The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the proportion of youth not in employment, education or training: A regional analysis and international perspective

Introduction

The proportion of youth not in employment, education or training (NEET) is an indicator that is used worldwide to identify youth at risk of social disconnection and exclusion during their transition from education to employment.

Over the course of the pandemic, measures put in place to prevent the spread of COVID-19 posed unprecedented disruptions for youth aged 15 to 29 with the shift to virtual learning, loss of employment opportunities and the decline of mental health and wellbeing.^Note NEET rates for youth aged 15 to 29 increased in response to these changing economic and social conditions.^Note While the economic fallout that resulted from the global health crisis has reached far and wide – the international, regional, and individual impacts on NEET rates are varied.

This fact sheet presents data from the Labour Force Survey (LFS) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) between 2019 and 2021. The data is presented by age group, selected OECD member country, province/territory and individual characteristics to better understand youth transitions between education and the labour market in Canada before and during the first two years of the pandemic.

The increase in NEET rates was greater in Canada and the United States during the first year of the pandemic, relative to other OECD member countries

Prior to the pandemic, Canada’s NEET rate was 13 percent, compared with the OECD average of 14 percent in 2019.^Note Across OECD member countries, the annual NEET rate increased by 14 percent for youth aged 18 to 24 from 2019 to 2020.^Note The largest increases in youth NEET among the selected OECD countries were seen in Canada and the United States, where the NEET rates increased by 46 and 33 percent respectively, over the first year of the pandemic.

Data table for Chart 1



Data table for chart 1
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for chart 1 18 to 24, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	18 to 24
	percent
2019 to 2020
Canada	46.47
France	0.00
New Zealand	9.55
OECD - Average	13.81
United Kingdom	5.22
United States	32.30
2019 to 2021
Canada	10.45
France	-8.44
New Zealand	-1.62
OECD - Average	3.71
United Kingdom	-5.36
United States	16.74
Source: Education at a Glance, 2022.

Canada experienced stricter health measures in 2021, affecting youth in jobs impacted by these restrictions

Around the globe, countries enacted public health measures that could potentially affect NEET rates, either through the transition to remote learning or restrictions that affected employment. The stringency of public health measures among the selected countries was relatively similar in 2020, but in 2021 Canada recorded higher stringency scores (71.2 compared with an average of 59.4 in the selected countries) according to the international COVID-19 stringency index.^Note

Data table for Chart 2



Data table for chart 2
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for chart 2 2020 and 2021, calculated using COVID-19 stringency score units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	2020	2021
	COVID-19 stringency score
Canada	59.36	71.28
France	57.92	64.55
New Zealand	41.36	45.16
United States	61.81	58.61
United Kingdom	59.58	57.72
Source: Our World in Data, 2022.

The effects of these restrictions may differ because of the types of jobs typically held by youth in a given country. Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States are largely characterized by a deregulated labour market, with many entry-level jobs.^Note Youth in these countries were employed in industries that may have been more affected by measures implemented to prevent the spread of COVID-19.^Note Therefore, in Canada, youth may have been comparatively worse off due to their relatively high concentration in industries that were hit hard by public health measures.

By 2021, the NEET rate had returned to levels comparable to before the pandemic for all the selected OECD countries.^Note This result followed the implementation of various government measures to support young people back into education and the labour market, the easing of pandemic-related restrictions, and broader economic recovery.^Note

Ontario and Quebec had the highest stringency scores during the COVID-19 pandemic, impacting economic and education opportunities for youth

Within Canada, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on NEET rates varied among the provinces and territories and across age groups. One of the reasons for this variation is that public health measures are applied at the provincial/territorial level and differed in terms of stringency, timing and duration. Ontario and Quebec consistently had the highest stringency scores among the provinces, indicating more severe measures were in place.^Note The prairies, alternatively, scored the lowest. In addition to posing disruptions to learning, recent research found that tighter public health restrictions on business and personal activity were associated with a slowing of economic activity in Canada, impacting youth employment.^{Note Note}

