Committente: European Committee of the Regions
Periodo: 2017
URL: Youth initiative: a framework for youth entrepreneurship
Descrizione:
The scope of this study is to provide the European Committee of the Regions (CoR) with background information and analysis on how youth entrepreneurship is promoted and boosted by local and regional authorities (LRAs). This scope is reflected in three main research questions: 1) ‘Which are the background conditions justifying the policy focus on youth entrepreneurship and influencing the participation of young people in the labour market?’; 2) ‘Which are the main measures adopted by LRAs to promote and boost youth entrepreneurship at the territorial level?’; and 3) ‘Which are the main challenges and needs faced by LRAs in the promotion of youth entrepreneurship?’ The first question on the background conditions is answered in Part 1 of the study where an introductory overview is given based on latest available statistics. In 2015, unemployed youth (i.e. aged 15-24) in the European Union (EU) were 4.6 million. Although the youth unemployment rate has improved since 2013, in 2015 it was still over the pre-recession level and the double of the total unemployment rate. Furthermore, in some regions (i.e. NUTS2) the situation is dramatic. In 2015, against an average EU youth unemployment rate of 20.4%, there are peaks of unemployment at NUTS2 level in the range of 40%-60%. This evidence justifies the need to address youth unemployment by means of tailored initiatives as well as the importance given by policymakers to youth entrepreneurship as a way out of unemployment, inactivity, or social exclusion. In 2015, both the youth long-term unemployment rate and the young people not in employment, education or training (NEETs) indicators were still worse than the pre-recession levels. On an opposite trend is the rate of early school leavers which decreased at the EU level since 2007. Among the other domains which may influence the decision of a young person to become an entrepreneur, the lack of capital is the most important, followed by the lack of skills (EC, 2013). In terms of attitude, the Youth Monitor reports over the period 2011-2014 a decreasing trend in the share of young people wishing to set up their own business. This rather negative attitude by the youth towards selfemployment is confirmed by the overall results of the 2014 Flash Eurobarometer survey of the European Parliament (EP, 2014). With regard to self-employment statistics, in 2015, the self-employment rate for young people in the EU was only 0.3% of the total employed and 2.3% of the total selfemployed. Furthermore, in the EU, the level of self-employment by youth decreased by 16% over the last decade (2006-2015). Overall, this situation justifies the necessity to implement specific measures to promote and boost youth entrepreneurship. The second research question enquiring which measures are actually adopted by LRAs towards this scope is answered in Part 2 of the study. The research method is mainly based on literature review and on the compilation of an inventory of initiatives implemented by, or with the significant support of, LRAs. Out of the 35 initiatives identified, ten have been described in more detail in short case studies presented in Part 4 of this report. The analytical review of all the initiatives and of the cases allowed the outline of six main categories of measures which are described in Part 2 and then analysed in Part 3 in terms of challenges and needs met by LRAs for the promotion of youth entrepreneurship. A first set of measures refers to the creation of a supportive environment for youth entrepreneurship. The capacity to take action in the creation of framework conditions which are supportive of youth entrepreneurship directly depends on the level of power of the concerned LRA. Where the sub-national level has some legislative and/or policymaking power, initiatives relate to the reform of the education system to make it inclusive of entrepreneurship; to the review of policies and legislation to support youth inclusion in society, including in terms of work placement and hence of self-employment; and to the fostering of ecosystems favourable to youth entrepreneurship in terms of engagement, empowerment and equipping of youth. Main identified challenges relate to the recognition/establishment of the most appropriate governance/interaction structure for implementation of actions related to youth entrepreneurship; to the definition of the legal and policy framework conditions for youth entrepreneurship; and to the use of youth entrepreneurship as a tool for retaining young people on the territory and facilitating their social inclusion. A second set of measures relates to the implementation of EU and/or national instruments and programmes directly tackling youth entrepreneurship with tailored initiatives. This set of measures is also commonly used by those LRAs not having legislative or policymaking power. In fact, there is ample evidence of the operationalization of (financial) instruments and programmes established at the European and/or national level for the promotion and support of youth entrepreneurship. Main identified challenges in this case relate to the capacity to properly and effectively design/manage projects/programmes and succeed in accessing competitive funding through the participation in open public calls for proposals. A third set of measures refers to the fostering of an entrepreneurial mindset, attitude and culture among youth as well as among their teachers. This area appears to be prioritised by LRAs and is considered either as an intervention which nurtures the sustainability of any initiative undertaken to promote youth entrepreneurship or as a way to equip young people with the capacity to consider entrepreneurship as a career option. The most relevant challenge relates to the introduction of entrepreneurship education within the formal education systems in general or the teaching activities in particular; or to the demonstration of the actual opportunities offered by entrepreneurship through less conventional approaches such as collaborative spaces. A fourth set of measures aims at providing the youth with information, training, advice, coaching and mentoring on entrepreneurial activities. Among the features which are frequently tackled by LRAs within this set is the recruitment of entrepreneurs to act as ‘role models’, and the reliance on comprehensive partnerships, or triple/quadruple helix interaction models where territorial authorities, universities, businesses and social partners each cooperate with a role and a contribution scope. Challenges in this intervention area relate to the qualifications and motivation of teachers for training activities, and to the scarce availability of business expertise for advising, coaching and mentoring activities. A fifth set of measures relates to the facilitation of the access of young entrepreneurs to financial resources for the start-up of their businesses. Major challenges in this case relate to the involvement of the private risk capital, the provision of guarantees for loans, and the identification of public resources for support. Finally, a last category of measures relates to the provision of structural support (e.g. offices, services) to the youth for the implementation of their entrepreneurial ideas. The challenge in this case relates to the identification of the proper facilities. Against the identified challenges, recommendations are drawn in Part 5. They point to: a) the opportunity, where the legal power and the administrative competences of the public authority allow, of promoting youth entrepreneurship as part of a more comprehensive ‘youth package’; b) the importance of building up an ecosystem of actors and, possibly, an ecosystem’s governance for coordination and interaction purposes; c) the necessity of having direct contacts or links with the target groups, as part of a well-defined reach out strategy; d) the possibility of mastering available instruments and programmes at the national and/or EU level by means of a strategy for actively seeking competitive funding opportunities, and of monitoring and evaluation exercises; e) the pertinence of upgrading the education systems with the inclusion of entrepreneurship teaching; f) the suitability of verifying the awareness, motivation and engagement level of teachers; g) the importance of building structural relationships with local financial actors to make new capitals available; h) the appropriateness of fostering synergies between funds to leverage their effect in quantitative terms; and i) the possibility of identifying and making use of soft (i.e. entrepreneurial know-how) and hard (i.e. entrepreneurial spaces) assets to the benefit of young entrepreneurs. Finally, there is evidence that youth entrepreneurship has been pursued by LRAs for a long time. Some of the initiatives started ten or more years ago and are still implemented as consolidated practices. In some cases, they started as a pilot at the territorial level and were later rolled out at the national level. Hence, there is a relevant experience on which other LRAs may build. Also, measures are mostly applied in combination and with the involvement of various stakeholders, concurrently contributing to several of the aspects fostering youth entrepreneurship. The way partnerships are comprehensive, interactive and engaged is of key importance to the successful achievement of results.
European Committee of the Regions, 26 April 2017.