Analysis-Youth and self-employment

United Nations
Development
Programme

Analysis: Youth and Self-employment- why and how
2
Authors:
Snezana Mircevska-Damjanovska, National Technical Advisor, UNDP
Afërdita Haxhijaha Imeri, Programme Officer, Social Inclusion Practice, UNDP
Special thanks to the involved local employment centres within the Employment Service Agency, as
well as UNDP project monitoring officers for all the efforts the employed in the realization of the
anticpated activities.

3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. 4
2. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................ 5
3. THE PURPOSE OF THE ANALYSIS.......................................................................................... 6
4. RESEARCH METHODS AND TECHNIQUES ............................................................................. 7
5. ANALYSIS SAMPLE………………………………………………………………………………………………..………....8
5.1. Sample for the quantitative methodological procedure……………………………….…………....8
5.2.Sample for the qualitative methodological procedure…………...…………………………….…....9
5.2.1. Sample for the focus group of young people that were not successful while
applying for the 2008 Employment Programs................................................................. 9
5.2.2. Sample for the focus group of young people that were successful while applying for
the 2008 Employment Programs .................................................................................... 9
6. FINDINGS OF THE ANALYSIS................................................................................................10
6.1 Findings of the questionnaire intended for young people up to 27 years of
age………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………10
6.2 Findings of the focus groups of young people that were not successful while applying
for the 2008 employment programs………………………………………………………….……………...……24
6.3 Findings of the focus groups of young people that were successful while applying for
the 2008 employment programs…………………………………………………………………………………….24
7. CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................25
8. ANNEXES ............................................................................................................................27
Annex 1- Questionnaire intended for young people up to 27 years of age........................27
Annex 2- Plan for semi- structured interview with Focus group composed of young people
that were not successful within the Employment Program 2008…………………...................31
Annex 3- Plan for semi- structured interview with Focus group composed of young people
– participants in the Employment Program 2008................................................................33
9. APPENDIXES ........................................................................................................................35
APPENDIX 1...............................................................................................................................36
APPENDIX 2...............................................................................................................................38
APPENDIX 3...............................................................................................................................39
APPENDIX 4...............................................................................................................................42
APPENDIX 5...............................................................................................................................44
APPENDIX 6...............................................................................................................................46

4
1.SUMMARY
Unemployment in the country is extremely high, including long-term unemployment. There
is a particularly serious problem of youth unemployment. Recent studies showed that, as in the other
countries in the region that emerged from the former Yugoslavia, young people aged 15-27 were
more likely to be unemployed than those in other age groups.
In view of the existing situation, the Government developed both a policy and a strategy,
undertaking a range of activities in the area of employment in order to curb the unemployment,
which activities were laid down in a series of subsequent documents. The Government‘s Operational
Plan on Employment occupies an important place among the envisaged activities. It basically
represents an annual action plan on the allocation of budget funds in the area of active labor market
programs and measures.
Despite these activities and the fact that young people up to 27 years of age were defined as
a separate target group eligible for obtaining support for employment, it was noticed, however,
especially during the implementation of the 2008 Operational Plan self-employment measure, that
young people were underrepresented.
As a result, a series of activities to look into this situation was undertaken in 2009. The
findings of these insights (analysis of the information from the field) indicate that young people apply
insufficiently for participation in the employment programs, the reason being lack of sufficient
information. More specifically, they opined that more information and counseling were needed, that
they should be informed about the goals, the model and the way in which they should apply, and
that their activities should be tracked until the completion of the cycle.
On the other hand, interviews with the successful applicants revealed, which was also the
case with the rest of the respondents, a high proportion of positive experience and positive
reputation associated with these activities. This is, primarily, a result of the efforts of all stakeholders
involved in the implementation of these governmental programs.
In general, it can be argued that these efforts by the Government are considered as a good
foundation for solving the unemployment issue, especially of young people; having said that, finding
or putting the emphasis on the most suitable ways of informing young people is something that
should receive more attention in the coming period. A significant amount of the job with regard to
improving the way of informing young people has already been done during the implementation of
the Operational Plan for 2009, independently from this Analysis, which resulted in an increased
participation by young people. This Analysis points to the necessity of continuing with these efforts
and indicates opportunities for making improvements.