Data table for Chart 3



Data table for chart 3
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for chart 3 2020 and 2021, calculated using COVID-19 stringency score units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	2020	2021
	COVID-19 stringency score
Newfoundland and Labrador	37.58	39.42
Prince Edward Island	40.67	34.52
Nova Scotia	38.82	39.56
New Brunswick	40.27	35.34
Quebec	44.20	48.67
Ontario	46.37	52.53
Manitoba	43.18	46.83
Saskatchewan	37.04	29.04
Alberta	33.85	34.72
British Columbia	31.71	34.34
Yukon	34.74	30.96
Northwest Territories	37.75	35.94
Nunuvat	39.66	37.62
Source: Clarke et al., Statistics Canada, 2020 and 2021.

Atlantic “bubble” provided labour market protection for 25- to 29-year-olds, while those in Quebec, Ontario experience extended lockdowns and unfavourable labour market conditions

There is evidence that the so-called Atlantic “bubble” experienced less of an economic impact since the onset of the pandemic.^Note The public health measures in place resulted in fewer restrictions for businesses and schools, which is reflected in the relatively low stringency scores of the Atlantic provinces (39.3 in 2020 and 37.2 in 2021). Youth employment in New Brunswick and Newfoundland and Labrador exceeded pre-pandemic levels in 2021 and NEET rates were stable.

Similarly, British Columbia had a relatively low stringency score in 2020 (31.7) and 2021 (34.3) and experienced the strongest employment recovery in Canada between 2020 and 2021, where the number of operational businesses has surpassed pre-pandemic levels.^Note Consequently, the NEET rate for 25- to 29-year-olds in British Columbia remained stable from 2019 to 2021.

Higher stringency scores in Ontario (46.3 in 2020 and 52.5 in 2021) and Quebec (44.2 in 2020 and 48.6 in 2021), conversely, were linked to lower employment levels than in 2019.^Note In Quebec, the NEET rate for youth aged 25 to 29 increased from 12 to 16 percent between 2019 and 2021. In Ontario, youth aged 25 to 29 also felt the repercussions of pandemic conditions into 2021 with one in five (20.7%) Ontario youth in NEET in 2021, compared with one in seven (14.6%) in 2019.

Data table for Chart 4



Data table for chart 4
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for chart 4 NEET rate, 95% confidence interval down and 95% confidence interval up, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	NEET rate	95% confidence interval down	95% confidence interval up
	percent
2019
Newfoundland and Labrador	24.55	6.59	6.72
Prince Edward Island	17.90	4.71	4.92
Nova Scotia	17.63	3.66	3.98
New Brunswick	17.81	3.47	3.64
Quebec	12.02	1.89	2.04
Ontario	14.64	1.64	1.72
Manitoba	15.86	2.48	2.56
Saskatchewan	14.67	2.38	2.40
Alberta	15.63	2.22	2.43
British Columbia	13.67	2.52	2.38
Northwest Territories	27.32	9.00	8.64
Nunavut	41.40	6.64	7.61
Canada	14.39	0.91	0.91
2020
Newfoundland and Labrador	24.91	5.00	5.49
Prince Edward Island	18.37	4.94	5.08
Nova Scotia	20.02	3.56	3.96
New Brunswick	21.46	3.95	4.74
Quebec	13.72	2.12	2.31
Ontario	16.80	1.72	1.76
Manitoba	17.26	2.85	2.82
Saskatchewan	15.88	2.48	2.65
Alberta	20.79	2.82	2.86
British Columbia	16.21	2.38	2.77
Northwest Territories	19.42	7.51	6.77
Nunavut	40.35	9.10	9.15
Canada	16.81Note *	0.95	1.00
2021
Newfoundland and Labrador	24.51	5.95	6.70
Prince Edward Island	11.26	3.57	4.01
Nova Scotia	17.40	4.14	4.35
New Brunswick	19.95	4.32	4.80
Quebec	16.11	3.05	2.83
Ontario	20.78Note *	2.29	2.15
Manitoba	15.58	2.55	2.55
Saskatchewan	18.74	3.20	3.83
Alberta	16.15	3.01	3.14
British Columbia	13.14	2.55	2.72
Northwest Territories	28.46	14.27	13.17
Nunavut	49.08	15.29	9.27
Canada	17.91Note *	1.32	1.24
Note * Values differ significantly from 2019. Return to note * referrer Note: NEET rates for the provinces/territories are calculated as 3-month averages over the months January to March. The 2020 reference period only includes 1 month where the labour market was affects by the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, NEET estimates for 2020 do not reflect the full impact of the pandemic. Yukon estimates supressed to meet the confidentiality requirements of the Statistics Act. Source: Statistics Canada, Labour Force Survey, January-March 2019, January-March 2020 and January-March 2021.

