EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Brussels, 11.4.2024

SWD(2024) 90 final

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

Evaluation

Accompanying the document

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions

on the interim evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027

{COM(2024) 162 final}

Table of contents

1.Introduction

2.What was the expected outcome of the intervention?

2.1.Description of the EU Youth Strategy and its objectives

2.2.Points of comparison

3.How has the situation evolved over the evaluation period?

3.1.Current state of play

4.Evaluation findings

4.1.To what extent was the intervention successful and why?

4.2.How has the EU intervention made a difference and to whom?

4.3.Is the intervention still relevant?

5.What are the conclusions and lessons learned?

Annex I. Procedural information

Annex II. Methodology and analytical models used

Annex III. Evaluation matrix

Annex IV. Overview of benefits and costs and, where relevant, table on simplification and burden reduction.

Annex V. Stakeholder consultation – synopsis report

Glossary

This staff working document describes the purpose, methodology and findings of the European Commission’s interim evaluation of the European Union Youth Strategy 2019-2027 (hereafter referred to as ‘EUYS’), which is the framework for EU cooperation in the youth field based on the Council Resolution of 18 December 2018 1 .  

Purpose

Based on the Council Resolution establishing the EUYS, and in line with the European Commission's Better Regulation Guidelines 2 , the purpose was to provide an interim evaluation of the EUYS, assessing its effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, coherence, and EU-added value at mid-point.

The results will be used as input to eventually develop and adapt the instruments and initiatives in the context of the implementation of the EUYS, to guide potential adjustments to the EUYS and its alignment with evolving developments, challenges, and needs of young people. The results will also inform the reflections and preparations of the framework for EU youth policy cooperation beyond 2027.

Scope

The interim evaluation covers:

-the period from 2019 to part of 2023, which represents the midway point of the EUYS’ implementation;

-the analysis of the performance of the EUYS in all EU Member States;

-the EUYS’ instruments and related initiatives, such as the EU Youth Dialogue, the EU Youth Coordinator, the European Youth Portal, mutual learning activities, knowledge- and evidence-building, the European Youth Work Agenda, and more.

-the alignment with the Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps programmes and the effects of the 2022 European Year of Youth on the EUYS.

Methodology

The Commission’s interim evaluation was supported by an independent external evaluation assignment/support study 3 using a mixed-method approach to data collection and analysis, including qualitative and quantitative data and contribution analysis. The contribution analysis consisted of assessing the extent to which the EUYS contributed to the intended changes and included developing an intervention logic for the EUYS instruments, unpacking their implementation and using primary evidence validating the assumptions. In addition, a cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using a defined framework to assess the costs associated with the EUYS. A steering group of relevant Commission departments oversaw the evaluation.  

The external evaluation assignment was carried out between February and December 2023 and included a public consultation and multiple targeted consultations. The consultation strategy for the evaluation was based on a mapping of stakeholders and the quantitative and qualitative data was mainly gathered through the following consultation activities:

·Call for evidence on the Commission’s 'Have Your Say' portal from 23 September to 21 October 2022.

·Public consultation on the ‘Have Your Say’-portal from 26 April to 2 August 2023.

·Quantitative data on awareness of the EUYS and engagement with its instruments, collected through:

-Online survey of young people

-Online survey of youth civil society organisations, youth researchers and youth informal groups

·Qualitative data on perceptions of the EUYS and examples of progress in its implementation, collected through:

-105 key informant interviews with 21 policy makers at EU level and 84 policy makers at national level and 3 focus groups with 15 decision and national policy makers, from 3 May to 20 June 2023;

-4 focus groups with 21 young people from 14 June to 8 August 2023Group interviews and individual interviews were performed with 9 civil society organisations, youth researchers and youth informal groups from 14 June to 23 August 2023.

Figure 1. Stakeholders’ participation in consultation activities.

Source: Kantar Public – Public Consultation on the EU Youth Strategy, 2023

The EU mandate 4 and the open method of coordination 5 in the field of youth policy set the scope for the intervention logic. The EUYS aims at contributing to the development of youth policies by encouraging cooperation and supporting and supplementing Member States' actions. This involves a challenge in identifying causality and in attributing and quantifying the specific effects of the EU Youth Strategy. The effect of the EUYS is thus often indirect, and mediated by stakeholders’ awareness, their buy in and alignment to the EUYS.  The performance of the EUYS relies to a large extent on Member States activities, their interest in exchanging and learning from each other, making use of the instruments available at EU level, and committing resources at national, regional and local levels to pursue the common objectives.

The evaluation encountered some challenges to data collection. The main limitations identified were the complexity of youth-related policies, potential overlaps with other evaluations, and limited evidence on human resource cost data. Mitigation measures involved prioritising qualitative methods such as key informant interviews and focus groups to capture insights on youth policies' complexity, methodology to differentiate from overlapping assessments, and quality checks in data collection.

The methodology is detailed in Annex I and II.

2.1.Description of the EU Youth Strategy and its objectives

The EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 builds on 20 years of European youth policy cooperation and aims to promote young people's participation in democratic life, in line with Article 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, to support social and civic engagement and to ensure that all young people have the necessary means to participate in society.

The overall objectives of the EUYS are to:

·enable young people to be architects of their own lives, support their personal development and growth to autonomy, build their resilience and equip them with life skills to cope with a changing world;

·encourage and equip young people with the necessary resources to become active citizens, agents of solidarity and positive change inspired by EU values and a European identity;

·improve policy decisions with regard to their impact on young people across all sectors, notably employment, education, health and social inclusion;

·contribute to the eradication of youth poverty and all forms of discrimination and promote the social inclusion of young people.

By pursuing the above objectives, the EUYS should also help realise the vision of young people as expressed in the 11 European Youth Goals 6 , which are part of the EUYS, by mobilising EU level policy and programme instruments and actions at national, regional and local levels by all stakeholders.

In short, the EUYS aims to engage, connect and empower young people, and to advance youth participation and youth mainstreaming across different policy areas. Through the open method of coordination, it encourages the development of youth policies across the EU and beyond, in synergy with other policies targeting young people such as education and training, employment, health, culture, environment, media literacy or digital skills. It also provides a policy framework for the EU youth programmes, which are Erasmus+ youth and the European Solidarity Corps.

The EUYS maintains a high degree of stability and continuity in overall objectives and instruments. At the same time, changes were introduced to better respond to the challenges and needs in a rapidly evolving society, to address the recommendations from the interim evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy 2010-2018 and to reflect input coming from stakeholders and young people.

The structure of the EUYS was simplified and the previous eight fields of action were rationalised into three core areas of the youth sector – ‘Engage, Connect, Empower’- – while also mainstreaming youth as a priority across different policy areas and emphasising the importance of greater youth involvement across the board.

The changes introduced in the 2019-2027 EU Youth Strategy, most of them resulting from the lessons learned from the interim evaluation of the predecessor framework 2010-2018, mainly consisted in adaptations linked to:

·More focus and flexibility to adapt European priorities in national contexts;

·Wider outreach to young people, in particular those with fewer opportunities;

·A new approach to working across policy areas;

·Improved transparency and monitoring framework;

·Multi-level and participatory governance;

·A clearer link between EU youth policy and related EU programme activities.

Concretely, the main new/strengthened actions included:

·Improve cross-sector cooperation across policy areas, including through the creation of an EU Youth Coordinator, to give youth a voice in shaping EU policies;

·Launch a new and more inclusive EU Youth Dialogue, with a focus on youth with fewer opportunities;

·Remove obstacles to and facilitate volunteering and solidarity mobility;

·Implement a Youth Work Agenda to increase recognition of non-formal learning;

·Reinforce the links between EU youth policy and related EU programmes (Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps)

·Track EU spending on youth.

The EUYS was developed before 2019 against the backdrop of a broad range of challenges of young people. On their way to adulthood, young people typically experience several transitions in their personal life and environment, from education and training to work, living on their own, partnerships or starting a family life, and becoming active citizens. Many face uncertainties about their future, because of climate change, digitalisation, globalisation, demographic and socioeconomic trends, discrimination, social exclusion, populism and fake news, with potential effects on jobs, skills, health and well-being, or of the way our democracies work.

The policy context has changed dramatically since the launch in 2019 of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027, with the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and the ensuing inflation crisis. During the first years of the implementation, these unforeseen circumstances have amplified existing challenges faced by young people and children, including negatively affecting the mental health and general well-being of young people. The Flash Eurobarometer on mental health 7 , launched in October 2023 ahead of World Mental Health Day, showed that 59% of young people (15–24 year-olds) had an emotional or psychosocial problem (such as feeling depressed or feeling anxious) in the last 12 months. According to a UNICEF report from 2021, suicide is the second leading cause of death among young people (15-19 years of age) after road accidents, and in the EU, the annual value of lost mental health, in children and young people is estimated at EUR 50 billion. 8  In the public consultation for this evaluation, the most frequently mentioned challenges for young people today are the impact of the rise in cost-of-living (95% of respondents), mental well-being (91%) and financial stability (90%). 

Intervention Logic of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027

Given the EUYS’ complexity and diverse set of instruments, assessing its impact requires a structured approach. To unravel how different components of the EUYS contribute to the overarching goals, impact pathways were developed as part of the external support study, shedding light on how the instruments contribute to the specific objectives in the EUYS’ three core areas: 'Engage,' 'Connect,' and 'Empower'.

For the evaluation, the impact pathways were organised in a simplified manner according to four groups that were anticipated to result in direct or indirect outcomes and impacts.

1)Policy development and implementation: Evidence-based youth policymaking and knowledge building, mutual learning and dissemination, peer learning activities, Future National Activities Planners and EU Work Plans for Youth. These activities establish the policymaking environment for all other activities;

2)Activities in the ‘Engage’ core area: Participatory governance including through the EUYS stakeholder platform; the EU Youth Dialogue and EU Youth Coordinator. These activities allow youth and relevant youth stakeholders to engage in youth policy making at the EU and national levels;

3)Activities in the ‘Connect’ core area: Communicating the EU Youth Strategy; mobilising and monitoring EU programmes and funds; youth information and support services such as the European Youth Portal.  These activities allow youth and relevant stakeholders to strengthen their network and use the opportunities available to them;

4)Activities in the ‘Empower’ core area: youth information and support services such as through European-wide organisations; and activities for the quality, innovation and recognition of youth work based on the European Youth Work Agenda.

Figure 2. Intervention Logic of the EU Youth Strategy.

Source Kantar Public

2.2.Points of comparison

To assess the impact of the EUYS, it is crucial to consider the context before the intervention and the expectations for its development. Given that the previous Strategy was active between 2010 and 2018, it serves as a valuable reference period to evaluate the progress achieved by the current Strategy.

Baseline

Over the reference period (2010-2018), European economies were recovering from the 2008 economic crisis. However, there were significant challenges such as the high level of NEETs. This was an indication of the vulnerable status of young people in the EU. Although there has been a notable decline to 11.7% in 2022, worldwide phenomena such as the COVID-19 pandemic slightly increased the proportion of young people in this categorisation.

Between 2014 and 2018, youth unemployment rates decreased across all Member States but remained more than twice as high as general unemployment. In 2018, 3.415 million young persons (under 25) were unemployed in the EU28. This decrease continued into 2019 but increased slightly in 2020 and 2021 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic Despite economic improvements, inequalities persisted. For example, the percentage of persons at risk of poverty or social exclusion (aged 15-29) rose between 2015 and 2016 to a peak of 28.3%. Thereafter, there has been a steady decline in this rate, to a low of 24.3% in 2019. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, saw a 1 percentage point increase from 2019-2021, while recent data points to a return to 2019 levels in 2022.

Figure 3. Youth unemployment rate in the EU 27, under 25 years of age (2008-2023)

 Source: Eurostat (2023). YTH_EMPL_100 9

Before the EUYS was implemented in 2019, inequalities within EU society, especially those spanning different generations, persisted. These disparities came despite an economic upswing and diminished unemployment rates over the reference period. For example, the percentage of persons at risk of poverty or social exclusion (aged 15-29) rose between 2015 and 2016 to a peak of 28.3%. In addition to this, gender imbalances also persist, with young women being more prone to facing risks of poverty and social exclusion.

Participation in formal or informal voluntary activities or active citizenship across Europe was unevenly distributed over the reference period, and particularly in 2015: Eastern European countries (e.g., Romania, Bulgaria, and Latvia) had lower participation rates (between 0.3-9%) compared to central European countries (e.g., Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark) with higher participation rates (between 55-90%).  The results from the third International Civic and Citizenship Education Study 2022 (ICCS 2022) 10 show a decreasing trend (2022 compared to 2016) in civic and citizenship competence of students in several of the participating EU Member States 11 . The recent results of the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2022 12 show that student's personal circumstances such as socio-economic status and the advantages or disadvantages that come within have an impact on student performance (OECD, 2023). Individuals with higher socio-economic status often have better access to education and sources of information which can foster deeper understanding and knowledge of civic participation.

Points of comparison

EUYS aims to respond to the challenges of youth unemployment, participation in voluntary activities, and active citizenship by promoting youth engagement, addressing inequalities, and enhancing opportunities for young people across Member States. The following table presents the main points of comparison against each evaluation criterion. It presents the insights obtained from the evaluation of the previous Strategy, the related main aims of the current EUYS, and also serves as the basis for assessing the performance of the EUYS in addressing the identified challenges and achieving its objectives.

Table 1. Points of comparison.

Source: Kantar Public – Public Consultation on the EU Youth Strategy, 2023

3.1.Current state of play

Implementation of the EU Youth Strategy during 2019-2023

The EU Youth Strategy operates in three-year work cycles, at the end of which the Commission reports on the progress in the EU Youth Report 15 . The priorities and actions in the core areas for each cycle are set by the Council together with the Commission and presented in the EU Work Plans for Youth. Each Work Plan spans two Council Presidency trios. The overarching thematic priority for 2019-2021 was ‘Creating opportunities for youth’ and for 2022-2024 it is ‘Engaging together for a sustainable and inclusive Europe’.

The governance and implementation of the EU Youth Strategy is supported by a range of instruments, mainly financed through the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes, such as the EU Youth Dialogue, the European Youth Portal, the European Youth Work Agenda, mutual learning activities, knowledge- and evidence-building and more.

The new generation of EU youth programmes – Erasmus+ 2021-2027 and European Solidarity Corps 2021-2027 – have brought a significant boost: the Erasmus+ budget for the 2021-2027 period doubled to over € 26 billion (with an additional 2 billion from EU external cooperation funds) and the European Solidarity Corps budget for 2021-2027 period was consolidated to just above € 1 billion. This benefits young people and youth work organisations and the development and implementation of the EU Youth Strategy at EU and national levels. Erasmus+ provides support to policy reform in the youth, contributing to the implementation of the EUYS.

A number of new or updated actions, including Youth Participation Activities and DiscoverEU in Erasmus+ and the Solidarity Projects and Humanitarian Aid Strand in the European Solidarity Corps, have enriched the range of opportunities open to young people and supporting their democratic, civic and humanitarian engagement. The four horizontal priorities of both programmes - inclusion and diversity, environment and fight against climate change, digital transformation, participation and civic engagement – and the quality and support measures, such as training and cooperation and networking activities and SALTO resource centres 16 , create linkages between the EUYS and the programmes.

Highlights of the EUYS implementation during 2019-2023 are presented below.

Mutual learning activities

Mutual learning activities 17  between Member States, the European Commission and relevant stakeholders is an important instrument to advance youth policy in the core areas as well as cross-sectorally. Mutual learning activities include expert groups which can develop policy guidance, practical tools and share good practices as well as peer learning activities, peer counselling and supporting studies. 18

The implemented activities during the first years of the EUYS included three several Expert Groups that worked on indicators, on the mobility of young volunteers and cross-border solidarity, and on youth work. The Expert Group’s recommendations were finalised based on similar challenges among Member States, for example, to improve volunteering and solidarity activities to reach more people with fewer opportunities.

Furthermore, three Peer Learning Activities between Member States have taken place on non-vocational qualifications for youth work, on a rights-based approach to youth policies, and on complementarity and synergy between national or regional volunteering schemes for youth and the European Solidarity Corps.