5
2. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
MLSP - Ministry of Labor and Social Policy
ESA - Employment Service Agency
MES - Ministry of Education and Science
VETC - Vocational Education and Training Center
APE - Agency for Promotion of Entrepreneurship
UNDP - United Nations Development Program
ALMM - Active Labor Market Measures
OP - Operational Plan
OEP - Operational Employment Program
SVE - Secondary Vocational Education
RIC - Roma Information Center

6
3. THE PURPOSE OF THE ANALYSIS
It has been the third year since UNDP actively participates in the realization of projects,
which provide technical assistance and support to the implementation of the annually planned active
labor market measures aimed at reducing the unemployment rate in the country. Based on the
experiences gained in the course of the implementation of the project1
in 2008, a weak participation
of the young people up to 27 years of age was registered, despite the fact that the 2008 Operational
Plan2
singled out the young people as a separate target group under the self-employment measure.
These findings were supported by the data obtained during the course of implementation of
the measures of Self-Employment and Formalization of Existing Businesses, especially in 2008.
Namely, the 2008 Operational Plan envisaged support for 250 young people up to 27 years of age as
one of the target groups in the aforementioned document, out of the 500 individuals that were to be
supported under the self-employment measure. Out of the possible 250 slots, only 122 individuals
from this target group applied for participation in this measure, and only 803
(32%) were supported
with funds earmarked within the OP for 2008.
Taking as a starting point this low response by the young people regarding their participation
in measures intended for finding an employment for them, the need for a detailed analysis aimed at
determining the reasons for this low response emerged, bearing in mind the labor market situation
and the youth unemployment rates in the country. Notably, according to Employment Service
Agency data, the situation as of December 31st
2008 was that 30.8% of the registered unemployed
people were waiting for an employment for 8 or more years. Young unemployed people aged 15-29
make up 27.7% of the total number of registered unemployed people in the country.
In that context, UNDP conducted an Analysis - in cooperation with the ESA - aimed at
determining the reasons leading to the low response by the young unemployed people up to 27
years of age, and the findings of this Analysis should be used when defining active employment
measures in the coming years.
1
“Self-employment II and Technical Assistance to Support the Government Operational Plan for ALMMs for
2008”
2
http://mtsp.gov.mk/default-mk.asp?ItemID=BD66FCC3A7FBCB47AB9150CBFECD2C96
3
An additional number of applicants were supported in 2008. Out of the initially planned 500 for the target
group of young people up to 27 years of age, only 74 received support. The number 80 is obtained from the
additional applicants.

7
4.RESEARCH METHODS AND TECHNIQUES
From a methodological point of view, the objective of this Analysis is to determine the
reasons leading to (non)participation of young people up to 27 years of age in the Government-
designed employment programs targeting this particular population group.
The Analysis will make an effort to establish links between the information/ awareness of the
young people about the existence (availability) of such programs and their motivation to participate
therein. At the same time, the Analysis will try to provide an explanation of the reasons leading to
the (lack of) success in the application process. This particularly applies to those young people up to
27 years of age that applied for participation in such governmental programs in the previous year
(2008).
This Analysis was derived from a combined research strategy (quantitative and qualitative
one). From among the quantitative methodological procedures for data collection, a survey involving
a questionnaire was used for the group of young people up to 27 yeas of age who failed to apply in
the past years for any of the active labor market measures or programs of the Government. A
questionnaire was developed for this purpose (see Annex 1), consisting of three groups of questions:
(i) general questions related to the socio-demographic characteristics of the young people up to 27
years of age; (ii) the second group of questions related to the information/awareness of the young
people up to 27 years of age about the existence of governmental employment programs; and (iii)
the third group of questions touched upon other indicators presenting the young people’s attitudes
towards the employment programs.
Pilot test of the questionnaires was conducted with the Monitoring Coordinators working as
part of the team of the UNDP project “Self-employment III and Technical Assistance to Support the
Government Operational Plan for ALMMs for 2009” in order to adjust questionnaire contents to the
target group. As part of their daily routine, Monitoring Coordinators were in constant communication
with the unemployed candidates, thus they are considered relevant concerning this issue.
Semi-structured interview with focus groups was used from among the qualitative
methodological procedures for data collection. Two different categories of focus groups were
included, as follows:
The first category consisted of people that have applied in the past period4
for some of the
active labor market measures aiming for employment, with UNDP involved in the
implementation as well, who were not successful in completing the envisaged process.
4
For the purposes of this Analysis, 2008 was taken as a reference year because the measure of “Formalization
of existing businesses” did not exist in 2007.