Prairie provinces saw the greatest sustained increase in NEET for youth aged 20 to 24

For youth aged 20 to 24, changes in the labour market were also a factor that affected the NEET rate. For example, Alberta’s economy was the hardest hit over the pandemic due to the economic downturn in the energy sector, which resulted in lower levels of employment for youth.^Note In this province, youth aged 20 to 24 experienced a sustained increase in the NEET rates relative to 2019 (four percentage points higher in both 2020 and 2021). Economic disruptions had a similar impact in Saskatchewan where the NEET rate increased by six percentage points in 2021, relative to pre-pandemic levels.^Note

Data table for Chart 5



Data table for chart 5
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for chart 5 NEET rate, 95% confidence interval down and 95% confidence interval up, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	NEET rate	95% confidence interval down	95% confidence interval up
	percent
2019
Newfoundland and Labrador	18.62	5.06	4.53
Prince Edward Island	13.56	4.07	4.30
Nova Scotia	15.27	2.99	3.07
New Brunswick	18.07	4.32	3.61
Quebec	10.53	2.04	2.47
Ontario	12.73	1.48	1.60
Manitoba	15.37	2.63	2.66
Saskatchewan	12.30	2.61	2.50
Alberta	11.95	2.08	2.33
British Columbia	11.13	2.20	2.37
Yukon	12.55	6.51	7.31
Northwest Territories	31.56	9.35	8.23
Nunavut	66.16	7.59	6.39
Canada	12.36	0.83	0.94
2020
Newfoundland and Labrador	21.53	4.47	4.56
Prince Edward Island	13.24	4.33	4.96
Nova Scotia	19.14	3.62	3.86
New Brunswick	15.17	3.30	3.73
Quebec	12.71	2.05	2.18
Ontario	13.56	1.44	1.46
Manitoba	15.48	2.50	2.91
Saskatchewan	15.13	2.63	2.95
Alberta	15.80	2.78	3.15
British Columbia	13.85	2.27	2.29
Yukon	14.12	9.20	11.39
Northwest Territories	31.35	10.21	9.16
Nunavut	53.23	8.58	9.38
Canada	14.11	0.89	0.94
2021
Newfoundland and Labrador	20.64	5.46	6.83
Prince Edward Island	17.32	5.01	5.25
Nova Scotia	15.31	3.93	4.62
New Brunswick	20.72	4.67	5.11
Quebec	11.81	2.23	2.52
Ontario	16.15Note *	1.78	1.92
Manitoba	14.58	2.64	2.67
Saskatchewan	17.57	3.42	3.76
Alberta	15.76	2.80	2.89
British Columbia	15.84	3.12	3.00
Yukon	20.31	12.85	13.01
Northwest Territories	15.83	7.12	9.74
Nunavut	66.68	14.14	10.71
Canada	15.36Note *	1.00	1.08
Note * Values differ significantly from 2019. Return to note * referrer Note: NEET rates for the provinces/territories are calculated as 3-month averages over the months January to March. The 2020 reference period only includes 1 month where the labour market was affects by the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, NEET estimates for 2020 do not reflect the full impact of the pandemic Source: Statistics Canada, Labour Force Survey, January-March 2019, January-March 2020 and January-March 2021.