Some of the challenges for implementing a rights-based approach to youth policies identified during the Peer Learning Activities include limited youth participation, outdated communication and participation tools, lack of mechanisms to reach out to vulnerable youth and the digital divide. The Peer Learning Activity on non-vocational qualifications for youth work mentions that digital technologies such as micro-credential systems have been useful in identifying and recognising key competences at national level and could contribute to long-term impacts such as increased youth employment 19 .

Future National Activities Planners

The Future National Activities Planners 20  (hereafter referred to as ‘FNAPs’) allow Member States on a voluntary basis to share their national priorities in line with the EU Youth Strategy. The FNAPs aim to increase transparency in the implementation of youth policies at regional, national and EU level. Youth policies in Member States are among the most important instruments for the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy. They are often consolidated in a national youth strategy or an equivalent youth policy planning document, as documented by the Youth Wiki. The content of such national youth strategies can be highly relevant for the European Commission and Member States to establish synergies, facilitate peer learning and help identify and cluster different interests and specific needs of Member States in youth policy development. 

The Member States have been invited twice to submit FNAPs, in 2019 and in 2021, and the main outcomes of these surveys are included in the EU Youth Report 2021. 21 Member States 21 shared their plans in 2019 and 18 22 in 2021, with 16 23 countries answering both in 2019 and 2021.

The figure below reports which EU Youth Goals were thought to be most important considering national priorities in 2019 and 2021 respectively. As shown in Figure 5, some EYGs, such as EYG 3 Inclusive Societies and EYG 9 Space and Participation for All, were considered less relevant in 2021 than in 2019, while EYG 4 Information and Constructive Dialogue and EYG 10 Sustainable Green Europe, were considered more relevant in 2021 than in 2019. The increase (from 61% to 75%) in relevance of EYG 5. Mental Health and Wellbeing is probably at least to some extent explained by the pandemic.

Figure 5. FNAP – EU Youth Goals that the Member States thought to be particularly relevant in light of national priorities

Source: Future National Activities Planners 2019 and 2021

EU Youth Dialogue

The EU Youth Dialogue 24  (hereafter referred to as ‘EUYD’) is the dialogue between young people and youth organisations and policy and decision makers, as well as experts, researchers and other relevant civil society actors. It serves as a forum for continuous joint reflection and consultation on the priorities, implementation and follow-up of the EU Youth Strategy. It builds on the achievements of past dialogue processes (previously called “Structured Dialogue”) and is organised into 18-month work cycles. A Council Resolution provided further guidelines for the governance of the renewed EU Youth Dialogue17, stressing also the importance of representativeness and of including the voices of young people with fewer opportunities and of those not organised in youth associations. To date, nine cycles of the EU Youth Dialogue have been fully implemented with three of them having been implemented during the current Strategy. The tenth cycle is on-going. It started in July 2023 and will end in December 2024.

The participatory process in each country is organised by national working groups through representatives of youth ministries, national youth councils, youth organisations, youth workers, researchers, and young people from all backgrounds. It was through the sixth cycle of the Dialogue (then called Structured Dialogue) which was being implemented during the former EUYS that the EU Youth Goals were shaped, and the aim of the cycle was to contribute to the creation of the 2019-2027 Strategy. One of the actions of the new Strategy was to launch a Dialogue with more focus on people with fewer opportunities.

During the last three Dialogue cycles, the proportion of young people identifying as disabled, part of an ethnic or religious minority group or LGBTIQ had increased (table 2 below). The participation of minority groups largely reflects the conclusions from an evaluation of participant inclusion levels within the EUYD, conducted by the EU-Council of Europe youth partnership (hereafter referred to as ‘EU-CoE Youth Partnership’). 25 The report states that 49.5% of the participants represent minority groups and that there is overrepresentation for all the minority groups mentioned, except NEETs and rural youth. 26 This showcases that the EUYS has become more diverse over time. In terms of gender equality, over the EUYD cycles 6-9, there were 59.85% of female participants, compared to 40.15% of male participants.

Table 2. Overview of the EU Youth Dialogue.

Source: Kantar Public – desk research, 2023

The EUYD also aims to contribute to policy making by providing inputs to Council documents. For instance, the Council Resolution on the Outcomes of the seventh Cycle of the EU Youth Dialogue invited the Commission and the Member States to address how to promote non-formal learning methods and approaches to secure formal recognition of non-formal education/learning and volunteering activities 28 . The Council Resolution on the Outcomes of the eighth Cycle of the EU Youth Dialogue invited the Commission and the Member States to prioritise and give visibility to the EUYD in national and EU-level events, promote youth participation in decision-making processes at all levels, and support and strengthen cooperation between different stakeholders, such as the European Steering Group, National Working Groups, the European Youth Forum, National Youth Councils, International Non-Governmental Youth Organisations, and other relevant stakeholders 29 . The Council Resolution on the outcomes of the ninth Cycle of the EU Youth Dialogue invited the Commission and the Member States to consider the outcomes of the ninth cycle of the EUYD when implementing and evaluating current youth policies and designing future policies in synergy with all policies affecting young people. 30  

Communicating the EU Youth Strategy & Youth Information and Support

The European Youth Portal 31 is the single multilingual entry point for EU level youth related information and opportunities. It functions as a one-stop-shop portal for young people and the visits increase year on year. In the period January-December 2023, the European Youth Portal registered more than 10.5 million visits, making it among the top 10 most visited websites on europa.eu overall, and the most visited website during the first days of any DiscoverEU round. Its revamped version launched in November 2020 supports the EU Youth Strategy in providing content and services for young people centred around its three core areas and a dedicated section on the EU Youth Strategy targeting youth stakeholders.

Other organisations involved in youth information and support are the Eurodesk network, the European Youth Information and Counselling Agency (ERYICA) and the European Youth Card Association (EYCA).

On a national level, there are also examples of measures implemented that are connected to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, in general, the main information from the national level came from the National Agencies for the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps. These National Agencies are responsible, among other things, for providing information about the programmes. 32 These National Agencies are supported by SALTOs, which is a network of resource centres working on the horizontal priority areas for the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes and supporting the programmes’ international dimension.  

EU Youth Strategy Platform

The EU Youth Strategy Platform is a collaborative online platform for youth stakeholders (youth ministries, programme implementing bodies, youth NGOs, researchers, networks and youth work organisations) which aims to build a basis for a regular civic dialogue, offer opportunities to exchange information on activities and results, and facilitate participatory governance and coordination of the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy. Following the launch in 2019 and online activities held in 2020, the pandemic disrupted the work of the network, however with the European Year of Youth many of the members re-convened as part of the Year of Youth national coordinators and stakeholders’ group. The plan is to revive the EU Youth Strategy Platform group in 2024 as part of the legacy of the Year.

Evidence-based Youth Policy Making and Knowledge Building

Evidence-based policy making 33 requires continuous research, knowledge development and outreach to young people and youth organisations. The Youth Wiki 34  gathers data to support the evidence base for the EUYS. It provides comparable qualitative information on youth related national policies, based on official documents, such as laws, decrees, regulations and recommendations. This supports analysis of policies, reforms, trends and exchange of good practices. The Youth Wiki complements the resources available via other internal and external knowledge providers, including:

-Eurostat, providing survey data on the situation of young people;

-EU-Council of Europe Youth partnership, providing research and training materials on youth policy related topics;

-Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps Dashboards and National Agencies, including the RAY research network providing data and analysis on the youth programmes.

-Civil society organisations and international organisations, providing research on youth related topics.

Youth Wiki data and other available data, as well as research, studies and reports, are used for the regular official report on the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy – the EU Youth Report. The EU Youth Report covering the first triennial cycle (2019-2021) was published in 2021 and the next EU Youth Report will cover the period 2022-2024. The 2021 EU Youth Report 35 provided a snapshot of the situation and challenges facing young people and of the progress in the implementation of the EUYS, against the backdrop of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The report stressed that 2020 and 2021 were atypical years and that the COVID-19 outbreak led to the acceleration of digital trends and had a negative impact on education, employment and mental health of young people. Implementation of the EU Youth Strategy was also disrupted, however allowed for flexibility to modify, reschedule (or cancel if not possible) some actions in the EU Work Plan for Youth 2019-2021 and to adjust projects in the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes.

The Eurostat EU Youth Dashboard 36  provides statistical data about the situation of young people. The Dashboard was updated in 2022, based on the proposal of an ad hoc expert group on youth indicators 37 , as an achievement under the European Year of Youth. It is composed of a selection of statistical indicators grouped according to the EUYS core areas of ‘Engage’, ‘Connect’ and ‘Empower’, complemented with contextual indicators. The EU Youth Dashboard takes the cross-sectoral nature of youth policy into consideration which is important to facilitate youth mainstreaming. 

The EU-CoE Youth Partnership provides research, training and cooperation on youth topics and functions as a “think tank” and laboratory in youth research, youth policy and youth work. The partnership coordinates and supports the European Platform on Learning Mobility (EPLM) and its Steering Group in producing and disseminating knowledge.

EU Youth Coordinator

The first EU Youth Coordinator was appointed in the European Commission in June 2021. The EU Youth Coordinator acts as a reference point for young people and their representatives, promoting integration of the youth perspective in relevant policies, contributes to coordination and cooperation of Commission services on youth mainstreaming and encourages youth participation and uptake of opportunities.

The EU Youth Coordinator chaired the internal Commission informal Youth Network and the European Year of Youth national coordinators and stakeholders’ group. The first one is an internal network for capacity building, coordination and collaboration on youth related issues between Commission services, while the second one comprised a group of 29 Member States, six contact points from Erasmus+ associated countries and more than 120 European-level youth stakeholders and was set-up in 2021 to support the implementation of the European Year of Youth. Furthermore, given the success of this group, the plan is to transform it into a renewed EU Youth Stakeholders platform which would meet regularly and exchange on initiatives for young people.

Monitoring and mobilising EU programmes and funds

The Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes are key programmes that contribute to achieving the objectives of the EU Youth Strategy and advancing youth policy cooperation. Erasmus+ provides opportunities for non-formal and informal learning mobility and active participation among young people, as well as cooperation, quality, inclusion, creativity, and innovation at the level of organisations and policies in the field of youth. The formal education and training strands of Erasmus+ also contribute to youth engagement and empowering young people. European Solidarity Corps provides opportunities for volunteering and solidarity activities as well as volunteering in the field of humanitarian aid. Quality and support measures under both programmes, e.g. transnational cooperation and networking activities and SALTO resources centres, contribute to synergies and bridges between youth programmes and youth policy.

The SALTOs 38 in the youth field play a specific role, as they often participate in and coordinate the long-term cooperation activities among National Agencies and involve a range of stakeholders at different levels. These are the so-called Strategic National Agency Cooperation Activities (SNACs), of which a range operate at the intersection between Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes and the EUYS, contributing to youth policy development as well as to quality in the programme implementation. Two new cross-sectoral SALTOs were set up under the current programming period, the SALTO on Green transition and sustainable development and SALTO Digital.

As manifested during the European Year of Youth, there are also many other EU programmes/funds/instruments that benefit young people, such as Horizon Europe, EU cohesion policy funds (including ESF+, ERDF and its Interreg strand, Just Transition Fund, Cohesion Fund), EU agricultural funds (EAGF and EAFRD), Recovery and Resilience Facility, the Technical Support Instrument, Digital Europe, Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values programme, EU4Health, Creative Europe, the Technical Support Instrument and many more.

The interim evaluations of the 2021-2027 Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps programmes, to be completed by the end of 2024, will assess the performance and impact of the initiatives and actions implemented via both programmes.

EU Work Plans for Youth

The EU Work Plans for Youth created by the Council and the Commission present the priorities and actions in the core areas of each three-year work cycle. Each Work Plan spans two Council Presidency trios. The overarching thematic priority for 2019-2021 was “Creating opportunities for youth”, and for 2022-2024 “Engaging together for a sustainable and inclusive Europe”. The implementation of the 2019-2021 Work Plan was however altered by the pandemic. Some actions had to be modified, rescheduled or even cancelled. 39  

In the 2022-2024 Work Plan for Youth, the European Year of Youth was given particular attention 40 . Out of the more than 13 000 activities organised as part of the Year, the most popular topic was Participation and Engagement. In conclusion, the Year has strengthened cross-sectoral cooperation; youth participation has emerged as the top focus and new tools for youth participation have been introduced. Mainstreaming a youth angle in EU policy across all relevant policy areas and not exclusively of those pertaining to the youth field, is a key legacy of the European Year of Youth. 41  

European Youth Work Agenda

The EYWA is an important instrument to strengthen, develop and promote youth work 42 , which was considered the second most relevant topic for cooperation in the 2021 FNAP. 43 The EYWA is linked to several instruments of the EUYS. A particular focus of the EYWA is to act at local level and in remote rural areas. As part of achieving this, the Sub-group on Youth Work, met six times between 2021 and 2022. The sub-group had a role in the implementation of the EYWA by giving advice on the process of creating and implementing a dedicated digital platform on youth work to share information, knowledge and good practices, engage in cooperation and peer learning. The subgroup also supports the EU-CoE Youth Partnership.

The Steering Group on the European Youth Work Agenda supported the implementation of the EYWA through three meetings between 2022-2023. The Group has supported the implementation by facilitating the dialogue within the youth work community of practice, support improvement in recognition of youth work, supporting EU-CoE Youth Partnership and EU initiatives on youth work, organising activities in the priority regions with a focus on Youth Work Development and by providing learning and development opportunities for members of the youth work community of practice.

Broader perspective on the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy

Taking a broad perspective of implementation which benefits young people, policy developments linked to the EU Youth Strategy span over many inter-connected policy areas: the EU Youth Strategy contributes to (and benefits from) delivering on the objectives of the, the European Education Area 44 and the Strategic Framework for European Cooperation in Education and Training towards the European Education Area and beyond (2021-2030) 45 , and other underlying sectoral policy agendas (e.g. the European Agenda for Adult Learning 2021- 2030 46 , the European Strategy for Universities 47 , etc.), the European Skills Agenda 48 , the New European Innovation Agenda 49 , the European Pillar of Social Rights 50 , the Digital Education Action Plan 2021-2027 51 , or the European Union Work Plan for Sport 2021-2024 52 . With the sixth European Education Summit in November 2023, the mid-term review of the European Education Area was concluded, showing strong progress towards EU level targets and inspiration for further efforts to make the experience of Europe as an open space for education, training and mobility an opportunity for all.  

The international dimension of the EU Youth Strategy has been strengthened through the first-ever policy framework for a strategic partnership with young people around the world adopted in October 2022 – the Youth Action Plan in the European Union external action for 2022-2027 53 . It will help deliver on international commitments, such as the United Nation's 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Climate Agreement, by enhancing youth participation and empowerment in the EU's external action policies.

Youth policy developments following the start of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 have in particular focused on youth work, based on the new dedicated core field of action – Empower – which targets youth work in all its forms as a catalyst for empowerment of young people. Youth work brings unique benefits to young people in their transition to adulthood, providing a safe environment for them to gain self-confidence, and learn in a non-formal way. Two policy documents adopted in 2019 emphasise the need to invest in youth work: Council conclusions on digital youth work and the Council conclusions on education and training of youth workers. The policy base on youth work was further strengthened with the adoption of the European Youth Work Agenda in 2020.

Furthermore, policy developments have also specifically aimed at strengthening young people’s democratic participation, including through the Council conclusions on fostering democratic awareness and democratic engagement among young people in Europe 54  and on strengthening multi-level governance when promoting the participation of young people in decision-making processes 55 . The EU Children’s Participation Platform  56 involves children (0-17) in EU decision-making and supports their active participation in democratic life, contributing to youth participation and active citizenship in the EUYS. The Commission’s Citizenship Package 57 aims to support democratic participation by raising awareness on EU citizenship rights, including with a Guide to EU citizenship 58 targeted to young EU citizens (who start being democratically engaged). The Defence of Democracy package 59  includes relevant Recommendations: the Commission Recommendation on promoting the engagement and effective participation of citizens and civil society organisations in public policy-making processes underlines the importance of promoting the participation of young people and children in democratic life in the EU and refers to best practices of existing children and youth councils and processes, including the EU Youth Dialogue. 60 The Recommendation on inclusive and resilient elections covers supporting young citizens in the exercise of their electoral rights, both as voters and candidates, and on promoting political engagement, with a special focus on young people, especially first-time voters. Youth participation is a key feature of the new European strategy for a better internet for kids (BIK+), with active involvement of children and young people across the EU in shaping the digital environment through consultations and youth led activities.

