Youth unemployment — all countries

Youth unemployment — Lithuania

Youth unemployment in Lithuania in 2025 — 13.76%. Ranked 97 in the world out of 182. Since 1991, the indicator has risen by 11.8 pp.

2025 13.76% +0.07 pp vs 2024
World rank 97of 182
Period maximum 35.74%2010
Period minimum 1.96%1991

Trend over time

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

Youth unemployment — Lithuania, 1991–202501020304019911995199920032007201120152019202320251991: 1.96%1992: 2.13%1993: 24.39%1994: 24.38%1995: 31.15%1996: 29.26%1997: 25.29%1998: 25.24%1999: 25.44%2000: 28.54%2001: 31.53%2002: 20.42%2003: 26.93%2004: 20.25%2005: 15.77%2006: 9.98%2007: 8.39%2008: 13.35%2009: 29.58%2010: 35.74%2011: 32.59%2012: 26.68%2013: 21.9%2014: 19.26%2015: 16.3%2016: 14.46%2017: 13.27%2018: 11.12%2019: 11.85%2020: 19.56%2021: 14.3%2022: 11.87%2023: 13.71%2024: 13.69%2025: 13.76%
Change over the period: +11.8 pp Annual average: 0.35 pp

Comparison, 2025

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

Lithuania 13.76%
World 13.41%
Northern Europe computed 15.5%
High-income countries computed 11.17%
Youth unemployment — Lithuania, by year Lithuania All countries CSV XLSX
Year % Change, pp
2025 13.76 +0.07 pp
2024 13.69 −0.02 pp
2023 13.71 +1.84 pp
2022 11.87 −2.43 pp
2021 14.3 −5.25 pp
2020 19.56 +7.71 pp
2019 11.85 +0.73 pp
2018 11.12 −2.15 pp
2017 13.27 −1.19 pp
2016 14.46 −1.85 pp
2015 16.3 −2.96 pp
2014 19.26 −2.64 pp
2013 21.9 −4.79 pp
2012 26.68 −5.9 pp
2011 32.59 −3.16 pp
2010 35.74 +6.16 pp
2009 29.58 +16.23 pp
2008 13.35 +4.96 pp
2007 8.39 −1.59 pp
2006 9.98 −5.78 pp
2005 15.77 −4.49 pp
2004 20.25 −6.68 pp
2003 26.93 +6.51 pp
2002 20.42 −11.1 pp
2001 31.53 +2.99 pp
2000 28.54 +3.1 pp
1999 25.44 +0.2 pp
1998 25.24 −0.05 pp
1997 25.29 −3.97 pp
1996 29.26 −1.9 pp
1995 31.15 +6.77 pp
1994 24.38 −0.01 pp
1993 24.39 +22.26 pp
1992 2.13 +0.17 pp
1991 1.96 —

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.