8
The second category consisted of people that applied in 2008 for some of the active labor
market measures aiming for employment, with UNDP involved in the implementation as
well, who were successful in completing the envisaged process, which resulted in them
obtaining a grant.
The qualitative procedure includes, inter alia, an analysis of the semi–structured interviews
conducted with both categories of focus groups. In order to ensure uniformity of the approach and of
the course of the interviews with both focus groups, two distinct plans for conducting these
interviews were developed. One of the plans pertains to those young people that were successful
under the employment program for 2008 (see Annex 2), while the other plan relates to those that
weren’t successful under the same program (see Annex 3). Plans for both categories of focus groups
include three groups of questions: the first group refers to the access to information for the young
people up to 27 years of age; the second group of questions refers to the young people’s opinions
about the relevance of such programs, with the purpose of this group of questions being to
determine the reasons leading to (de)motivation of the young people; the third group of questions
refers to other elements expressing young people’s opinions/positions on the positive and/or
negative aspects of their participation in such type of employment programs.
5.ANALYSIS SAMPLE
5.1. Sample for the quantitative methodological procedure
The sample for the quantitative methodological procedure was determined based on the
situation with the total number of unemployed people as at 30 April 2009, distributed across the 30
local employment centers falling under the Employment Service Agency (see Appendix 1). Based on
the number of young unemployed people from among the target population, the first 6 local
employment centers with highest registered numbers of youth (up to 27 years of age)
unemployment were selected. It must be stressed, however, that the age group of the unemployed
from among the target population has increased to 29 years, which is primarily due to the
distribution of age groups established by the Employment Service Agency.
This gave birth to projections that the proportion of youth up to 27 years of age in the total
population involved in the survey will be higher than the initially projected one. In the
aforementioned 6 employment centers, from among the total number of unemployed persons (now
up to 29 years of age), a survey would be conducted with 0.5% of the total number of young people
up to 27 years of age, which meant around 300 respondents on average. Through its Monitoring
Coordinators, UNDP would distribute the questionnaires to those 6 employment centers, following
which the staff in the centers would invite the young people from among the target population to
come to the Job Clubs to fill in the questionnaires.