Policy developments have also aimed to promote cross-border volunteering. The Council recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers across the European Union 61 , aims to address obstacles to and facilitate cross-border volunteering, in particular for young people with fewer opportunities, through the European Solidarity Corps as well as national schemes. This also contributes to the European Education Area through fostering, valuing and recognising non-formal learning including volunteering, and enhancing the inclusiveness, quality and recognition of cross-border solidarity.

The European Year of Youth 2022 62 raised awareness of EU action and strengthened opportunities for young people to voice their views, engage in and influence policies at different levels, also giving a boost to the EU Youth Strategy, The objectives of the Year were very relevant for and closely linked to the EUYS:

·Renewing the positive perspectives for young people and drawing inspiration from their actions, vision and insights;

·Supporting young people, especially those with fewer opportunities to become active and engaged citizens and actors of change;

·Promoting opportunities for young people in a green, digital and inclusive world;

·Mainstreaming youth policy across all relevant policy areas to encourage that a youth perspective is brought into policy-making at all levels.

The Conference on the Future of Europe 63  generated lessons of relevance for participative democracy in the EU’s youth policy-making and many of the ideas and proposals on the future of Europe concern young people. Building on the success of the Conference on the Future of Europe, Citizens’ Panels (with significant participation of young people) have become a regular feature of EU policy making.

Developments of high relevance for the EUYS also included the 2023 European Year of Skills 64 , the Commission Communication on a comprehensive approach to mental health 65 , adopted in June 2023, and Council Conclusions 66  in this area in November 2023, and the Commission proposal for a Council Recommendation ‘Europe on the Move’ – learning mobility opportunities for everyone 67 , as part of the Talent Mobility package, adopted in November 2023.

The evaluation framework covers the five evaluation criteria, namely: effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, EU added value and relevance. These were operationalised through more detailed evaluation questions (see Evaluation framework in Annex III) for the following evaluation objectives.

Effectiveness

·Evaluate progress in the core areas (Engage, Connect, Empower) and progress towards the 11 European Youth Goals, guiding principles at EU and MS level.

·Evaluate the extent to which the EUYS instruments have proven to be effective.

·Examine unintended/unexpected effect of the EUYS.

·Evaluate the extent to which the EUYS instruments have supported cross-sectorial cooperation and mainstreaming.

·Examine the ability of the EUYS to adapt to unforeseen developments and the impacts of the Covid 19 pandemic and Russia’s full scale military aggression of Ukraine.

·Evaluate the impact of the EUYS on the inclusion of young people with fewer opportunities.

·Assess the extent to which the EUYS promotes green and digital transition.

Efficiency

·Evaluate the extent to which the EUYS instruments, structures, processes and activities were non-burdensome and cost-effective.

·Assess the extent to which the EUYS has used proportionate resources to achieve its objectives.

Coherence

·Assess the coherence of the EUYS with wider EU policies and priorities.

·Uncover how the different core areas and instruments of the EUYS work together to achieve its objectives and are coherent with each other.

·Assess the extent to which the EUYS’ coherence was influenced by the European Year of Youth.

EU added value

·Assess how and to what extent does the EUYS add value in what MS could achieve on their own.

·Evaluate to what extent the EUYS promotes cooperation between countries in Europe and beyond.

·Assess the extent to which the EUYS’ added value was influenced by the European Year of Youth.

·Explore the possible consequences of discontinuing the EUYS.

Relevance

·Understand the degree to which the objectives of the EUYS remained relevant over the period 2019 - part of 2023.

·Evaluate how the EUYS still corresponds to the needs and challenges of young people and youth stakeholders.

·Assess the extent to which the EUYS’ relevance was influenced by the European Year of Youth.

The evaluation covered the period from 2019 to part of 2023. Special attention was given to the new or strengthened elements, in particular the renewed EU Youth Dialogue, the FNAPs, the EU Youth Coordinator, and the developments related to the new emphasis on quality youth work as a specific strand.

4.1.To what extent was the intervention successful and why?

Effectiveness

This section presents the findings concerning the effectiveness of the EUYS as a strategic framework at EU and national levels, its effects in relation to the three core areas ‘Engage’, ‘Connect’ and ‘Empower’, the effectiveness and sustainability of the EUYS instruments, the degree of adaptability of the EUYS, and how it has contributed to the social inclusion of young people, as well as to the digital and green transitions.

A number of general remarks on the effectiveness of the EUYS need to be taken into consideration:

·Among the stakeholders consulted, very few had a clear, comprehensive overview of the EUYS as a whole and of its instruments, making it difficult for them to determine what exactly has been achieved by the EUYS, over and above what has been achieved by its component parts, i.e., its instruments and activities.

·Many stakeholders consider the EU youth programmes, namely Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps as very closely intertwined with the EUYS and struggle differentiating between the contribution of the programmes and contribution of the EUYS.

·The EUYS 2019-2027 builds on the previous Strategy (2010-2018) and framework for European cooperation in the youth field 68 . While the current EUYS has been restructured and some new instruments have been introduced, many activities and priorities are a continuation of the previous frameworks. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to clearly delineate the effects of the current Strategy independently of the predecessors. Consulted stakeholders were not always able to differentiate clearly between the current and previous Strategy as from their perspective these are a continuous effort. Therefore, it is likely that the findings presented in this chapter on effectiveness do not solely capture the effects of the current Strategy at mid-term but also capture the legacy effects of previous frameworks.

Key findings related to the effectiveness criterion:

·The EUYS has contributed to foster active citizenship, social inclusion and solidarity in particular through the EU Youth Dialogue and the EU youth programmes (Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps).

·The EUYS has a positive influence on youth policies at national level as well as on youth mainstreaming into other policy areas, resulting in specific and tangible policy developments at national level.

·The EUYS has fostered more inclusive and good quality youth work through the European Youth Work Agenda as well as through aligned priorities and actions in EU youth programmes. As part of the public consultation, 71% of respondents who were aware of the EUYS or of any of its instruments (102 out of 143) considered that the EUYS helped improve the quality of youth work, while 71% (101 out of 143) considered that it increased the recognition of youth work.

·The EUYS has a wider international influence beyond the EU through the international dimension of the EU youth programmes and the Youth Action Plan in EU external action.

·The EUYS has fostered participation of young people with fewer opportunities in the EU Youth Dialogue and EU youth programmes. 

·The EUYS has accelerated the promotion of the green and digital transition through its instruments at the EU and national level, albeit to varying degrees.

The EUYS as a strategic framework

The evaluation found that the EUYS was effective in promoting youth participation, fostering solidarity and intercultural understanding, supporting youth empowerment and enabling active citizenship at EU and national levels.

This was achieved through a combination of instruments, with the most important contribution by the:

·The EUYD celebrates more than 10 years of existence and is the largest participatory instrument at EU level involving young people in policy making. As flagship instrument of the EUYS, it directly boosts the active citizenship of those participating. The EUYD has also contributed to stimulate more participatory initiatives in Member States. The EUYD through its last three cycles, has played a key role in increasing the inclusion of young people with fewer opportunities, thus ensuring a more diverse and representative dialogue. 

·The mobilisation and monitoring of EU programmes, funds and instruments have created important opportunities for young people, focusing on youth mobility and volunteering. The EUYS has effectively fostered alignment of the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes with the EUYS objectives. Examples of the strengthened linkages include new/adapted actions such as the Youth Participation Activities, DiscoverEU and Youth Worker Mobility in Erasmus+ and the Solidarity Projects and Humanitarian Aid Strand in the European Solidarity Corps. The EUYS has increased the awareness and accessibility of EU youth programmes promoting information about youth opportunities through the European Youth Portal and the Eurodesk network. This has empowered young people to contribute to societal debates on critical challenges and encouraged them to actively engage with these issues. 

·The European Youth Work Agenda has strengthened the policy focus on quality and recognition of youth work. This acts in combination with EU programmes which provide important funding to youth work, including for youth workers mobility, youth exchanges and partnerships in the field of youth work. Through transparency tools such as the Youthpass 69 , young people and youth workers can identify and document learning outcomes and achievements in cross-border youth and youth work activities and volunteering, contributing to recognition of youth work.

Youth mainstreaming

The EUYS also encourages mainstreaming the youth perspective across different policy areas at EU level and it encourages national policy makers to strive for the same through national youth strategies or policies. Youth mainstreaming aims to ensure that the effects of policies on youth are systematically examined and considered when designing or changing policies. It also aims to ensure meaningful youth participation and youth representation so that the needs and voices of young people are taken into account across different policies.

When it comes to youth mainstreaming at EU level, the results are somewhat mixed. The evaluation of the EUYS 2010-2018 concluded that whilst the EUYS was striving for youth mainstreaming it was making limited progress in this regard at EU level. The creation of the EU Youth Coordinator in the EUYS 2019-2027 was partially a response to this conclusion and an effort to enhance youth mainstreaming in EU policies and initiatives. This current evaluation finds that progress has been made in youth mainstreaming and the following findings arise from the analysis:

·There is a stronger emphasis on youth mainstreaming in EU policies beyond the youth policy field. This is also shown in the analysis of coherence. Developments such as youth engagement in climate action, the vulnerability of young people to mental health difficulties during and after the pandemic, exposure and vulnerability of young people to online threats including misinformation, cyberviolence or fraud, have increased the focus on youth in different policy agendas of the EU.

·There has also been an increased exchange on youth at EU level, which has promoted more discussions and actions on youth-related challenges and priorities. This was also boosted and increased thanks to the 2022 European Year of Youth, which had youth mainstreaming as one of its four objectives, and the work of the EU Youth Coordinator.

·EU policy makers have actively participated in EUYD discussions and activities, indicating a commitment to youth-related initiatives. Other participatory actions such as the creation of the EU Children’s Participation Platform, policy dialogues with European Commissioners organised in the context of the European Year of Youth, or the Youth Sounding Board for youth participation and empowerment in EU external action have also emphasised the role of youth and of the dialogue between EU policy makers and youth

·Nevertheless, despite these efforts, only 31% of the respondents in the survey for young people mentioned that EU initiatives effectively address their needs, suggesting room for improvement in this regard.

·Interviews with national policy makers and CSOs revealed that some of these stakeholders were not aware of or expressed doubts about the influence of the EU Youth Dialogue on European policy making.

At national level, the contribution of the EUYS to youth mainstreaming is more indirect and depends on the extent to which national youth policies and strategies succeed in fostering such mainstreaming. The EUYS shapes national youth policies but the scale and type of effects vary greatly across countries. The predecessor EUYS (2010-2018) led to the establishment of youth strategies in most EU countries. The focus of the 2019-2027 EUYS has been to influence policy agendas, frameworks, and practices in Member States. As a result, national youth policies are better aligned with the EUYS and there is therefore less incentive and scope for the EUYS to have a direct impact on triggering national strategies. Nevertheless, EUYS continues to be a ‘catalyst’ for national youth strategy/youth policy developments, e.g. by empowering national youth sectors and stakeholders and enhancing their legitimacy also in the eyes of policy makers from other sectors in the Member States.

The following factors were found to limit the influence of the EUYS on youth mainstreaming at national level:

·All EUYS instruments, except the EUYD, EU Youth Coordinator and Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes, are solely targeting policy makers in the field of youth. For example, the evaluation found no evidence that stakeholders from outside the youth sector would regularly participate in EUYS mutual learning activities or events. 

·The EU Youth Dialogue, despite its embedded national process, is sometimes perceived as an initiative intended for the EU level, and national stakeholders do not always see it as something that could contribute also to national policies. As a result, the EUYD does not systematically influence national policy debates and national policy development. Stakeholders are not always aware of the final recommendations and even less of the follow-up.

The use of concrete youth mainstreaming instruments (including youth checks, youth tests or similar) was not explicitly covered in evaluation questions, however national policy makers in Belgium (Flemish Community), Germany, France and Austria, mentioned the existence and positive experience with such tools in their countries. A forthcoming analytical report by the European Commission (expected in 2024) will present youth mainstreaming approaches in EU Member States. The use of a ‘youth test’ in EU policy making was among others advocated by the European Youth Forum 70 . In its conclusions on youth mainstreaming 71 , the Council invited the Commission to use its Better Regulation framework to factor in the impact of new policies on young people.

On 10 January 2024, the Commission adopted a Communication on the legacy of the European Year of Youth 2022 72 . The Communication deepens the youth dimension of EU policies, thus boosting the engagement of young people in the preparation of EU policies. When designing EU policies, the Commission will use the full potential of youth mainstreaming as part of the Commission’s Better Regulation framework and toolbox, resulting in a youth check. These tools will be complemented with several youth-specific instruments under the 2019-2027 EU Youth Strategy.

EU Youth programmes

At programme level, there is a very clear relationship between the EUYS and the EU programmes in the field of youth, Erasmus + and the European Solidarity Corps:

·The Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes are the main and best-known instruments of the EUYS. For example, 93% of the respondents to the survey of CSOs, youth researchers and youth informal group were aware of Erasmus+, and 90% of the European Solidarity Corps. In the public consultation, 95% of the respondents were aware of Erasmus+ and 80% of the European Solidarity Corps. The programmes offer a range of opportunities across all education and training sectors, youth and sport, among other for young people, youth workers and civil society organisations.

·Funding opportunities have become better focused and more strategic, e.g. as concerns new actions such as Youth Participation Activities, and the renewed Youth Worker Mobility action under Erasmus+. While the direct contribution of the EUYS to these changes is difficult to delineate, it is clear that the EUYS explicitly aims to mobilise and promote effective use of EU programmes for its objectives.

There is no clear evidence about the effects of the EUYS on other funding programmes, although positive steps were noted in the context of the European Year of Youth, with the mobilisation of more than 30 European Commission departments and services which contributed to the objectives of the Year with more than 130 policy initiatives for young people. 

Youth Work

The EUYS, in combination notably with the EU funding programmes in the field of youth, has contributed to strengthen the quality, recognition and inclusiveness of youth work and thus helped to facilitate young people's transitions to adulthood, and to the world of work, enhancing their skills and competences and their active citizenship. These changes have been achieved through the European Youth Work Agenda, professionalising youth work and strategic cooperation with policy makers at EU and national level and civil society organisations. This also included mutual learning activities, notably the work of the expert group on youth work and associated studies and guidance.

The CSOs as well as young people surveyed expressed positive views on the contribution of youth work to young people in their transition to adulthood, and the recognition and quality enhancement of youth work contributing to the developing quality youth work offer.

Qualitative evidence from interviews, focus groups and desk research show a positive interaction between the EUYS, EYWA and youth work developments in EU Member States:

·EUYS has acted as a catalyst in accelerating specific efforts in the field of quality youth work. This has been achieved by professionalising youth work and increasing cooperation between policy makers and civil society organisations at EU and national level.

·Through the EU youth programmes, the EYWA policy ambition around and support for quality youth work can directly reach youth workers and youth organisations and contribute to effects such as better recognition of youth work. For example,71% of the respondents to the surveys of CSOs, youth researchers and youth informal groups considered that the EUYS increased the recognition of youth work. Tools such as Youthpass can be a direct trigger for the recognition of youth work.

·The Steering Group on the European Youth Work Agenda provided a relevant support to the implementation of the EYWA, with several meetings, activities and opportunities for the youth work community of practice.

·The EU-CoE Youth Partnership has played an important role in the implementation of the EYWA, particularly through the research conducted by the Pool of European Youth Researchers (PEYR) driving the development of better knowledge and contributing to the development of evidence-based youth initiatives such as the EYWA.

·There is already a strong network – SALTO – which is funded through the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes – and which has two decades of history in supporting youth work development and youth workers. 

·Member States (as well as other countries such as candidate countries) are in different stages of development of their youth work systems and youth workers, including the professionalisation and training offer for this crucial group of professionals. Subsequently there is scope for mutual learning and exchange.

Youth work was also a sector that was strongly affected by COVID-19 pandemic. The effects on youth work were three-fold:

·On one hand the restrictions imposed meant that many activities which were delivered face-to-face were disrupted (moved on-line, postponed or cancelled. According to the study 73 , 70% of responding youth workers and youth leaders stated that the impact was major, and only one percent stated that the pandemic had no effects on their youth work.

·Vulnerable groups were particularly affected by this disruption as many youth workers and youth organisations lost contact with vulnerable young people during the pandemic.