Youth aged 15 to 19 in Quebec, Saskatchewan and British Columbia most impacted by school closures

The youngest age group of 15- to 19-year-olds were most likely to be in school, and thus were likely the most affected by the school closures that occurred at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Relative to pre-pandemic NEET rates in 2019, the largest increases in 2020 were observed in Quebec (4.9 to 10.3%), Saskatchewan (6.0 to 12.0%) and British Columbia (5.4 to 10.7%). The increase in the NEET rate was primarily due to a decline in youth participating in education across Canada between 2019 and 2020 (-3.8 percentage points), likely due to changes in the delivery of education rather than youth leaving school entirely.^Note By 2021, however, those aged 15 to 19 generally returned to education.

Data table for Chart 6



Data table for chart 6
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for chart 6 NEET rate, 95% confidence interval down and 95% confidence interval up, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	NEET rate	95% confidence interval down	95% confidence interval up
	percent
2019
Newfoundland and Labrador	8.87	3.02	3.55
Prince Edward Island	5.63	2.73	3.15
Nova Scotia	4.79	1.77	1.93
New Brunswick	6.00	1.89	2.10
Quebec	4.96	1.12	1.06
Ontario	5.68	0.80	1.00
Manitoba	7.94	1.79	1.91
Saskatchewan	6.08	1.68	1.71
Alberta	7.62	2.20	2.08
British Columbia	5.44	1.36	1.56
Yukon	10.23	7.62	8.33
Northwest Territories	7.30	4.38	5.17
Nunavut	19.59	5.52	6.03
Canada	5.89	0.56	0.52
2020
Newfoundland and Labrador	11.38	2.81	2.60
Prince Edward Island	8.54	3.53	3.14
Nova Scotia	7.46	2.31	2.33
New Brunswick	8.78	2.49	2.35
Quebec	10.33Note *	1.82	1.83
Ontario	8.25Note *	1.11	1.07
Manitoba	6.58	1.51	1.65
Saskatchewan	12.08Note *	2.04	2.22
Alberta	8.12	1.74	1.80
British Columbia	10.78Note *	1.75	2.26
Yukon	14.36	7.33	8.60
Northwest Territories	10.31	6.20	5.76
Nunavut	23.35	6.58	6.82
Canada	9.11Note *	0.64	0.68
2021
Newfoundland and Labrador	10.72	4.06	5.58
Prince Edward Island	4.89	2.36	2.82
Nova Scotia	6.54	2.56	2.63
New Brunswick	4.55	2.05	2.09
Quebec	6.74	1.52	1.62
Ontario	5.83	1.01	1.10
Manitoba	8.36	1.91	2.14
Saskatchewan	9.37	2.23	2.34
Alberta	7.54	1.79	2.00
British Columbia	8.17	2.06	2.49
Yukon	16.80	11.49	11.25
Northwest Territories	8.73	7.00	9.12
Nunavut	17.47	7.17	6.37
Canada	6.82	0.66	0.71
Note * Values differ significantly from 2019. Return to note * referrer Note: NEET rates for the provinces/territories are calculated as 3-month averages over the months January to March. The 2020 reference period only includes 1 month where the labour market was affects by the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, NEET estimates for 2020 do not reflect the full impact of the pandemic Source: Statistics Canada, Labour Force Survey, January-March 2019, January-March 2020 and January-March 2021.

NEET rates for Indigenous youth did not increase significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic

Even prior to the pandemic, the proportion of youth not in employment, education or training varied among different groups of youth across the country. For example, NEET rates have historically been higher for Indigenous youth than non-Indigenous youth^Note as Indigenous youth face additional barriers such as accessing quality education that is culturally sensitive. In addition, some Indigenous youth must leave their communities in pursuit of education and employment opportunities, that may cause cultural dislocation and exposure to discrimination.^Note

While the proportion of youth not in employment, education or training is significantly different between Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth, the pandemic NEET rates for Indigenous youth residing off reserve did not increase to the same degree as they did for non-Indigenous youth during the pandemic.^Note

