Youth unemployment — all countries

Youth unemployment — Tanzania

Youth unemployment in Tanzania in 2025 — 2.38%. Ranked 7 in the world out of 182. Since 1991, the indicator has fallen by 3.91 pp.

2025 2.38% +0.05 pp vs 2024
World rank 7of 182
Period maximum 6.76%2011
Period minimum 2.33%2024

Trend over time

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

Youth unemployment — Tanzania, 1991–20250246819911995199920032007201120152019202320251991: 6.29%1992: 6.37%1993: 6.62%1994: 6.58%1995: 6.33%1996: 6.05%1997: 5.85%1998: 5.76%1999: 5.67%2000: 5.54%2001: 5.35%2002: 5.45%2003: 5.54%2004: 5.67%2005: 5.83%2006: 6.02%2007: 5.63%2008: 5.27%2009: 4.84%2010: 5.85%2011: 6.76%2012: 6.26%2013: 5.69%2014: 3.69%2015: 3.44%2016: 3.24%2017: 3.04%2018: 2.85%2019: 2.66%2020: 2.75%2021: 2.75%2022: 2.34%2023: 2.34%2024: 2.33%2025: 2.38%
Change over the period: −3.91 pp Annual average: -0.11 pp

Comparison, 2025

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

Tanzania 2.38%
World 13.41%
Eastern Africa computed 7.77%
Youth unemployment — Tanzania, by year Tanzania All countries CSV XLSX
Year % Change, pp
2025 2.38 +0.05 pp
2024 2.33 −0 pp
2023 2.34 −0 pp
2022 2.34 −0.41 pp
2021 2.75 +0.01 pp
2020 2.75 +0.09 pp
2019 2.66 −0.19 pp
2018 2.85 −0.19 pp
2017 3.04 −0.2 pp
2016 3.24 −0.2 pp
2015 3.44 −0.25 pp
2014 3.69 −2 pp
2013 5.69 −0.57 pp
2012 6.26 −0.5 pp
2011 6.76 +0.91 pp
2010 5.85 +1.01 pp
2009 4.84 −0.43 pp
2008 5.27 −0.36 pp
2007 5.63 −0.39 pp
2006 6.02 +0.19 pp
2005 5.83 +0.17 pp
2004 5.67 +0.12 pp
2003 5.54 +0.09 pp
2002 5.45 +0.1 pp
2001 5.35 −0.19 pp
2000 5.54 −0.13 pp
1999 5.67 −0.1 pp
1998 5.76 −0.09 pp
1997 5.85 −0.19 pp
1996 6.05 −0.28 pp
1995 6.33 −0.25 pp
1994 6.58 −0.04 pp
1993 6.62 +0.25 pp
1992 6.37 +0.08 pp
1991 6.29 —

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.