·The isolation during the pandemic worsened mental health of many young people, highlighted in the focus group with the CSOs also, and created increased or new demand on youth workers which they were not equipped in terms of capacities or also in some cases in terms of competences. As example, the Health at a Glance report 2022 74 reported that 1 in 2 young Europeans reported unmet needs, and that depression among young people more than doubled.

These challenges further strengthened the relevance of the EYWA and created a new momentum for cooperation in the field of youth work post pandemic. This development also favourably influenced the take up of recommendations and guidelines stemming from the EYWA and associated activities.

International dimension

The international impact of the EUYS is demonstrated by its role in shaping external action for youth as well as when it comes to accelerating knowledge exchange and creating positive perceptions among international organisations. The EUYS has become a reference and a source of guidance for youth-related actions in the external context, while facilitating knowledge exchange and cooperation with countries outside the EU. This is evident in several ways:

·The EUYS has played a key role in shaping the activities and principles implemented in the framework of external action for youth. This includes the adoption of the Youth Action Plan in EU External Action for 2022-2027, where the EUYS has served as a reference document providing guidance for youth-related actions in the external actions.

·As mentioned in the key informant interviews with EU level and international organisations the Youth Wiki – Europe’s Encyclopaedia of National Youth Policies providing information on youth policies in the EU MS and in 5 candidate countries -  has facilitated the exchange of knowledge and good practices within the EU and CoE countries. An interview with the representative of the UN showed that the Youth Wiki was used a reference point: “We used Youth Wiki comparative overviews of what happens at national level. For example, we have used it on the matter of social inclusion [and how it is addressed] in national youth strategies”.

·The principles and model of the EUYS are highly regarded by other international organisations as a replicable model for countries outside the EU. International organisations, including UNICEF, view the EUYS positively and as a source of inspiration.

·The EUYS has encouraged the participation of international organisations in dissemination activities, thus promoting the exchange of valuable information and experience in the youth field. For example, UN staff has participated in EU youth events where there was an opportunity to discuss and exchange good practices. The OECD has been involved in the dissemination and exchange through their network of “Friends of Youth+” under the Public Evidence Committee.

·Mutual learning and dissemination have played a crucial role in shaping youth practice in countries participating in the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes, including around youth dialogue and volunteering activities. This is further reinforced by the process linked to the implementation of programme activities, which ensures that the experiences of participating organisations are disseminated to countries outside the EU. In addition, the participation of third countries in the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes demonstrates the international reach of the EUYS.

·The EU-CoE Youth Partnership has brought an international dimension to the EUYS through its geographical coverage, supporting the EUYS in promoting cooperation between countries within and outside of the European Union.

The youth researchers interviewed flagged the positive contribution of the EU-CoE Youth Partnership to research on issues faced by youth. The Knowledge Hub 75 was mentioned as a positive example of the EU-CoE Youth Partnership and focused on the impact of the pandemic on young people and the youth sector. In the survey of CSOs the EU-CoE Youth Partnership was also positively perceived 76 . In some of the open-ended questions, the respondents noted that the organisation and professionalism of the EU-CoE Youth Partnership was a positive factor strengthening the influence of the EUYS.

Effectiveness of the EUYS’ instruments

This section outlines how the different instruments contributed to the effectiveness of the EUYS so far and presents the contribution analysis for each of the instruments separately. However, it is important to keep in mind that the instruments are designed to operate in an intertwined manner. They are also expected to have effects at different levels (system level: EU and national policies, organisational level: civil society organisations practices, individuals: young people).

The EU Work Plans for Youth: the contribution analysis showed that the activities, outputs and results of the EU Work Plans for Youth were achieved. The COVID-19 pandemic affected the implementation of the 2019-2021 Work Plans and some activities were modified, rescheduled or cancelled, indicating a successful adaptation to some degree. The subsequent Work Plan for the period 2022-2024 compensated partly for the delays.

The EU Work Plans for Youth are found to have contributed to the medium-term impact of ensuring that EUYS activities are focused, driven by agreed priorities and that resources are used in a strategic manner towards agreed activities.

The EUYS’ participatory governance aims to involve a wide range of youth stakeholders, including national authorities and agencies, young people, youth organisations, experts and researchers, in particular through an EUYS stakeholder platform launched in 2019. The meetings of the platform were disrupted by the pandemic and subsequently replaced by the European Year of Youth national coordinators and stakeholders’ group meetings.

There is recognition that the EUYS was designed in a participatory manner (see for example the European Youth Goals which were defined through the EU Youth Dialogue and also the process with a year of listening that preceded the Commission proposal for the EUYS) and that the Commission strives to also steer it in a participatory manner. However, the EUYS stakeholders’ platform meetings were impacted by the pandemic, replaced by webinars due to the pandemic, and this could not fully provide for optimal interaction. It remains to be observed if the positive experiences with the 2022 European Year of Youth national coordinators and stakeholder group can be sustained for a permanent EUYS stakeholders’ group. Subsequently so far this strand of activities contributed somewhat to the objective of participatory governance of the EUYS, and youth mainstreaming into different policy areas as well as across different levels of government.

The EUYD celebrates more than 10 years of existence and is the largest participatory instrument at EU level for involving young people in policy making. This flagship instrument under the EUYS has been instrumental in systematically involving young people in policy debate with policy makers and stakeholders and formulating policy recommendations and promoting their active citizenship. The EUYD has successfully engaged a diverse range of young people, including those from minority groups, indicating a broad inclusivity, which needs to be sustained and efforts made to further involve any under-represented groups. Participation of young people with fewer opportunities in the EUYD has increased over the cycles (except for NEETs and youth living in rural areas, whose representation decreased between 2019-2021) indicating that the EU Youth Dialogue has become more inclusive over time and contributed to medium-term impacts such as social inclusion but also long-term impacts such as increased youth participation and representation.

Young people themselves as well as the stakeholders interviewed generally praise its added value on the young people who participate. Almost 90 000 young people have engaged in the consultation in the period 2019-(first half)2023, of which 22 000 during the 9th cycle (January 2022–June 2023). The individual level impact of the EUYD is an important contribution to active citizenship. There is however limited evidence that young people who take part in the EUYD receive proper preparation and training which would help in particular young people with fewer opportunities to build knowledge, confidence and public speaking capabilities, thus contributing to making their inputs to the dialogues even more effective. The role and systematic involvement of national youth councils in the EUYD could also be clarified.

Stakeholders and policy makers at national level are in general very positive about the EUYD which is clearly one of the success stories of the EUYS. In terms of the use of EUYD recommendations, the interviews and desk research show that youth voices are reflected in the design of youth policies at EU level. However, there is less evidence about the extent to which EUYD contribute to mainstream the youth perspective in other policy areas. While some national policy makers report that the results of the EUYD are useful to design national initiatives, a greater number perceived that the EUYD could be further strengthened by increasing ownership at the level of applying it to national youth policies. This will allow the EUYD to have the same positive impact on national policies as it has been shown to have at EU level.

Taking this into consideration, the EUYD fully contributed to policymaking, empowering young people's voices and fostering a vital link between young people and decision-makers, however the inclusiveness of the process needs to be kept up and the impact of the EUYD recommendations can be further strengthened.

The EU Youth Coordinator: the first EU Youth Coordinator was appointed in June 2021 and was immediately active during the preparation and implementation of the 2022 European Year of Youth, which created a strong momentum for inter-service cooperation and youth mainstreaming. The EU Youth Coordinator set up and animated a dedicated informal internal Youth Network, as well as the European Year of Youth national coordinators and stakeholders’ group. The Coordinator was extensively in contact with many stakeholders and harvested their suggestions and concerns. The EU Youth Coordinator is relatively known among the stakeholders despite this role being new. Interviewees in the evaluation almost uniformly agreed on the benefits of establishing the EU Youth Coordinator role and its effectiveness, in particular for knowledge-sharing on youth needs for cross-sectoral cooperation within the European Commission.

The EU Youth Coordinator is the front runner for youth mainstreaming in the EU. The evaluation pointed out that the EU Youth Coordinator mandate is very vast in terms of cooperation and communication with external stakeholders. Considering the high expectations for this role, adequate resources are required for fulfilling this highly visible role.

Moreover, the European Year of Youth offered a strong incentive of cooperation and synergies between the different Commission departments, as youth was high on the European political agenda in 2022. After the Year, the challenge is to maintain the same level of cooperation and active synergies.

The EU Youth Coordinator has already facilitated the dissemination of knowledge and information and contributed to the mainstreaming of youth perspectives in EU policies by speaking prominently about the youth perspective, participating in numerous events and exchanges with internal and external stakeholders, and facilitating the integration of the youth perspective in different policy areas. The EU Youth Coordinator participated in and organised more than 300 meetings and events on youth mainstreaming and facilitated half of the 27 policy dialogues with European Commissioners as part of the European Year of Youth.

The EU Youth Coordinator function shows high potential and, despite the short time of existence of the role, already contributed to the EUYS’ medium-term impact to mainstreaming of youth policies and amplifying the voice of youth within the European Commission.

Communicating the EU Youth Strategy: aims to raise awareness and understanding of the EUYS through a combination of communication channels.

While the EU Youth Report contains useful information on different activities implemented under the EUYS, the three years period between publications present a challenge as tailored and concise updates on youth are not made available between two editions of the EU Youth Report. Furthermore, while the EU Youth Reports present information on different actions contributing to the three core areas of the EUYS, the breadth of information may be too wide for certain stakeholders who require specified information.

While overall respondents to the different surveys are relatively aware of the EUYS, when questioned in more detail it appears that the EUYS is perceived differently among different groups. Very often stakeholders associate their perception of EU programmes in the field of youth with the EUYS. Others have a fragmented view of the EUYS and focus on the EU Youth Dialogue. Young people interviewed during focus groups were also rather critical about some communication materials they recalled having been exposed to, for instance some social media posts. This has resulted in the need of a better targeted dissemination strategy for the different target groups.

The communication activities have targeted multiple audiences and channels. For instance, young receive information about opportunities for engagement and participation while decision makers might be more interested in information on funding, cooperation opportunities, youth policy developments as they are directly engaged in activities of the EUYS. On the other hand, CSOs might be interested in receiving information on both.

While overall the different stakeholders appear to have a positive opinion of the EUYS, this is largely linked to the positive view they have of the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes. The communication activities therefore succeeded in providing information and raising awareness about the funding opportunities and opportunities in broader sense. The extent to which the communication activities are at the service of the EUYS goals around youth mainstreaming and influencing of youth policies is less clear, and the contribution to these objectives seems more limited. Subsequently, so far communication activities somewhat contributed to mid-term impacts of the EUYS.

Adaptability of EUYS to unforeseen circumstances

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted some EUYS instruments notably those linked to events which prior to the pandemic were largely face-to-face, such as mutual learning activities, youth events, and stakeholder interaction. EU programmes in the field of youth were also affected and were flexible in adapting to the situation by allowing modification of project activities, changing into online activities, postponing, or cancelling some activities. Youth work provision was also affected more generally as well as young people who suffered from social isolation and whose mental health deteriorated during the pandemic.

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine resulted in an inflow of refugees and led to a general movement of solidarity. In time, however, this faded in some countries and gave course to more polarised positions. This was accompanied by the spreading of mis- and disinformation, in particular in countries neighbouring Ukraine. It also led to an increase of energy prices which in turn translated into an increase in costs of living, harshly affecting young people in particular students or in early careers, but in particular those with low or no income. Inflation and increase of interest rates negatively affected access to loans including for young people.

During the period covered, EU countries also had to face major challenges due to climate change such as wildfires, floods or draughts. Young people have been mobilised in movements related to climate justice and calling for more action including through actions taken under the European Year of Youth (e.g., Green Track campaign).

The EUYS instruments were most directly affected by the pandemic as some activities planned in the EU Work Plan for Youth 2019-2021 were modified, postponed, or cancelled. indicating a successful adaption to some degree. The EUYS was able to replace some of the activities by online formats. The pandemic and its effects on youth were also covered as a topic for research and mutual learning relatively rapidly. Overall, the EUYS adapted reasonably well to the issues created by the pandemic, including through exchange of good practices.

Similarly, following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, through their in-built flexibility, EU youth programmes were quickly adapted to help out people from Ukraine fleeing the war, many of which were young people. The European Youth Portal published information for young people fleeing Ukraine and for young people wishing to help, providing trusted sources on EU actions, and debunking disinformation.

When asked about the degree of adaptability of the EUYS to unforeseen circumstances, national stakeholders mentioned that the flexibility shown by the European Commission in adapting the rules for the implementation of programmes and projects was highly appreciated.

In general, the main consequences of COVID-19 pandemic were the digitalisation of meetings, consultations, and events, as well as a stronger focus on mental health and well-being of youth. Overall, the EUYS’ underlying principles and goals remained relevant and resilient during the crises, although it was considered that it was not fully effective in directly addressing real needs such as cost of living, housing and employment, which become more acute during crises.

Contribution of the EUYS to the promotion of social inclusion and equality

The contribution of the EUYS to the promotion of social inclusion and equality at EU and national levels has taken place through several mechanisms:

·The EUYS has promoted participation and monitoring of participation of youth with fewer opportunities through the EU youth programmes as well as in the EUYD. In the EUYD, the participation of youth with fewer opportunities, such as young people from minority groups and LGBTIQ youth, has increased over time as shown in the section on implementation. This indicates that the EUYS has been successful in making the EUYD more inclusive, although efforts should be maintained for young NEETs and young people living in rural areas. Inclusion is a horizontal priority in both Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps and the common framework of inclusion measures as well as common inclusion strategy of both programmes and the SALTO Inclusion & Diversity help strengthen social inclusion and equality in these programmes.

·Studies, evidence-based tools, mutual learning and other activities under the EUYS regularly cover issues faced by youth with fewer opportunities. Examples include the work of the Expert Group on mobility of young volunteers and cross-border solidarity, which was supported by a study on removing obstacles to cross border solidarity activities; the study identified a need for better recognition of volunteering experience, inclusion of people from disadvantaged backgrounds, a need for stable funding and capacity-building opportunities for organisations. Subsequently, the 2022 Council Recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers 80  provides measures to promote inclusive volunteering opportunities.  

·Through the EYWA, specific attention has been paid to inclusion and providing quality youth work to youth with fewer opportunities with a specific focus on youth in remote or rural areas. 

Overall, most respondents at national level agreed that the EUYS has promoted or influenced the inclusion of young people with fewer opportunities. They also note that this is not a new priority in national youth policies, but it is one that needs to continuously remain present and be pushed forward. Therefore, even in countries where youth strategies or policies already have a strong emphasis on the issues of inclusion of youth with fewer opportunities, there is still space for progress. In this regard the EUYS contributes to making the case for even greater inclusiveness.

The survey carried out among youth shows that financial resources continue being a major barrier for young people to take advantage of opportunities to learn, work and volunteer abroad. The EUYS can contribute to address this barrier through the actions of relevant funding programmes and specific support provided to participants with fewer opportunities. The EUYS is also an important mechanism to continue highlighting the challenges faced by youth and pushing the political discussion about support measures forward.

Contribution of the EUYS to the green and digital transitions

The contribution of the EUYS to the green and digital transitions at EU and national level has been made through several mechanisms. It should be noted that the EUYS 2019-2027 addresses the digital transition and its implications for youth in each of the three core areas. The EUYS, however, does not directly refer to the promotion of the green transition, except through the EYG 10 Sustainable Green Europe. The evaluation found that the contribution to the twin transition during the 2019-2023 period was made in the following ways:

·The protection of the environment and the fight against global warming are a horizontal priority for the selection of projects under Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps. The EU youth programmes also integrate green practices into projects and encourage environmentally sustainable and responsible behaviour among participants and participating organisations.

·The contribution of the EUYS to the green and digital transitions through EU programmes is also linked to the EYWA, where opportunities are provided for young people and youth workers to improve their digital literacy and to recognise their digital youth work skills.

·The alignment has also been strengthened through the creation of two cross-sectoral SALTOs - SALTO on Green Transition and Sustainable Development and SALTO Digital - which specifically address the issue of green and digital transitions.

·The EUYS has contributed to the green and digital transitions by addressing these issues in the EUYD and allowing young people to express their voices and needs related to the twin transitions. In the seventh cycle of the EUYD, special attention was given to the digital transition in the context of youth employment. In the ninth cycle of EUYD the specific focus was on the EYG 10 Sustainable Green Europe. The discussion on youth and the green and digital transition has also been accelerated in national events as part of the EUYD national process. The examples of national activities organised under the EUYD on green and digital transition has been found across 15 Member States.