Data table for Chart 7



Data table for chart 7
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for chart 7 15 to 19 years old, 20 to 24 years old, 25 to 29 years old, 2019/2020 school year and 2020/2021 school year, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	15 to 19 years old		20 to 24 years old		25 to 29 years old
	2019/2020 school year	2020/2021 school year	2019/2020 school year	2020/2021 school year	2019/2020 school year	2020/2021 school year
	percent
Indigenous	11.11	12.00	25.09	26.73	24.84	27.64
95% confidence interval down	2.25	2.63	3.66	4.75	3.83	5.08
95% confidence interval up	2.50	3.15	3.90	4.80	3.95	5.75
Non-Indigenous	5.63	6.17	11.35	14.97Note *	12.86	16.11Note *
95% confidence interval down	0.55	0.59	0.86	1.02	0.80	1.16
95% confidence interval up	0.58	0.59	0.83	1.15	0.85	1.34
Note * Values differ significantly between September 2019-February 2020 and September 2020-February 2021. Return to note * referrer Source: Statistics Canada, Labour Force Survey, September 2019-February 2020 and September 2020-February 2021.

Additional impacts of public health measures included safety concerns and adverse effects on mental health

Women with lower levels of education, immigrants and individuals with mental or physical health concerns faced additional challenges, putting them at greater risk of falling into the NEET category.

Women aged 25 to 29 with an education level lower than high school completion had one of the largest increases (+37.2%) in the proportion of NEET in 2021, relative to 2019, compared with an increase of 25.0% for men in the same category. This finding fits into a larger body of research that suggests women of all ages have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic due to their concentration in the services sector, which is relatively sensitive to public health measures.^Note

Additionally, immigrant youth experienced a larger increase in NEET rates relative to non-immigrant youth, particularly for those aged 15 to 19 (63% higher than 2019 NEET levels). For this age group, the proportion of immigrant youth NEET increased from 4 to 7 percent from 2019/2020 to 2020/2021, while the NEET rate for non-immigrant youth remained stable at 6 percent. For those aged 15 to 19, this increase in NEET was primarily due to a decrease in the number of those attending school, which was not observed for Canadian-born students.^Note This finding is consistent with recent work indicating that immigrants disproportionately felt the effects of COVID-19. For example, immigrants have faced greater health risks and poorer perceived safety during the pandemic.^{Note Note}

Data table for Chart 8



Data table for chart 8
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for chart 8 15 to 19 years old, 20 to 24 years old and 25 to 29 years old, calculated using percent change units of measure (appearing as column headers).

	15 to 19 years old	20 to 24 years old	25 to 29 years old
	percent change
Immigrant	63.71Note *	36.64Note *	14.01
95% confidence interval down	44.24	27.13	20.10
95% confidence interval up	67.40	34.28	22.77
Non-Immigrant	6.22	28.76Note *	22.57Note *
95% confidence interval down	12.08	10.48	10.88
95% confidence interval up	14.92	12.53	11.75
Note * Values differ significantly between September 2019-February 2020 and September 2020-February 2021. Return to note * referrer Source: Statistics Canada, Labour Force Survey, September 2019-February 2020 and September 2020-February 2021.

The mental health of youth in Canada was particularly affected by the pandemic, which can contribute to whether an individual is able to participate in employment, education or training.^Note More Canadian youth reported that they did not look for a job due to their own illness or disability in 2020/2021, relative to pre-pandemic levels.^Note

The mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic also affected those who were employed. Recent data from the LFS indicates that the prevalence of mental health-related disability among employed youth increased from 2019 to 2021, particularly for women (9.6 to 17.2%), which is consistent with other studies that have examined the challenges faced by Canadians over the course of the pandemic.^Note

Conclusion

On an international scale, youth aged 18 to 24 in Canada and the United States experienced the largest increases in NEET rates – while youth in the United Kingdom faced subtler effects relative to the OECD average. Many factors likely play into the international experience of COVID-19, including the strength of public health measures applied across regions and the prevalence of youth employed in industries that are sensitive to those measures. While the stringency of public health measures among the selected countries was relatively similar in 2020, Canada had more restrictive measures in 2021.

