08 |
| Andhra Pradesh | 0.43 | 15 | 0.48 | 13 | 0.44 | 14 | 0.54 | 11 | +0.11 |
| Haryana | 0.48 | 8 | 0.56 | 3 | 0.53 | 3 | 0.54 | 12 | −0.02 |
| Assam | 0.39 | 18 | 0.40 | 19 | 0.44 | 13 | 0.54 | 13 | +0.15 |
| Karnataka | 0.46 | 11 | 0.53 | 8 | 0.49 | 8 | 0.54 | 14 | +0.08 |
| Chhattisgarh | 0.44 | 14 | 0.44 | 16 | 0.46 | 12 | 0.54 | 15 | +0.10 |
| Punjab | 0.45 | 13 | 0.54 | 7 | 0.48 | 11 | 0.53 | 16 | +0.08 |
| West Bengal | 0.35 | 19 | 0.41 | 18 | 0.42 | 17 | 0.51 | 17 | +0.16 |
| Madhya Pradesh | 0.45 | 12 | 0.45 | 15 | 0.41 | 18 | 0.49 | 18 | +0.04 |
| Uttar Pradesh | 0.40 | 17 | 0.41 | 17 | 0.38 | 19 | 0.49 | 19 | +0.09 |
| Jharkhand | 0.42 | 16 | 0.39 | 20 | 0.36 | 20 | 0.49 | 20 | +0.07 |
| Sector | 2000–2012 | 2012–2019 | 2019–2022 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agriculture | −0.39% | −2.55% | +8.93% |
| Manufacturing | +2.89% | −0.33% | +3.00% |
| Construction | +9.15% | +2.18% | +6.37% |
| Services | −0.67% | +10.80% | +1.09% |
| Non-agriculture (total) | +3.86% | +2.09% | +2.61% |
| Employment Type | Average Monthly Earnings (2022) |
|---|---|
| Regular salaried workers | ₹19,010 |
| Self-employed | ₹11,973 |
| Casual workers | ₹8,267 |
The economy is not generating enough suitable employment for the increasing number of educated youth. Manufacturing and services need targeted investment.
90% informal employment means no social security, no contracts, no stability. Formalization and labour protection must be priorities.
Women’s LFPR is ~25%. NEET rates are overwhelmingly female. Caste, region, and gender gaps persist and must be actively tackled.
Technical and vocational training reach is low. Skill mismatch is a major driver of educated youth unemployment. PMKVY, DDU-GKY need scaling.
Policymakers lack timely, granular labour market data. The Periodic Labour Force Survey is a step forward, but more disaggregated tracking is needed.