·The green and digital transitions were also addressed through the EU Work Plans for Youth and the FNAPs. The EUYS has also worked towards addressing the knowledge gaps regarding the digitalisation as part of the evidence-based tools, for example, through the EU-CoE Youth Partnership’s publications on digitalisation and digital literacy among youth.

·The digital transition is being addressed under BIK+ through active participation of BIK Youth Ambassadors and Youth panellists, including via youth-led events 81 targeting decision-makers, industry and NGOs.

Transversal considerations on the EUYS as a catalyst of change

The role of the EUYS extends beyond the specific contribution it has to the effects which have been discussed earlier in this section. It also goes beyond the effects of the different instruments individually and combined. During the period covered by this evaluation, fewer countries had high level or overarching youth strategies than in the baseline period. Nevertheless, the EUYS still positively influenced youth policy and youth strategy developments in many Member States. In many cases the influences were very concrete and covered the ways in which specific aspects of youth policy evolved and in some cases the EUYS acted as an example/inspiration, e.g. giving legitimacy to youth stakeholders pushing for youth strategy/youth policy developments at national level. The evaluation found examples of influence across all three core areas of ‘Connect’, ‘Engage’ and ‘Empower’.

The EUYS has an important role as a catalyst of change in youth policies in that it emphasises both:

·The specific vulnerabilities and challenges of young people across different issues and which are tackled by a diversity of policy areas. In this regard the EUYS call for cross-sectoral youth strategies sends an important signal to all stakeholders involved with issues related to youth and invites them to consider youth in a holistic perspective across policy domains; and

·The importance of youth work, youth activities and non-formal and informal learning in building young people who are fulfilled and engaged. In that regard it also underlines the importance of these activities for the building of cohesive, accepting, diverse and inclusive societies.

This catalyst role of the EUYS is highly welcomed by all stakeholders interviewed. National policy makers and youth CSOs have a positive view of the EUYS because they see it as a mechanism which keeps youth high on the very busy political agenda, where many issues compete for policy makers’ attention and focus. The consistency of the EU in having an EU Youth Strategy and in dedicating activities and resources to it is in itself seen as a positive outcome and a signal to other stakeholders of the value of this sector.

Efficiency

This section presents the mid-term analysis of the efficiency of the EUYS, covering the cost-effectiveness of the EUYS instruments, structures, processes and activities, and the proportionality of resources devoted to the implementation of the EUYS.

It is possible to identify the following key findings related to the efficiency criterion:

·The EUYS as a whole has been cost-effective delivering adequate value for money at the EU level.

·The total costs of the EUYS are small but appear sufficient and proportional given its character as a cooperation framework and what the EUYS has set out to achieve.

·The EUYS has not imposed significant administrative burdens on public administrations or other stakeholders. For example, in the survey of CSOs, youth researchers and youth informal groups, 65% of, found the administrative burden associated with being involved in EUYS activities and instruments to be proportionate to their benefits.

·The cost-efficiency differed between EUYS instruments. As it was not possible to uniquely allocate costs and benefits to single instruments, no precise comparison was made between the EUYS instruments. Some benefits are best considered as a combined effect of diverse EUYS instruments.

·Minor improvements in cost-efficiency are possible. These could be achieved through different measures, including changes to the format and modalities of some outputs (e.g. FNAPs where the evaluation found scope for simplification and reducing Member States reporting burden), reviewing resource allocations or clarifying scope (e.g. for communication activities and for the EU Youth Coordinator role which the evaluation found broadly formulated). 

The analysis used committed budget data for selected activities in Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps Annual Work Programmes 2019-2022.

It shows an increase in the total budget allocations in 2022 compared to the previous years (2019-2021), with a noticeable rise in 2022. The increase in budgetary commitments can be traced to the transition from the 2014-2020 programme generation to the current programme 2021-2027. The rise in 2022 can also be attributed to the additional reinforcement to some actions within the programmes due to the European Year of Youth.

Considering the diversity of instruments implemented through these budgets and the fact that some Strategy activities are implemented also at national level (EUYD), or that some activities require IT infrastructure that necessitates maintenance and updating as well as generation of content (youth information), the resources allocated to the EUYS appear small in absolute terms and proportionate.

Stakeholders at the EU and national levels broadly agreed that the costs can be described as small or even minimal compared to the benefits brought about by the EUYS. It was however not possible to obtain precise estimates from Member State authorities on the cost of implementing the EUYS at national level.

Suggestions were also put forward by stakeholders for how the cost effectiveness of the EUYS and its instruments could be further improved. CSOs and youth researchers, for example, highlighted that instruments such as the EUYS stakeholder platform and the EU Youth Coordinator role could be further expanded both in scale and resources allocated to their implementation. In the case of the Youth Strategy Platform, it was specifically reiterated that despite there being a wealth of information available about the EUYS, there continued to be limited awareness and understanding among stakeholders. Thus, to improve the cost-effectiveness of this instrument, it was suggested to improve the communication and promotion of available resources to ensure broader awareness and encourage their active usage by youth and stakeholders.

Furthermore, CSOs and youth researchers also emphasised the benefits of collaborative partnerships and grassroots involvement in the effective implementation of the EUYS, underscoring the role of local organisations and stakeholders in the EUYS’ success. Thus, it was suggested that even with a small increase in funding for collaborative partnerships and grassroot initiatives for local organisations and stakeholders could yield significant benefits.

Considering the benefits (e.g. better co-ordination and alignment of youth-related strategies, policies and programmes and mainstreaming youth actions across several policy areas) that have been brought about by the EUYS at mid-term, the analysis points towards the EUYS as a whole being cost-effective and proportionate to the resources allocated. Similarly to the predecessor (2010-2018 EUYS), the EUYS has been able to generate impacts at the EU and national levels with relatively minimal resources. The following sub-section provides further insights into the cost effectiveness of the EUYS at the level of the instruments, structures, processes, and activities.

Table 3 Committed budget (in EUR) for selected actions under the Erasmus+ (youth chapter) and European Solidarity Corps 2019-2022 Source: compiled by Kantar Public, 2023

Cost-effectiveness of the EUYS instruments, structure, processes and activities

The analysis of the functioning, potential administrative burden, and cost-effectiveness of the EUYS and its instruments, structures, processes, and activities at the EU and national levels revealed an overall positive picture. The table below illustrates the estimated cost-effectiveness classification of the different instruments. Those that remain undetermined due to the time lag between outreach and measuring outcomes or the unavailability of cost data for precise estimates.

Table 4. Cost-effectiveness of the EUYS instruments, structure, processes and activities.

Source: Kantar Public

The analysis of the proportionality of the resources dedicated to the implementation of the EUYS and its instruments, found the costs to be overall sufficient with an adequate cost-benefit ratio. The EUYS Work Plans, for instance, were found to exhibit a favourable balance between their relatively low costs and the positive impacts they generate in terms of promoting active citizenship and social inclusion. Similarly, the instrument for mobilising and monitoring EU programmes and funds relied on using existing initiatives (e.g. Erasmus+), thus no significant costs were incurred. However, challenges arise in instruments such as the FNAPs, where stakeholders at the national level questioned the usability of the information provided in relation to the burden of providing it.

At the national level, mixed views were expressed by national policy makers and CSOs on the cost-effectiveness of the EUYS’ instruments, structure, processes, and activities. For CSOs, 65% of those responding to the targeted survey agreed that the administrative burden associated with being involved in activities under the EUYS was proportionate to the benefits that were brought about. However, analysis of the written responses found diverging ways of understanding the EUYS and in particular its relations with its specific instruments or programmes. For example, 45% of the respondents to the survey to CSOs noted that they face challenges in relation to limited financial resources to participate in Erasmus+ and 45% to participate in the European Solidarity Corps. This sheds a negative light on the perception of the EUYS by these stakeholders, even though not directly linked to the EUYS as such.

Despite this, national policymakers and CSOs emphasised the need to further emphasise initiatives with proven impacts. One notable example was the Erasmus+ programme which has demonstrated its effectiveness in supporting educational, professional, and cultural exchanges, leading to marked improvements in skills development, employability, social inclusion, and active citizenship of young people. Similarly, strengthening integration and leveraging existing initiatives, such as the EUYD, was another recurring theme in stakeholders’ views. Increasing the awareness and recognition of existing initiatives was thus seen as a way to not only improve the visibility of the EUYS, but also improve its cost-effectiveness.

In addition, CSOs contributing to the group interviews raised challenges in accessing and utilising information and resources from EUYS instruments (e.g. European Youth Portal, Youth Wiki, DiscoverEU and the EUYS platform), primarily due to the sheer volume of information which has been made available. They express a certain degree of information overload which suggests that there is scope to streamline and simplify information that targets this user group. Moreover, while instruments such as evidence-based youth policymaking and knowledge building were assessed as having adequate cost-effectiveness, stakeholder views outline that the useability and user-friendliness of the instruments may also hinder their potential cost-effectiveness.

In assessing the cost effectiveness of the EUYS, it was often challenging for stakeholders to delineate potential burdens that may stem from specific funding programmes compared to those potentially generated by the EUYS as a cooperation framework. Nevertheless, most consulted stakeholders considered the EUYS’ associated costs and burdens to be minimal and the overall conclusion points to negligible or low burdens at EU and national levels related to the EUYS.

Coherence

This section presents the assessment of the coherence of the EUYS, including its external coherence with wider EU policies and the internal coherence of the EUYS’ core areas and instruments, as well as an assessment of the influence of the Year on the EUYS’ coherence. Overall, a positive assessment is made of the EUYS’ coherence.

It is possible to identify the following key findings related to the coherence criterion:

·The EUYS aligns with multiple EU policies and strategies, through shared priorities, objectivesand values. A positive example is the synergies between youth participation and child participation actions 84 . The new EU Children’s Participation Platform 85 involves children (0-17) in EU decision-making and supports the active participation in democratic life from an early age, contributing to youth participation and active citizenship under the EUYS.  The Commission’s Citizenship Package 86 aims to support democratic participation by raising awareness on EU citizenship rights, including with a Guide to EU citizenship targeted to young EU citizens (who start being democratically engaged). The Defence of Democracy package 87 includes relevant Recommendations: the Commission Recommendation on promoting the engagement and effective participation of citizens and civil society organisations in public policy-making processes underlines the importance of promoting the participation of young people and children in democratic life in the EU and refers to best practices of existing children and youth councils and processes, including the EU Youth Dialogue. Another example is the synergy with demography policies prioritising gender equality, non-discrimination and intergenerational fairness; in this regard, the Communication from the Commission “Demographic change in Europe: a toolbox for action” called for the support of policy solutions mutually benefitting several or all generations across various policy areas such as education and, housing and care and in the workplace 88 . Youth participation is a key feature of the new European strategy for a better internet for kids (BIK+): in 2023, around 960 activities organised by the Safer Internet Centres and the BIK platform 89 with funding under Digital Europe, involved actively children and young people. 90 However, although there are many synergies across EU policies, there is limited evidence on concrete actions of complementarities and synergies, highlighting existing room for enhanced cooperation at EU level. 

·The EUYS ensures coherence with international obligations by reflecting some of the priorities contained in the 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (hereafter referred to as ‘UN SDGs’), notably inclusion (UN SDG 16), reducing inequalities (UN SDG 10), decent work and economic growth (UN SDG 8), and the green transition (UN SDGs 12 and 13). Nevertheless, there is scope for further highlighting linkages and for developing the communication around these.

·The instruments and core areas of the EUYS are largely internally coherent; the EU Youth Dialogue, Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes in particular emerged as the instruments fostering the most synergies.

·The European Year of Youth positively influenced the coherence of the EUYS, by enhancing coordination and mobilisation in the area of youth and around the EUYS, and by contributing to the launch of multiple initiatives that are relevant to the implementation of the EUYS.

Coherence with wider EU policies, strategies, priorities, and with international obligations

The first aspect of the coherence assessment of the EUYS focuses on its external coherence with wider EU policies, strategies and priorities, as well as international obligations. Youth mainstreaming is an explicit objective of the EUYS and relies on cross-sectoral cooperation at all levels of decision-making, promoting synergies and complementarities, and youth involvement.

Similarly to the predecessor (2010-2018 EUYS) the EUYS is broadly coherent with wider EU policies, strategies, and priorities. Such links and complementarities largely emerge through shared common objectives, priorities and focus areas, and sometimes through explicit references to the EUYS and its instruments.

Examples of policies and strategies which explicitly reference the EUYS (or its instruments) and/or the European Youth Goals are:

·the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025 91 , which makes direct reference to the EU Youth Dialogue and the European Youth Goals;

·The EU anti-racism action plan 2020-2025 92 , which emphasises the important role of young people in combating racism and discrimination and directly refers to the EU Youth Dialogue, the EU Solidarity Corps and Erasmus+;

·The Defence of Democracy package 93 , which underlines the importance of promoting the participation of young people and children in democratic life in the EU and refers to best practices of existing children and youth councils and processes, including the EU Youth Dialogue. 94

·the EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child 95 , which makes a reference to the EU Youth Dialogue as a way to promote democratic participation;

·the European Democracy Action Plan, which builds on the EUYS focus on promoting active citizenship among young people and foresees the use of EU funds and opportunities under the EUYS (among others) to foster access to democratic participation and trust in democracy;

·the Commission Communication on a comprehensive approach to mental health 96 , adopted in June 2023, has a strong focus on boosting the mental health of children and young people, with several flagship initiatives, including a child and youth mental health network, a prevention toolkit, and activities to protect young people in the digital sphere, and makes reference to the EUYS and European Youth Goals;

·the Youth Action Plan in EU External Action, which mirrors the structure of the EUYS around the core areas of ‘Engage, ‘Connect’ and ‘Empower’, and contributes to the international dimension of the EUYS.

·The European Alliance for Apprenticeships (EAfA), has set up since 2017 the European Apprentices Network (EAN) to involve young people in vocational education and training, in particular apprentices in the development of the Alliance

More frequently, external coherence of the EUYS is about alignment (rather than explicit references and mentions). Such an alignment materialises through the fact that the other policies and strategies concern (some of) the same priorities and values as the EUYS, the European Youth Goals and/or the EUYS’ core areas and guiding principles.

The coherence of the EUYS’ focus areas and priorities with the broader EU policy framework was confirmed by the consulted stakeholders. One of the factors contributing to this is the transversality of youth as a topic, which intersects with multiple policy areas, for instance education, employment, health, culture and environment. As such, the EUYS was found to be successful in encompassing and highlighting multiple policy priorities - for instance relating to sustainability, youth employment, lifelong learning, equality and inclusion. and allowed to create complementarities with other policy areas,

Key informant interviews also mentioned active efforts to promote synergies between the EUYS and other EU policies, in particular through the establishment of the internal Youth Network, and the EU Youth Coordinator, in increasing the visibility of the EUYS and promoting connections between policy areas. These efforts contributed to creating a better overview of initiatives and resources supporting youth and fostering the exchange of information and ideas across Commission departments. Overall, the alignment of the EUYS with the broader EU policy framework was largely visible in policy documents and some positive examples of collaborative efforts emerged.

Concerning the international sphere, despite evidence being relatively limited, the EUYS appears to be broadly coherent with international obligations, while also being considered as a relevant instrument at international level in the field of youth policy. Alignment with international obligations is primarily reflected by the fact that the EUYS encompasses some of the priorities contained in the UN Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) (e.g. inclusion, reduced inequalities, decent work, the green transition), thus contributing to their achievement. Strengthening of the EUYS’ international dimension was also provided for by the Youth Action Plan in EU external action, which aims to promote the engagement of young people as a strategic partner in EU external action, to make progress towards international commitments such as the UN SDGs.

Nevertheless, some stakeholders at the international level considered that the EUYS could place more emphasis on promoting global themes like sustainable development, hunger, poverty, peace and security, and highlight linkage with the UN SDGs. This could also be used for communication, to increase the visibility of these linkages.