In Canada, differences in the stringency of public health measures applied at the provincial/territorial level may have impacted NEET youth, through both school closures and persistent lockdowns affecting economic activity. The former is more likely to have played a role in the experience of youth aged 15 to 19 in Quebec and Saskatchewan, where the largest increase in NEET rates was observed. Economic contractions are more likely to have affected youth aged 20 to 24 and 25 to 29 in the prairies and Ontario, as labour market opportunities responded to declines in the energy, manufacturing and hospitality sectors.

Additionally, certain population groups were disproportionately affected by COVID-19. For example, women aged 25 to 29 who did not have a high school diploma experienced a particularly large increase (+37.2%) in the proportion of youth NEET in 2021. Immigrant youth aged 15 to 19 also experienced an increase in the NEET rate primarily due to a decrease in those attending school, which was not observed for Canadian-born youth.

This study has provided a high-level analysis of the impacts of the pandemic on NEET rates, and how they varied between countries and between regions within Canada. Future work might focus on the progress of groups vulnerable to falling into the NEET category, including Indigenous people, students, young women and immigrant youth. Additionally, analysis of the international response to COVID-19 may shed light on the best policy practices to support youth recovery around the globe.

       

Data sources, Methods and Definitions

The data used in this fact sheet are from the Labour Force Survey (LFS). The sample is representative of Canada's population aged 15 years and older, and each respondent aged 15 and over is classified as employed, unemployed or not in the labour force (inactive).

In international comparisons, NEET rates are calculated using only the first three months of the reference year, in accordance with OECD methodology. For national and interprovincial comparisons, the OECD methodology is employed. For certain population groups (i.e., immigrants, Indigenous youth and those with mental or physical illness) NEET rates are calculated using the months from September to February in order to maximize the sample size.

The bootstrap method is employed to calculate standard error and includes sampling uncertainties. Confidence intervals on the percentages in this analysis correspond to the 95% confidence interval. The increase or decrease is deemed significant if the confidence interval does not include zero.

An immigrant refers to a person who is or has ever been a landed immigrant or permanent resident in Canada. This person has been granted the right to live in Canada permanently by immigration authorities. Some immigrants are Canadian citizens, while others are not.^Note

The Indigenous population is composed of persons who reported being an Aboriginal person, that is, First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit). Excluded from the survey’s coverage are persons living on reserves and other Aboriginal settlements in the provinces, as well as those living in the territories.^Note

Both reported stringency measures are based on the methodology of the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT) developed by the University of Oxford’s Blavatnik School of Government. The index on any given day is calculated as the mean score of the metrics, each taking a value between 0 and 100, with a higher score indicating a higher level of stringency. The annual COVID-19 Stringency measure reported is calculated as an average of the daily scores each year.

The international COVID-19 Stringency Index is calculated as a composite measure of nine of the response metrics including: school closures, workplace closures, cancellation of public events, restrictions on public gatherings, closures of public transport, stay-at-home requirements, public information campaigns, restrictions on internal movements, and international travel controls.

The provincial/territorial COVID-19 Stringency Index measures the severity of containment policies related to COVID-19. For each province or territory, the restrictions index is the average of 15 policy-specific indexes where the policy-specific indexes are normalized values of corresponding policy indicators. Eight of the indexes are derived (with some modifications) from the variables in the Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index. Seven additional variables are added to the index to better reflect the policy stance of Canadian jurisdictions.^Note

References

Arriagada, P. 2021. “The achievements, experiences and labour market outcomes of First Nations, Métis and Inuit women with bachelor’s degrees or higher.” Insights on Canadian Society. Statistics Canada Catalogue no.  75-006-x.

Bank of Canada. 2022. “The Bank of Canada COVID-19 stringency index: measuring policy response across provinces.” COVID-19: Actions to Support the Economy and Financial System.

Barford, A., Coutts, A. and Garima, S. (2021). “Youth employment in times of COVID.” International Labour Organization.

Bourbeau, E. and Pelletier, R. 2019. “Young people not in employment, education or training: What did they do in the past 12 months?” Labour Statistics at a Glance. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 71-222-X.

Brunet, S. 2018. “The transition from school to work: The NEET (not in employment, education or training) indicator for 25- to 29-year-old women and men in Canada.” Education Indicators in Canada: Fact Sheet, no. 13. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 81-599-X.