9
5.2. Sample for the qualitative methodological procedure
Concerning the qualitative methodological procedure, as stated above, 2 categories of focus groups
were established: a focus group with young people that were not successful while applying for the
2008 Employment Programs, and a focus group with young people that were successful while
applying for the same employment programs.
5.2.1. Sample for the focus group of young people that were not successful while
applying for the 2008 Employment Programs
As regards how the sample for this focus group was formed, the total number of
unemployed candidates up to 27 years of age that applied to participate in any of the measures in
2008 was obtained from the database developed by UNDP aimed to serve the needs of all 2008
Employment Program implementing partners, including all target groups defined in the 2008 OP,
following which the number of successful candidates that received the funds envisaged with the
measures in 2008 (thus entered employment) was subtracted from the former number. From among
the unsuccessful candidates, following the regional division of the country into 8 regions5
, a sample
of 10% of unemployed people was selected (see Appendix 2), or a total of 16 candidates (2 from each
region). This number of unsuccessful candidates was distributed into 2 focus groups. Candidates
were randomly identified from the 2008 database, paying attention to having adequate
representation in terms of gender, ethnicity and place of living (rural and urban areas).
5.2.2. Sample for the focus group of young people that were successful while applying for
the 2008 Employment Programs
As for the formation of the sample for this focus group, the total number of unemployed
candidates up to 27 years of age that applied to participate in any of the measures in 2008 and were
successful and received funds envisaged with the measures in 2008 (thus entered employment) was
obtained from the database developed by UNDP aimed to serve the needs of all 2008 Employment
Program implementing partners. From among the successful candidates within the target group of
unemployed youth up to 27 years of age defined in the 2008 Operational Plan, and given the regional
division of the country into 8 regions, a sample of 20% was selected (see Appendix 4), or a total of 16
candidates (2 from each region). This number of successful candidates was distributed into 2 focus
groups. The individuals were randomly identified from the 2008 database, paying attention to having
adequate representation in terms of gender, ethnicity and place of living (rural and urban areas).
5
Source: State Statistical Office

10
6. FINDINGS OF THE ANALYSIS
6.1 Findings of the questionnaire intended for young people up to 27
years of age
For the purposes of an easier tracking of the findings and results of the questionnaires
completed by the young people up to 27 years of age who have not participated in any governmental
employment programs before, they will be presented according to the division made in the
questionnaire itself. Namely, the questionnaire consists of three groups of questions:
(1) general questions related to the socio-demographic characteristics of the young people
up to 27 years of age;
(2) questions related to the information/awareness of the young people up to 27 years of
age about the existence of governmental employment programs; and
(3) questions relating to other indicators presenting the young people’s attitudes towards
the employment programs.
General questions related to the socio-demographic characteristics of the young
people up to 27 years of age
From the aspect of gender breakdown of the unemployed persons that participated in completing
the questionnaire of this Analysis in the pre-determined 6 employment centers (see Appendix 1 or
Chapter 5.1), the majority of the answers were obtained from female respondents - 129 (44%);
however, the number of unanswered questionnaires concerning this group of questions - 56 or 19% -
came as a surprise, which can be a subject of another, more detailed analysis.
Table 1. Respondents breakdown by gender
City Bitola Kumanovo Prilep Skopje Strumica Tetovo Total
Question No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
Gender
Male 10 16 15 33 12 22 108
Female 17 19 17 42 17 17 129
No answer
0 11 2 30 3 10 56
Total 27 46 34 105 32 49 293
The following table (Table 2) gives an overview of the age groups, as per the age group
classification established by the Employment Service Agency, which fall under the target group i.e.
young people up to 27 years of age. It can be noticed that the majority of the respondents who
completed the questionnaire were aged 25-29 (46%), whereas the proportion of young people aged
15-19 was only 10%, which is primarily due to the fact that young people of this age were still
attending secondary school or have just graduated from it, given the fact that secondary education in
the country is mandatory.

11
Table 2. Respondents breakdown by age groups within the target group
Question/ No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of answ. No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
Age
15- 19 2 2 5 13 4 4 30
20- 24 24 14 12 33 19 15 117
25- 29 1 29 17 52 7 30 136
No answer 0 1 0 7 2 0 10
Total 27 46 34 105 32 49 293
From ethnicity point of view, attempt was made to have all largest ethnic groups in the
country represented, with more than half of the respondents (60%) being Macedonian, then
Albanians (20%), Roma (10%) etc. (Table 3). Regarding the place of living, the majority of the
respondents (75%) came from urban areas in the country (Table 4).
Table 3. Respondents breakdown by ethnicity
Question/ No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of answ. No. of answ. No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
Ethnicity
Macedonian 22 23 28 51 32 21 177
Turk 1 0 1 4 0 1 7
Roma 3 4 3 17 0 2 29
Bosnian 0 0 0 6 0 0 6
Albanian 1 13 2 19 0 23 58
Serb 0 6 0 2 0 2 10
Vlach 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
No answer 0 0 0 5 0 0 5
Total 27 46 34 105 32 49 293
Table 4. Respondents breakdown by place of living
Question/ No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of answ. No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
Place of living
Rural 1 13 6 19 15 16 70
Urban 26 32 28 84 17 33 220
No answer 0 1 0 2 0 0 3
Total 27 46 34 105 32 49 293