Finally, it is relevant to note that most national youth strategies have a degree of alignment with the EUYS in terms of policies and priorities. Even in countries where the existence of a national youth strategy preceded the adoption of the EUYS, such coherence exists. Some of the aspects most prominently covered across national strategies, in line with the EUYS, are youth democratic participation and the reduction of social and cultural inequalities, aimed at promoting social inclusion. Complementarities between the EUYS challenges and objectives and national youth strategies were recognised by most of the stakeholders consulted. Specifically, the Erasmus + and European Solidarity Corps programmes emerged to be by far the instruments showcasing the highest degree of complementarity with existing initiatives/policies at national level.

Coherence of the EUYS’ core areas and instruments

The internal coherence of the EUYS’ core areas and instruments was another focus of this evaluation. The final evaluation of the 2010-2018 EUYS reported mixed views on its internal coherence, with some stakeholders being unable to make a judgement on this aspect. This evaluation found that the focus on three core areas instead of eight thematic ones as in the previous Strategy resulted in strengthening the internal coherence of the 2019-2027 EUYS.

While it is important to note that stakeholders often lacked complete knowledge/overview of the instruments of the EUYS, they often found the EUYS’ areas and instruments to be overall complementary and to allow for the creation of synergies, while providing different avenues for engagement and participation. In particular, the EUYD was the instrument most frequently mentioned as an enabler of synergies, specifically with the core areas of ‘Engage’ and ‘Connect’. The instrument relating to the mobilisation and monitoring of EU funds, and particularly the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes, also emerged as important drivers of synergies with each other and with the three core areas.

Influence of the European Year of Youth on the EUYS’ coherence

The European Year of Youth had an overall positive impact on the coherence of the EUYS. It is important to note that evidence on this aspect is relatively limited yet and the impacts might take time to materialise fully as the Year was only closed in spring 2023. However, the feedback and information gathered so far reveal the coherence and synergies of the objectives of and activities carried out during the Year with the EUYS.

The Year contributed to enhancing coordination between different services in relation to youth and the EUYS, as it mobilised different Commission departments, as well as youth departments at national level. It also led to the mobilisation of young people and relevant stakeholders in the field, through the more than 13,000 activities organised at national, EU and international level across 67 countries. The Year thus allowed to increase the visibility of the instruments and priorities of the EUYS, promote engagement in the activities of the EUYS and enhance support for its implementation.

The Year allowed to establish connections and complementarities between the EUYS and other policy areas. Importantly, some key initiatives were launched in the context of the Year, such as ALMA, the Youth Action Plan in EU External Action 2022-2027, the new European strategy for a better internet for kids (BIK+), the 2023 Flagship Technical Support Project Youth FIRST supporting children and youth wellbeing, education, training, social protection and labour prospects, or the Green Track Campaign, which show coherence between the Year and the EUYS, as well as with other EU level policy priorities. Moreover, several initiatives aimed at strengthening the voice of young people into the policy dialogue, such as the Youth Talks, the policy dialogues between young people and European Commissioners, the youth-led Safer Internet Forum ,and the Youth Voice Platform, positively contributing to the priorities and goals of the EUYS.

The Year was a highly politically visible initiative and created incentives for cooperation and coordination between the different parts of the European Commission. The Youth Network coordinated by the EU Youth Coordinator, and more than 30 European Commission departments and services contributing to the Year with more than 130 policy initiatives for young people, are testimony to this strengthened coherence in connection with the EUYS. The challenge and opportunity for the next phase of the implementation of the EUYS will be to continue and maintain the momentum created by the European Year of Youth and keep a high focus on youth mainstreaming in the coordination and cooperation at EU level, including across future policy developments.

4.2.How has the EU intervention made a difference and to whom?

EU added value

This section presents the findings on the EU added value of the EUYS as a strategic framework at the EU and national level and its impact in terms of scale, scope, role and process, its value in promoting cooperation between countries in Europe and beyond, the impact of the Year on the EUYS added value, and the consequences of discontinuing the EUYS. Overall, the desk research, stakeholder consultations and country research conducted allowed for a positive assessment of the EU added value of the EUYS.

It is possible to identify below key findings related to the EU added value criterion:

·The EUYS provided added value beyond what Member States could achieve on their own. For example, in the public consultation for this evaluation, 68% of the respondents 97 indicated that the EUYS had provided additional value beyond what Member States could have achieved on their own to a great or certain extent.

·The EUYS generates added value by 

-providing a policy framework to funding programmes with strong youth focus, notably Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps;

-facilitating knowledge sharing and exchange of experience;

-acting as an example and catalyst for national and international youth relevant policy development;

-creating collective responsibility in addressing youth challenges at the EU level;

-increasing the understanding of youth as a complex target group that requires holistic approaches.

·The European Year of Youth had a positive impact on the added value of the EUYS, as it raised awareness of available opportunities and improved the understanding of complementarities between policies and instruments.

·A discontinuation of the EUYS would have several negative consequences, like fragmented EU funding in the field of youth; decline in perception of the importance of the youth perspective among decision makers including from other policy fields; limited cross-sectorial cooperation at EU level; fewer opportunities for youth to input into EU level decision making; slowing down of progress of youth related policy development and actions in Member States.

EU added value of the EUYS as a strategic framework

The EUYS provides an overarching policy framework to funding activities at EU level through programmes with a strong youth focus notably Erasmus + and European Solidarity Corps. The activities funded through the programmes are aligned with EUYS priorities (see effectiveness section) which ensures the funding contributes to a commonly agreed set of broad goals. Without the EUYS these EU funding programmes would still be providing funding towards actions in the field of youth, however it is highly likely that these actions would be more fragmented in terms of focus.

The EUYS provides stakeholders with a platform for exchange and sharing of experience which in turn influence the development of national youth policies (see section on effectiveness), albeit to a varying degree, and also the work of youth organisations.

The EUYS as a catalyst in youth policies brings benefits beyond what individual Member States and stakeholders could achieve on their own. The existence of a youth strategy at EU level signals, to youth stakeholders as well as other policy makers, that the youth perspective and considerations for youth impact are important for the development of all relevant policies. This catalyst role supports youth policy makers and other youth stakeholders in national agenda setting and policy making processes. The youth sector may sometimes suffer from being under-valued by stakeholders from other sectors. Having a youth strategy at EU level gives a boost to the way in which youth sector stakeholders can position themselves in decision-making at country level.

In parallel to its role as a catalyst in policy development noted above, the EUYS also strengthens the understanding among policy makers of the fact that young people are a complex target group facing possibly multiple vulnerabilities but also representing the future of our societies and therefore needing dedicated attention and holistic approach. Previously young people were often seen only through specific lenses, such as unemployment, education, and democratic participation. The EUYS has followed the dual approach as a guiding principle – specific actions in the youth sector and mainstreaming youth across different policies. Furthermore, the emphasis of the EUYS on youth direct participation was also flagged as value-added and supporting change, particularly in countries where traditionally young people were spoken on behalf of by persons from other age groups.

The EU added value of the EUYS as a framework for driving change for national youth policy making is evident but depends very much on the tradition and starting position of the country concerned.

The added value of the EUYS at the level of Member States is present, albeit to a varying degree, in terms of the scope and scale of the effects. The assessment showed that the EUYS represents a specific effort to empower and engage young people across Europe and beyond, with the goal of fostering active citizenship, social inclusion, and solidarity. However, the impact of the EUYS is not uniform across the diverse landscape of EU countries. The evaluation shows that even countries with a strong alignment between their national youth policy and EU-level policy see the added value of the EUYS. At the same time, the added value was also observed in countries without a national youth strategy.

Moreover, the general public via the public consultation, interviewed stakeholders from EU institutions and policymakers at the national level, and surveyed CSOs, also confirmed that the EUYS provided added value beyond what Member States could achieve on their own.

Figure 6. To what extent has the EU Youth Strategy provided additional value to what Member States could have achieved on their own? (N=91).

Source: Kantar Public – Public Consultation on the EU Youth Strategy, 2023.

The results from the surveys with young people and CSOs are condensed in the figure below, demonstrating the role of the EUYS in key areas, namely education and mental health, youth engagement, and stakeholder engagement.

Figure 7. Role effects of the EUYS identified by young people and CSOs.

Source: Kantar Public – survey of CSOs and survey of young people, 2023

In addition to its added value in terms of the scale of support to Member States and the range of issues addressed, the EUYS plays an important role in fostering cooperation between countries in Europe and beyond. It facilitates transnational exchanges, consultations, and dialogue between institutions and organisations in the Member States, thus promoting mutual learning and sharing of successful approaches. The EUYS encourages stakeholders to work together, creating networks and stimulating cooperation in youth work at the national and transnational levels. Mechanisms such as peer learning activities and dialogues deepen countries' understanding of youth-related policies and enable them to reflect on their own strategies. The EUYS also promotes engagement between policymakers and youth organisations, facilitating networking and cross-border engagement. By providing a platform for countries to share knowledge, exchange ideas and learn from each other, the EUYS enhances cooperation, coherence, and awareness of the youth perspective at regional, national and international level.

In addition, the contribution analysis shows that the mutual learning activities, which aim at strengthening cooperation between Member States, brought strong added value. The analysis also showed that the EU Youth Coordinator, the evidence-based tools, the participatory governance and the EUYD added value to what the Member States could have achieved on their own. This impact was also visible beyond the EU through the EU-CoE Youth Partnership and the Youth Action Plan in EU External Action.

Impact of the European Year of Youth on the EUYS added value

The Year had a positive impact on the added value of the EUYS. As pointed out in the coherence section, the Year and its objectives were fully in line with the EUYS objectives and EYGs. The volume of Year activities and their strong alignment with the objectives of the EUYS show that the Year has accelerated the visibility of opportunities linked to EUYS for young people and youth stakeholders. The interviews at EU and national levels showcased that the Year and its relevant initiatives provided a platform for coordination, networking, and information gathering on youth-related activities while at the same time raising awareness of available opportunities and funding and improving the understanding of policy complementarities. This contributed to the visibility and recognition of the EUYS.

At the EU level, the Year also facilitated internal networking within the European Commission, leading to improved youth mainstreaming, policy coordination, and reflection on tools to enhance the consideration of impacts on young people in legislative processes. It also raised awareness, promoted communication, and created a space for dialogue, fostering recognition and support for youth-related policies.

While the positive impact of the Year was recognised at the EU level, consultations with policymakers at national level revealed varying perceptions. The Year played an important role in shaping youth policy across the EU, but the perceptions of national policy makers on its impact varied among Member States. While many experienced significant positive changes (national policy makers from 13 Member States indicated that the Year had a strong or moderate positive impact), some observed limited positive impact or made no observation on this. The figure below summarises the perception of the national policy makers on the Year, as gathered during national interviews.

Figure 8. National policy makers perceptions on the added value and impact of the Year.

Source: Kantar Public based on the country research.

Consequences of discontinuing the EUYS

The effects of discontinuing the EUYS at EU level would be largely adverse. The negative consequences are mainly related to the positive results of the EUYS in promoting cross-sectoral cooperation, mainstreaming youth in policy and strengthening the connection, engagement and empowerment of young people at EU level:

·Limiting the extent of cross-sectoral cooperation between the Commission services. There would be less attention paid to youth mainstreaming, possibly returning to a situation where each department would continue its own activities in the field of youth without there being coordination and active synergies.

·Decline in the perception of the importance of the youth perspective in the eyes of decision makers.

·Absence of clear and dedicated policy linkages and priorities for EU programmes in the field of youth – Erasmus + Youth and European Solidarity Corps.

·Substantially fewer opportunities for youth to input into EU level decision making. 

·Less comparative evidence about the situation of youth and about youth policies.

At the national level, the discontinuation of the EUYS would have effects mostly due to its value as a catalyst nature, as explained above. Overall, national level policymakers stated that there would be less policy input on the youth perspective from Member States, leading to uneven levels of importance of youth policies and differences in support for young people across the EU. The absence of the EUYS could make it more difficult to achieve visibility and legitimacy for youth-related issues, especially in countries where the political context does not prioritise youth policy. National policymakers perceive varying degrees of consequences of a discontinuation of the EUYS.

Figure 9. Perceptions of national policy makers on consequences of discontinuing the EUYS.

Source: Kantar Public – country research, 2023.

4.3.Is the intervention still relevant?

Relevance

This section presents the findings on the relevance of the EU Youth Strategy, particularly regarding the extent to which the EUYS objectives remained relevant over 2019-2023; how well the EUYS objectives still correspond to the needs and challenges of youth today; and the extent to which the EUYS’ relevance has been influenced by the European Year of Youth. Overall, the evaluation allowed for a positive assessment of the relevance of the EUYS.

It is possible to identify below key findings related to the EU relevance criterion:

·The EUYS was relevant in addressing diverse youth needs during 2019-2023, due to the broad formulation of its objectives and the comprehensiveness of the EYGs and guiding principles, and this is confirmed also by the perceptions of EU and national policy makers, and CSOs.

·Since the launch of the EUYS 2019-2027, new needs have emerged that have been addressed via the EUYS, albeit to varying degrees.

·The 2022 European Year of Youth brought a number of benefits increasing the relevance of the EUYS. In the survey of CSOs, youth researchers and youth informal groups, 63% of respondents that were aware of the EUYS, considered that the European Year of Youth made the EUYS more relevant to their organisation.

Stakeholders’ perceptions of the relevance of the EUYS objectives during 2019-2023

The focus of the EUYS has been broadened compared to the previous Strategy, to cover the complex landscape of youth challenges. During the 2019-2023 period, young people faced challenges in different areas of their lives, which were then exacerbated by unforeseen circumstances, such as the Covid-19 pandemic and Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine which led to inflation and exacerbated costs of living challenges.

Generally, policymakers at EU and national level consider the EUYS relevant and sustainable because of its broadness and adaptability to specific youth needs over time. EU level policymakers also appreciated the EUYS’ comprehensive nature for identifying interventions to support young people, including the fostering of youth participation and engagement opportunities.

Similarly, national policymakers considered the EUYS to be relevant in addressing youth needs, either directly through EU level initiatives or by encouraging national initiatives. The main topics addressed by the EUYS considered particularly relevant by national policy makers consulted as part of the country research include youth engagement and participation, mental health and well-being, and inclusion: in most countries’ views, these were aligned with the objectives of the EUYS. The relevance of the EUYS is highlighted by the way national policymakers used the EUYS as a framework to adopt their own initiatives. The national policymakers interviewed considered the EUYS relevant for addressing youth needs, particularly when it came to barriers to mobility, education, and digital skills development.

The stakeholders reached through the public consultation, and civil society organisations, further confirmed the relevance of the EUYS, and that the core areas of ‘Engage’, ‘Connect’ and ‘Empower’ capture most challenges faced by youth as well as the youth initiatives put forward. According to the results of the public consultation, the three main challenges faced by young people between 2019 and 2022 were the rising cost of living, mental health and well-being, and financial stability. The costs of living and financial stability were not seen to be specifically and directly addressed by EUYS instruments and activities in the period covered.

According to civil society organisations, at the EU level, the EUYS is most relevant to address insufficient youth participation and social exclusion or discrimination, followed by the green transition.

EUYS’ correspondence with current youth needs and challenges

Many of the above issues were identified in the survey of young people and CSOs in the youth field, who overall converge about the fact that the highest priorities are:

·Inflation and costs of living;

·Mental health and well-being;

·Unemployment; and

·Environment and sustainability.

In general, the broadness of the EUYS objectives, core areas, principles, and European Youth Goals were found to respond to a range of challenges of young people. In particular, the results of the youth survey and the survey of CSOs on this question are shown below.

Figure 10. Issues important to young people based on survey with youth.

Source: Kantar Public – survey of young people, 2023.

According to the national policy makers, the three major youth needs identified at the national level include mental health and well-being, youth participation, and inclusion. In most countries’ views, these were aligned with the objectives of the EUYS. The national stakeholders interviewed had mixed views about the extent to which these issues are tackled by the EUYS. While some consider the alignment is good, others have more temperate views about it.

Stakeholders at EU level identified several challenges currently facing young people. Among these, the lasting effects of unforeseen circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine were the most frequently mentioned. At the same time, policy makers at EU level reiterated issues such as the increased cost of living, youth participation, challenges related to digitalisation, mental health and well-being, youth unemployment and mainstreaming of youth policies. At the same time, it was pointed out that challenges such as the cost of living are complex issues tackled by several policy areas and that the EUYS could not be the main framework for addressing such issues and providing direct solutions. In their view, the EUYS has been particularly useful in addressing youth participation and involvement, raising the visibility of the youth perspective and policies, promoting networking among young people, supporting young people with fewer opportunities, the green transition, youth work and volunteering. Based on the consultation activities, the EUYS could nevertheless more visibly address the impact of some of the new/re-surging challenges (e.g. cost of living).