Clarke, S., Dekker, J., Habli, N., Macdonald, R., and McCormack, C. 2022. “Measuring the Correlation Between COVID-19 Restrictions and Economic Activity.” Analytical Studies: Methods and References. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 11-633-X.

Deng, Z., Arim, R., Henseke, G., Schoon, I., Dietrich, H., Murray, A., Smyth, E. and Dupéré, V. 2022. “Youth unemployment in Canada, Germany, Ireland, and the United Kingdom in times of COVID-19.” Economic and Social Reports. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 36-28-0001.

Dinkes, R. 2021. “Education at a glance 2021: putting U.S. data in a global context.” NCES Blog. National Center for Education Statistics.

Grekou, D. and Lu, Y. 2021. “Gender differences in employment one year into the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis by industrial sector and firm size.” Economic and Social Reports. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 36-28-0001.

Hango, D., Zarifa, D. and Seward, B. 2021. “Are some canadian youth NEETer than others? Examining North–South and rural–urban inequalities in education, employment, and training.” The Northern Review 52: 61–89.

LaRochelle-Côté, S. and Uppal, S. (2020). “The social and economic concerns of immigrants during the COVID-19 pandemic.” StatCan COVID-19: Data to Insights for a Better Canada. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 45-28-0001.

Leclerc, K. 2020. “Caring for their children: Impacts of COVID-19 on parents.” StatCan COVID-19: Data to Insights for a Better Canada. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 45-28-0001.

Morissette, R. 2021. “Chapter 2: Youth Employment in Canada.” Portrait of Youth in Canada: Data Report. Statistics Canada, Catalogue no. 42-28-0001.

Ng, E. 2021. “COVID-19 deaths among immigrants: Evidence from the early months of the pandemic.” StatCan COVID-19: Data to Insights for a Better Canada. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 45-28-0001.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2020. “Job retention schemes during the COVID-19 lockdown and beyond.” Tackling Coronavirus (COVID-19).

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2022a. “Education at a glance 2021: OECD indicators.” OECD Publishing.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2022b. “First lessons from government evaluations of COVID-19 responses: A synthesis.” Tackling Coronavirus (COVID-19).

Ritchie, H., Mathieu, E., Rodés-Guirao, L., Appel, C., Giattino, C., Ortiz-Ospina, E., Hasell, J., Macdonald, B., BeltekianM D. and Roser M. 2020. "Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)". Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus

Sandner, M., Patzina, A., Anger, S., Bernhard, S. and Dietrich, H. 2021. “The COVID-19 pandemic, well-being, and transitions to post-secondary education.” Discussion Paper Series. IZA Institute of Labour Economics No. 14797.

Schoon, I. and Bynner, J. 2019. “Young people and the Great Recession: Variations in the school-to-work transition in Europe and the United States.” Longitudinal and Life Course Studies 10: 153–173.

Statistics Canada. 2020. Labour Force Survey questionnaire, Guide to the Labour Force Survey, Appendix C. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 71-543-G.

Statistics Canada. 2021a. “Economic impacts of COVID-19 in the provinces and territories.” A Presentation Series from Statistics Canada About the Economy, Environment and Society. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 11-631-X.

Statistics Canada. 2021b. “Self-perceived mental health and mental health care needs during the COVID-19 pandemic.” StatCan COVID-19: Data to Insights for a Better Canada. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 45-28-0001.

Statistics Canada. 2021c. “Working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic, April 2020 to June 2021.” The Daily.

Statistics Canada. 2022. “Mental health-related disability rises among employed Canadians during pandemic, 2021.” The Daily.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2021. “Employment and unemployment among youth summary.” Summer Youth Labor Force. Economic News Release.

Wall, K. 2021. “Gendered impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the proportion of youth neither in employment nor education at the start of the school year.” Insights on Canadian Society. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 75-006-X.

Zeman, K. and Frenette, M. 2021. “Chapter 3: youth and education in Canada.” Portrait of Youth in Canada: Data Report. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 42-28-0001.