Influence of the European Year of Youth on the relevance of the EUYS

The Year increased the relevance of the EUYS through several activities that made stakeholders more aware of the opportunities available to young people and youth stakeholders. The Year was positively perceived by participants in the Year’ activities and by the stakeholders consulted as part of this evaluation.

Based on a survey conducted among young people, stakeholders, and national coordinators involved in the Year, the Year brought a number of benefits to the participants. These included higher involvement of young people in youth-related activities through conferences and awareness campaigns, increased youth empowerment to become active and engaged citizens, improved young people’s awareness of opportunities and resources available to them, contribution towards better connection of youth through stronger networks, and increased participation by youth in decision-making processes. These results suggest that the Year brought several benefits in line with the EYGs, thereby contributing to the achievement of the EUYS’ objectives.

In addition, consultations carried out as part of this evaluation, showed that national policy makers held a positive view of the Year, considering that it brought a number of benefits boosting the relevance of the EUYS, presented in the figure below. These benefits were also echoed by EU-level policymakers.

Figure 11. Perceptions on results of the European Year of Youth mentioned by national policymakers boosting the relevance of the EUYS.

Source: Kantar Public – interviews with national policymakers, 2023.

Both national and EU-level policymakers emphasised the need for effective engagement and long-term legacy. The Year created an important momentum around youth mainstreaming at EU level, with and among EU Member States, and other stakeholders such as civil society organisations and networks, international organisations, experts and researchers. The challenge for the EUYS going forward will be to maintain the level of commitment of stakeholders in the aftermath of the Year.

Overall conclusions and lessons learned

The evaluation underlined the effectiveness and continued importance of the EU Youth Strategy as a strategic framework for European cooperation, knowledge sharing and peer learning, channelling resources and concerted action towards common objectives in addressing youth challenges and complementing Member States action and initiatives. Notably, the EUYS remains vital as ‘catalyst’, i.e. acts as an example/model for national youth strategies/youth policy developments, in particular in countries without a national youth strategy or where it is being constructed or renewed, to support convergence of policy approaches. This role also extends beyond the EU as demonstrated in the Youth Action Plan in EU external action through which the EUYS can also inspire third countries to adopt similar approaches.

The evaluation has highlighted the continued relevance of the EU Youth Strategy objectives with a strong focus on inclusion and diversity, and on youth participation and civic engagement. Generally, the broadness of the objectives, and the European Youth Goals, were found to respond to a range of challenges and needs of young people. The instruments operate in an interlinked manner to contribute to the effectiveness of the EUYS and allow the EUYS to have influence at multiple levels, including on EU and national policies, civil society organisation practices and young people.

Nevertheless, consultation activities identified that there is scope to tackle more visibly and concretely the impact on young people of some new/re-surging challenges, notably cost of living, housing, environment and climate, digitalisation, physical and mental health and well-being, and challenges of rural youth. This underlines the importance of the dual approach of the EU Youth Strategy, i.e. to pursue youth mainstreaming and cross-sectoral cooperation across policy areas, while relying also on strong youth participation and youth representation, alongside continuing to mobilise and enhance the specific instruments and initiatives in the youth sector.

The 2022 European Year of Youth brought the EU closer to young people, raising awareness of the many and diverse opportunities available to them. It boosted youth participation and accelerated youth mainstreaming and increased the relevance of the EU Youth Strategy. Sustaining and building on these positive effects of the European Year of Youth, as also outlined in the Communication on the European Year of Youth 2022 98 , will further reinforce the performance of the EU Youth Strategy in the coming years.

The main conclusions and lessons learned from the evaluation are geared towards enhancing the influence of the EU Youth Strategy through further boosting some of its instruments. These have been grouped in blocks below covering 1) youth participation and youth mainstreaming, 2) enabling instruments, and 3) scope for simplification.

Youth participation and Youth mainstreaming

ØEU Youth Dialogue: becoming more inclusive, attention to follow-up

The EU Youth Dialogue celebrates more than 10 years of existence and is the largest EU level participatory instrument for involving young people in policy making. Almost 90 000 young people have engaged in the consultation in the period 2019- (first half) 2023, of which 22 000 during the 9th cycle (January 2022–June 2023). The EU Youth Dialogue needs to continue evolving and growing. It is vital to safeguard the good achievements on inclusion over the last three cycles, to keep up the progress for involvement of young people from ethnic and religious minority groups, young people with disabilities, and young LGBTQIA, and increase the participation in the Dialogue process of any under-represented groups, including young people not in education, employment or training and rural youth, at national and EU level. Finetuning outreach and communication can be part of the measures here as well as better preparation and support of participants in the EU Youth Dialogue, in particular young people with fewer opportunities.

A key area for attention is to further develop and support a process of sharing and channelling outcomes and recommendations from the EU Youth Dialogue to all relevant stakeholders at EU and national level (or at all levels), in particular policy makers. There is also a need for systematic mechanisms for informing participants in the EU Youth Dialogue and stakeholders about the follow-up planned at EU and national level. At EU level, this could also imply seeking a closer alignment of the EU Youth Dialogue’s focus with the Commission work programme.

It would also be opportune to create more synergies with other child and youth participation instruments, such as the EU Children’s Participation Platform and the BIK Youth participation activities 99 , at EU and national level for more transparency and joined-up efforts to engage young people and youth representatives, with the help of civil society organisations and networks.

Priority actions to further develop youth participation and the EU Youth Dialogue are outlined in the Communication on the European Year of Youth 100 .

ØYouth Mainstreaming: accelerate, build on and press ahead

The evaluation revealed examples of policy initiatives at EU level that have incorporated a youth perspective, some of which also refer explicitly to the EU Youth Strategy, such as the Commission Communication on a comprehensive approach to mental health, which was developed with input from young people 101 .. However, although there are many synergies across EU policies, there is limited evidence of concrete actions in complementarities and synergies, highlighting existing room for enhanced cooperation at EU level.

Building on the achievements during 2022 European Year of Youth, and on its many legacy actions, there is an opportunity to step up efforts at EU and national level towards further progress in youth mainstreaming across all relevant policy fields, including considering concrete mainstreaming instruments at EU and national levels to tackle the complex challenges of young people.

When designing EU policies, the Commission will use the full potential of youth mainstreaming as part of the Commission’s Better Regulation framework and toolbox, resulting in a youth check, as outlined in the Communication on the European Year of Youth. Efforts will also include better outreach to civil society organisations, networks and young people to encourage their taking part in consultations for new EU initiatives, including in citizen panels (one-third of whom are young people). A new youth stakeholders’ platform will be set up to facilitate a continuous exchange with youth organisations, youth researchers, Member State representatives and other EU institutions. Continuing regular youth policy dialogues with European Commissioners, organising dedicated youth mainstreaming roundtables, and further mobilising the internal Commission Youth Network of youth correspondents, in particular through the EU Youth Coordinator, will also be important to enhance mainstreaming.

The European Commission can also support national efforts in this area by organising mutual learning activities on youth mainstreaming in cooperation with Member States, to exchange on how to involve young people and civil society organisations and better channel the youth perspective in policy making processes with an impact on youth. The European Commission also encourages Member States to establish national or regional youth coordinators, following the example of the EU Youth Coordinator.

Member States and the European Commission could also identify specific areas for intensifying synergies and complementarities, e.g. creating synergies between youth participation under the EU Youth Strategy and children participation under the EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child, and with national policies and initiatives in these areas, in line with measures for inclusive civic engagement and participation for European democratic resilience outlined in the Commission’s Citizenship Package and Defence of Democracy package 102 .

Member States and the European Commission could also collaborate on specific policies and initiatives, such as targeting the mental health and well-being challenges of young people, considering interconnections with digital life, sport and culture, and pursuing holistic approaches on the basis of the Commission’s Communication on a comprehensive approach to mental health 103 and Council Conclusions 104 . As an example, in the implementation of the youth-related flagship initiatives of the Communication on mental health, the Commission works closely with the Member States through the sub-group on mental health of the Public Health Expert Group 105 . Public authorities at national and regional level can also request support under the EU Technical Support Instrument to design and implement policies targeted to young people, including in the form of multi-country/multi-regional projects involving several beneficiary authorities. Under this instrument, support has been provided to preserve and improve youth mental health and wellbeing in a number of EU Member States. Similar collaboration can be facilitated on a range of other key areas, based on the challenges identified by young people and youth stakeholders.

There is also a need and potential for engaging with stakeholders, communicating better on the youth mainstreaming objective and cross-sectoral nature of the EU Youth Strategy, and disseminating and raising awareness about successful youth mainstreaming at EU and national level among all stakeholders.

Priority actions to strengthen youth mainstreaming are also outlined in the Communication on the European Year of Youth.

ØEU Youth Coordinator: instrumental for youth mainstreaming, attention to role

The evaluation showed that the EU Youth Coordinator function is instrumental for youth mainstreaming achievements at EU level, notably through the internal Youth Network, and has high potential and importance for the continuation of efforts. Stakeholder feedback indicated scope to increase visibility and awareness of the role and work of the EU Youth Coordinator to external stakeholders, and to better communicate on and potentially further clarify the mandate of the function which is very broad.

Regular and broad stakeholder involvement in the design, implementation and follow-up of the EUYS is vital for the participatory governance and overall performance of the EUYS. Building on the positive experiences with the European Year of Youth national coordinators and stakeholders’ group, the EU Youth Coordinator will be able to rely on a more permanent Youth stakeholder’s platform group, to be mobilised for consultations, discussions and exchanges, co-creation, dissemination of knowledge and outputs from different EUYS instruments, and as a community of practice, including also capacity building sessions on topics of interest to the community. This is also outlined in the Communication on the European Year of Youth.

Enabling instruments

ØEU programmes: explore further synergies

The Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps programmes are key instruments for supporting the EUYS at EU level. It is therefore important to safeguard links between these programmes and the EUYS objectives and activities. There is also scope to further explore synergies between these programmes and other programmes/funds/instruments (e.g. Horizon Europe, cohesion policy funds and the Technical Support Instrument at EU level) as well as national programmes/funds. The Youth Network in the Commission as well as mutual learning activities can facilitate work on this.

ØYouth information and communication: development of a communication plan

Awareness of the EUYS among stakeholders is a precondition for its success as it allows the stakeholders to engage with the different activities and their outputs. The communication activities are primarily directed at young people and especially cover opportunities for young people to participate in EU programmes and schemes and there is a lack of comprehensive communication towards policy makers and civil society organisations.

The evaluation found a good degree of awareness of the EUYS among all consulted stakeholders, however more often of some of the key instruments, in particular the EU youth programmes and the European Youth Portal. The European Youth Portal is in particular well known by young people and civil society organisations. There was less clarity over what the EUYS aims to achieve overall and how the different components of the EUYS fit together.

There is thus scope for clearer overall communication on the EU Youth Strategy and its interlinked components. At the same time, there is also a need for more targeted communication for policy makers and civil society organisations/practitioners, to strengthen communication on the EU Youth Dialogue consultations and recommendations and on youth mainstreaming, and to still finetune information and communication products on the European Youth Portal for young people. While there is a visible effort to use appropriate style, format and channels, the focus groups with young people suggested that even more could be done in this area, e.g. by testing communication products and means/channels with a panel of young people.

This could be addressed by developing a communication plan for the EU Youth Strategy, including user-friendly access and relevant resources for policy makers and civil society organisations. This can also involve specific communication products for communicating on implementation and performance of the EU Youth Strategy.

ØEvidence-based tools: continuous improvement, attention to communication

Continuous efforts are needed to provide and communicate relevant data on the implementation and performance of the EU Youth Strategy and on the evolving situation of young people to policy makers, civil society organisations, practitioners, young people and other stakeholders in a timely, user-friendly and digestible way. The websites and tools for knowledge- and evidence building, such as the Youth Wiki, the Eurostat EU Youth Dashboard, the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps Dashboards, and for communication and outreach, such as the European Youth Portal, are highly valued and used. There is also a wealth of research, studies and data available through the EU-Council of Europe Youth Partnership, the RAY network and the SALTOs in the EU youth programmes, stakeholder organisations such as the European Youth Forum, OECD and other international organisations.

The evaluation identified specific needs which could be addressed at EU and national levels to better capitalise on and use achievements so far and areas for further developments. There is e.g. potential to create an ‘entry-point’ and streamline/curate resources for policy makers and civil society organisations/practitioners, today spread over several portals and websites. The Youth Wiki, already the most utilized platform by this audience, could be considered here, to create a clear distinction between channels for informing youth (European Youth Portal) and those more targeting policy makers and civil society organisations (Youth Wiki). Recognizing the differing needs of these audiences, it is advisable to use adapted and distinct resources. The EU Youth Report contains rich and useful information on activities implemented and progress under the EUYS, drawing on all evidence-based tools and sources, however the evaluation found that many stakeholders require more specified and more frequent information. This calls for reviewing the EU Youth Reportfrequency, volume and form of information to cater for needs of different audiences and facilitate communication on the progress and evidence-base of the EUYS.

To facilitate monitoring and evaluation, the evaluation suggests developing few key indicators to help track progress and provide a bridge between the higher-level strategic objectives and the more direct sphere of influence of the EUYS (on the evolution of youth policies, practices of youth organisations, youth participation). The evaluation grouped the EUYS instruments in a simplified manner and elaborated medium-term impact pathways linked to the specific objectives, which could be useful to consider in the indicator development. Efforts should also continue on the availability of data, possibly considering also additional systematic surveys, based on the proposals of the ad hoc expert group on youth indicators for a unified monitoring framework of quantitative and qualitative indicators.

Member States and the European Commission, also involving youth stakeholders, could cooperate on further developing key indicators, methodologies, and data for evidence-based monitoring of the EU Youth Strategy’s implementation and performance.

Scope for simplification

ØFuture National Activities Planners: consider alternatives

The evaluation identified scope to simplify and reduce Member States’ reporting burden for the Future National Activities Planners 106 . In the consultations, policy makers found them burdensome to complete and with limited use, while most other stakeholders indicated limited involvement and awareness of the Planners. The number of completed FNAPs also declined in 2021 compared to 2019. This indicates a need to consider substituting the Future National Activities Planners by an alternative way of gathering information on national youth policy priorities and developments, in cooperation with Member States. Alternatives to explore could include the Youth wiki instrument and simplified ad hoc surveys of national representatives.

Lead Directorate-General: European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, DG EAC

Agenda planning reference:  PLAN/2022/1741

Organisation: The main preparatory steps for the evaluation in 2022 included the set-up of an Inter-Service-Group to accompany and steer the evaluation, publication of a call for evidence and preparation of technical specifications for a supporting external evaluation assignment (service contract EAC-2023-0086). The service contract was awarded under the DG EAC framework contract for evaluations and impact assessments to a consortium led by Kantar Public and started in February 2023.

The external evaluation assignment included a public consultation and multiple targeted consultations and provided the main evidence base for the Staff Working Document. The full final report of the service contractor has been published here:  Support study for the Interim evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 ; Annexes - Support study for the Interim evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027

The factual summary on the public consultation and call for evidence has been published and is available here: EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 – interim evaluation (europa.eu) . The synopsis report on all the consultation activities in the evaluation is annexed to the Staff Working Document. 

Timing (general chronology of the evaluation):

DGs participated in the Steering Group (ISSG): An Inter-Service-Group of relevant Commission departments oversaw the evaluation and met regularly throughout the evaluation process. In addition to DG EAC, the Inter-Service-Group was composed of representatives of 17 Commission departments 107 .  In line with the Better Regulation guidelines, the Inter-Service-Group was involved in all the key steps of the evaluation work, including the evaluation mandate, call for evidence, evaluation questions, technical specifications for selecting the external contractor, the public consultation questionnaire and survey questionnaires, monitoring progress and steering the evaluation, providing comments to and ensuring quality and objectivity of evaluation reports.

In connection with the meetings of the Inter-Service-Group and key deliverables, consultations were carried out in the dedicated Teams channel. The feedback periods, deadlines and arrangements for managing comments and approval of deliverables were agreed in the meetings.

Work/studies carried out by the external contractors: The Commission’s interim evaluation was supported by an independent external evaluation assignment. In line with the Better Regulation Guidelines the contractor analysed the effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, added value and relevance of the EUYS at mid-point. The contractor used a mixed-method approach to data collection and analysis, including qualitative and quantitative data and contribution analysis. The contribution analysis consisted of assessing the extent to which the EUYS contributed to the intended changes and included developing an intervention logic for the EUYS instruments, unpacking their implementation and using primary evidence validating the assumptions. In addition, a cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using a defined framework to assess the costs associated with the EUYS.

The external evaluation assignment was carried out between February and December 2023 and included public consultation and multiple targeted consultations. The consultation strategy for the evaluation was based on a mapping of stakeholders and quantitative and qualitative data was mainly gathered through the following consultation activities:

·Call for evidence on the Commission’s 'Have Your Say' portal from 23 September to 21 October 2022.

·Public consultation on the ‘Have Your Say’-portal from 26 April to 2 August 2023.

·Quantitative data on awareness of the EUYS and engagement with its instruments, collected through:

-Online survey of young people

-Online survey of youth civil society organisations, youth researchers and youth informal groups

·Qualitative data on perceptions of the EUYS and examples of progress in its implementation, collected through:

-Key informant interviews with policy makers at EU and national level and focus groups with national policy makers, from 3 May to 20 June 2023;

-Focus groups with young people from 14 June to 8 August 2023;

Focus groups with civil society organisations, youth researchers and youth informal groups from 14 June to 23 August 2023.

Overall methodology

The external evaluation assignment encompassed five tasks, as presented below, each contributing to support a comprehensive assessment of the EUYS performance and impact.

Figure 1. Overall process and methodology of this interim evaluation

Task 1 – Inception and desk research

Task 1.1 Inception phase

·Kick off

The kick-off meeting with members of the EUYS Inter-service Group (ISG) took place on 8 February 2023. During the kick-off meeting, the evaluation team introduced the objectives of the EUYS 2019-2027 interim evaluation, the intervention logic and the evaluation framework. Discussions with the ISG members and comments received helped to revise the stakeholder consultation approach in view of enhancing engagement of youth with different social, political, economic and cultural backgrounds in the youth survey and focus groups.

·Scoping desk research and interviews

The scoping interviews were conducted with representatives of DG EAC, DG INTPA and EACEA. The purpose of the scoping interviews was to better understand the EUYS and the instruments implementation. The interviews helped to refine the intervention logic and evaluation matrix. Scoping desk research was carried out in preparation for the Theory of Change Workshop.

·Theory of Change Workshop

The Theory of Change workshop was conducted on 20 February 2023 with representatives of DG EAC and EACEA. The purpose of the workshop was to gain better understanding to refine the intervention logic and evaluation framework and develop detailed impact pathways linked to the expected results and desired impacts of the EUYS. The implementation of the EUYS relies on multiple strands of activities. At the design stage of the interim evaluation, it was important to develop a solid understanding of the impact pathways linked to the EUYS implementation mechanisms. During the Theory of Change workshop, the evaluation team:

·Harnessed the thoughts and reflections of seven representatives from DG EAC working on different instruments of the EUYS;

The evaluation team documented the discussions on the intervention logic and on the policy context of the EUYS, which allowed the team to finetune the intervention logic and develop the impact pathways used in the evaluation.

Task 1.2 – Desk research

Under the task 1, the desk research was carried out at the EU and national level. The methodological and analytical process for the desk research contained two phases, firstly the scoping desk research and secondly the EU and national level desk research. The purpose of the scoping desk research was to analyse the information that exists around the EUYS to ensure that our understanding of the theory of change was soundly rooted in the policy context and backed up by existing academic or grey literature about the EUYS and youth-related policies and measures.

·Desk research at the EU level

EU level desk research was based on the literature about EUYS activities, inputs and outputs. The EU level desk research mainly analysed Staff Working Documents, Communication documents and Reports, other documents on all the eleven instruments of the EUYS.

The study team gathered key documentation and DG EAC provided further literature which allowed the team to revise the list of preliminary secondary data sources and create a document repository containing over 300 documents. Analysis was carried out by analysing documents in line with the evaluation matrix and gathering the secondary data on indicators. The results of EU level desk research fed into identifying the EUYS implementation via its instruments. The results were also used to contextualise the evaluation findings presented in the final report.

·Desk research at the national level

The national level desk research covered all EU Member States. The aim was to gather key insights that could be difficult to capture with quantitative tools about potential synergies between national youth strategies and the EUYS, and examples of EUYS effects. The national desk research was based on documentation gathered via FNAPs, YouthWIKI, national youth policies and strategies, national reports on youth policy area and other available documents. National desk research was also coupled with stakeholder consultations carried out under the task 2, such as:

·undertaking interviews with national youth policymakers in all the EU27 (described under the task 2 – stakeholder consultation);

·follow-up focus groups with national policymakers in three countries in Denmark, Germany and Slovakia (described under the task 2 – stakeholder consultation).

The first step was a review of available secondary data – reports and national youth strategies and policies implemented in the context of the EUYS. On this basis, we developed the template for the country research to collect evidence in a systematic way and the study team carried out interviews and focus groups with the national policymakers. The researchers elaborated country reports summarising key information from the interviews and national-specific literature, helping build a picture of the EUYS effects at the national level across EU27.

Task 2 - Stakeholder consultations

The consultation strategy for the evaluation was based on a mapping of stakeholders and included the following consultation activities to involve a broad range of EUYS stakeholders and the public:

·A call for evidence open to any stakeholder and the public on the European Commission’s 'Have Your Say' portal during 23 Sep. - 21 Oct. 2022.

·A public consultation open to any stakeholder and the public, on the European Commission’s ‘Have Your Say’-portal during 26 Apr. - 2 Aug. 2023.

·Quantitative activities gathering data on awareness of the EUYS and engagement with different EUYS activities and instruments, collected through two targeted surveys:

-Online survey of young people, reached through a general population sample in 10 EU Member States 108 during 10-29 July 2023;

-Online survey of youth civil society organisations, youth researchers active at EU and national level, and youth informal groups, during 15 June - 14 Aug. 2023.

·Qualitative activities gathering perceptions of the EUYS and examples of progress made in its implementation, collected through:

-Key informant interviews with policy makers at EU and national level and focus groups with national policy makers, during 3 May - 20 June 2023;

-Focus groups with young people during 14 June - 8 Aug. 2023;

-Focus groups with civil society organisations, youth researchers and youth informal groups during 14 June - 23 Aug. 2023.

The targeted consultation activities (surveys, interviews, focus groups) have involved stakeholders based on:

·The relevance of the EUYS 2019-2027 to them;

·Their expertise in the subject;

·Their involvement in EUYS 2019-2027 activities and instruments.

Specific attention was paid to ensuring inclusion and diversity in the online survey of youth. Respondents were selected to ensure a distribution that reflected the population of each country in terms of age group (16-29), gender and region. In addition, during the survey implementation, the respondents were selected with respect to several characteristics such as educational attainment, employment status, rural/urban residence and self-reported disabilities.

Task 3 – Analysis and key issues for possible mid-term review

Contribution analysis

The EUYS tackles multifaceted challenges affecting young people during their transition to adulthood, spanning education and training, employment, social inclusion, and more. It also addresses broader concerns like youth unemployment, inequality gaps, and exposure to harmful content. Moreover, unexpected events such as the COVID-19 pandemic and geopolitical shifts have significantly influenced the EUYS’ operating landscape.

Given the complexity of the EUYS, which encompasses a diverse array of instruments and measures, assessing its impact demands a structured approach. In addition to the refined intervention logic - to capture this complexity, the impact pathways were developed for each of the EUYS instruments. The implementation of the EUYS relies on several strands of activities or different instruments. Each of these instruments has its own logic and a set of assumptions about key success factors.

·The following methodological steps were taken by the study team to carry out the contribution analysis:

·developing the impact pathways for each EUYS instrument and mapping what they were intended to achieve and under what assumptions;

·developing the assumptions associated with each instrument's activities, outputs and outcomes;

·gathering the secondary and primary evidence from this evaluation to determine the extent to which the intended activities, outputs and results have been achieved;

·assessing the validity of the assumptions using the evidence gathered.

Developing impact pathways and assumptions

To evaluate the EUYS, it was important to unpack the different implementation instruments, make assumptions about their own impact and carry out the contribution analysis - an assessment of how a given set of activities feeds into the overarching intervention logic of the EUYS. Impact pathways help us trace the connections between the EUYS’ activities and the intended outcomes, illuminating how different interventions contribute to overarching goals.

In order to unravel the effects of the EUYS through impact pathways, we engaged in a twofold process. First, we dissected the different instruments and actions within the EUYS. Each of these instruments functions as a unique entity, targeting specific objectives and outcomes. Developing impact pathways for these instruments involved outlining the sequence of actions, changes and influences that occur as a result of their implementation.

In essence, by outlining these pathways, we gain insight into how individual actions contribute to the broader picture of youth development, empowerment, and change. Following the four groups of activities of the EUYS, the impact pathways have been clustered, allowing us to unpack the impacts of the EUYS across its core areas.

Figure 2. Clustering of impact pathways against four core areas of the EUYS.

Secondly, impact pathways require the identification and examination of assumptions. These assumptions are the underlying beliefs about how the instruments will lead to certain outcomes. By scrutinising these assumptions, we ensure a clear understanding of the logical links between activities and impacts. This process allowed us to validate the intervention logic of the EUYS, ensuring that the expected impacts are plausible and supported by evidence. We identify the critical elements and assumptions that need to be assessed during the evaluation. This approach allowed us to collect primary and secondary data to verify the existence of the impact pathways outlined and the accuracy of the underlying assumptions.

Validating the assumptions

Identifying the contribution of the instruments to the EUYS requires validation of the assumption. In order to validate the assumptions, the secondary and primary data collected in this evaluation were used in the translation. This process was carried out in four steps:

·Mapping which of the activities, outcomes and results have been achieved.

·Validating the assumptions based on the available evidence.

·Identifying the extent to which the instrument has contributed to the EUYS.

·Developing a contribution story for each instrument.

Task 4 – Systematic review

The purpose of the systematic review was to:

·produce an updated comprehensive assessment of the impact of the EUYS on the selected topic;

·attempt to provide a systematic overview of the direction and magnitude of the impact of EUYS on the selected topic;

·attempt to identify factors that may explain the heterogeneity of the results that have been found in individual studies or national evaluations.

·Based on the in-depth review of the comprehensive portfolio of documents and grey literature we have conducted, the systematic overview team together with DG EAC have chosen the following topic for the analysis: digital life and well-being of young people.

Context and research question

One of the overall objectives of the EUYS is to ‘improve policy decisions with regard to their impact on young people across all sectors, notably employment, education and training, health and social inclusion’. There has been an increasing impact of digitalisation on everyday work, education and training, and social life, which was intensified by the COVID-19 Pandemic and there is a call for a systematic overview of how this shift has impacted the well-being of young people.

On this behalf, it is interesting to investigate the topic further; hence, we proposed the following research question: How has digital life impacted well-being of young people?

Limitations of the chosen topic

The topic ‘digital life and well-being of young people’ is an emerging field. Hence, it is justified to conduct an up-to-date review of the topic. The subject is also fairly broad which provides several different sub-topics to choose from. However, it could also be seen as a disadvantage to select an emerging field, such as digital life and youth well-being, because of the presumably limited access to secondary data and research conducted. Also, the restricted availability of secondary data might be a drawback in terms of robustness, which is something we have considered when adjusting the method to a systematic review rather than a full-scale meta-analysis. The full systematic review is published as an annex of the external study report.

Conceptual framework

The concept of well-being is broadly defined as a state of “optimal psychological experience and functioning”. 109 Such definition leads to various interpretations on what aspects the well-being encompasses. Traditionally, the well-being is associated with mental health, although broader definitions of the well-being include the following dimensions 110 :

·Physical well-being – e.g., good state of (mental and physical) health and physical capabilities;

·Cognitive well-being – e.g., successful participation in a learning process (education and training);

·Psychological/emotional well-being – e.g., positive self-esteem, agency, satisfaction with life; hope for the future, sadness, anger;

·Social well-being – e.g., developing healthy relationships with others, participating in the community, and having a sense of belonging.

Such broader conceptualisation of the well-being is in line with the approach of the EU Youth Strategy, since it aims to support the health and well-being of young people with a focus on 111 :

·Promoting mental and sexual health, sport, physical activity and healthy lifestyles;

·Preventing and treating injury, eating disorders, addictions and substance abuse;

·Education on nutrition;

·Promoting cooperation between schools, youth workers, health professionals and sport organisations;

·Making health facilities more accessible and attractive for young people;

·Raising awareness of how sport can promote teamwork, intercultural learning and responsibility.

Task 5 - Reporting and dissemination

The final task consisted in the analysis and synthesis of the data in view of drafting the final report. The report structure follows the Better Regulation Guidelines template for evaluation reports and includes the required annexes.

Effectiveness

The approach to assess the effectiveness of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 (Hereafter EUYS of the EUYS) uses a theory-based contribution analysis. Beyond the development of the intervention logic and related theory of change, this implies:

·Development of the detailed impact pathways between the individual components of the EUYS implementation and the expected results and impacts. This recognises that not all elements of the EUYS contribute to all the results and impact but that there is a more detailed set of pathways between the actions taken and the expected changes;

·Explicit formulation of assumptions that underpin the impact pathways. These reflect under what conditions we assume the changes will follow from the activities implemented;

·Identify the critical assumptions and critical segments of impact pathways and focus data collection and compilation on those elements of the theory of chain;

·Collect evidence from primary and secondary data against the impact pathways so as to confirm or disconfirm whether these pathways have materialised;

·Assess the strength of the evidence gathered and subsequently the credibility of the emerging narrative of contribution of the EUYS to the changes observed and measured; and

·Revise the contribution theory and present the actually achieved theory of change (rather than the expected one) showcasing what the EUYS has achieved to deliver.

Table 1 Evaluation matrix – Effectiveness

Efficiency

The EUYS is implemented through a range of instruments. These instruments are funded from different funding sources and in addition to budgets they also mobilise the time of different stakeholders. Time of stakeholders is needed for participation in different events and activities. This time constitutes and important indirect costs for the implementation of the EUYS. In our approach to evaluating efficiency of this strategy we therefore propose to not only assess the direct costs (expenditure on the different activities) but also indirect costs meaning:

·Headcount dedicated to EUYS in DG EAC; and

·Time spent by different stakeholders engaging with the EUYS.

These indirect costs is quantified and monetised using the EU standard cost model which will allow us to get a more comprehensive view of the costs of the implementation of this strategy. This is compared with the benefits of the EUYS as identified under effectiveness.

Table 2. Evaluation matrix – Efficiency

Relevance

As per the Better Regulation Guidelines 112 , the criterion of relevance looks at the relationship between the needs and problems in society and the objectives of the intervention and hence touches on aspects of design. Analysis under the criterion of Relevance requires a consideration to how the objectives of an EU intervention (i.e. the EUYS) corresponds to wider EU policy goals and priorities. The analysis also requires the identification of possible mismatches between the objectives of the intervention and the (current) needs or problems.

Table 3. Evaluation matrix – Relevance

Coherence

The methodological toolbox of the Better Regulation Guidelines is the baseline and the reference for the overall conceptual design of the framework for assessing coherence. In this sense, we will check:

·the ‘internal’ coherence: i.e. how the various core areas, instruments and guiding principles in different areas of the EUYS operate together to achieve its objectives. This also look at whether synergies have actively been sought across the EUYS’ core areas and instruments, as relevant.

·the ‘external’ coherence: i.e. the relationship between the EUYS and other interventions, at different levels: for example, between EU interventions within the field of education, training and youth (e.g. European Education Area, European Strategy for Universities, Digital Education Action Plan, European Skills Agenda). Also, the relationship with other relevant EU policies and programmes with more high level and horizontal policy objectives such as the Green Deal, NextGenerationEU and the Recovery and Resilience Facility).

Table 4. Evaluation matrix – Coherence

EU added value

To operationalise the analysis of EU added value, the evaluation assesses four main aspects:

·Volume/scale effects: the extent to which the EUYS creates additional volume effects (scale of cooperation) which would not be achieved through national actions.

·Scope effects: the extent to which the EUYS covers stakeholders that would not be covered by national interventions.