12
Regarding the level of completed education, the majority of the respondents have graduated
from a secondary vocational school - 33.4% (see Table 5), which corresponds to the total number of
unemployed with a secondary vocational school degree in the records of unemployed population.6
Table 5. Respondents breakdown by the level of completed education
Question/ No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of answ. No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
Level of completed education
Primary
education 4 14 4 43 0 8 73
Secondary
general school 1 4 5 9 2 12 33
Secondary
vocational school 7 12 13 24 21 21 98
Post-secondary
education 3 4 2 3 0 0 12
Higher education
10 11 10 25 9 7 72
Master’s or
higher degree 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
Other 0 1 0 0 0 1 2
No answer 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Total 27 46 34 105 32 49 293
As regards the extent to which the respondents live independently (i.e. the question whom
the respondent lives with), the majority of them (70.3%) were still living with their parents. This piece
of information should not come as a surprise given the fact that a traditional family in the country
includes members of different generations, as well as the fact that many young people tend to live
with their parents regardless of whether they have a family of their own or not (Table 6).
6
Source: Employment Service Agency – Review of unemployed persons by level of education – situation as
of 31st December 2008, and Review of unemployed persons by level of education – situation as of 31st
December 2009 (http://www.avrm.gov.mk/?ItemID=91B1C6E62BD0384DA6CAAAD42F3F2FB5), where in
both years the share of the persons with secondary vocational school degree was around 24% from the total
number of unemployed population, which makes it the second largest group following the persons without
any qualifications or those with/without completed primary education.

13
Table 6. Respondents breakdown by their degree of independence
Question/ No. of
answ.
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
The respondent is living:
With his/her
parents 21 31 20 74 25 35 206
Independently 1 10 5 17 1 3 37
Has a family of
his/her own 5 5 9 14 6 11 50
No answer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 27 46 34 105 32 49 293
Concerning the question about the family income, the majority of the respondents had low
or no income (60% or 177 answers). This finding matches the proportion of poverty7
in the country
that amounted to 28.7% in 2008, i.e. matches the piece of information that poverty rate among the
unemployed was 38.4%, and that 43% of all poor people in the country were unemployed. If this is
broken down further, the most vulnerable groups seem to be the multiple member households,
bearing in mind the fact that 57.7% of the poor live in households with multiple members, which
confirms the data of Table 6.
Table 7. Respondents breakdown by family income
Question/ No. of
answ.
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
Size of the family income
Low income – up to
10.000 MKD 8 21 20 70 21 30 170
Average income–
up to 20.000 MKD 18 20 10 26 9 15 98
High income - over
30.000 MKD 0 3 2 3 1 2 11
No answer 1 0 2 3 1 0 7
No income at all 0 2 0 3 0 2 7
Total 27 46 34 105 32 49 293
Questions related to the information/awareness of the young people up to 27 years of age
about the existence of governmental employment programs
In this section of the questionnaire, respondents gave answers concerning their
information/awareness about the existence of employment programs, about their wish and interest
in participating in such programs, as well as about the reasons leading to them being interested or
7
Source: State Statistical Office (http://www.stat.gov.mk/statistiki.asp?ss=08.01&rbs=8)

14
not in the programs. Since this section lies in the heart of the Analysis, especially the aspect of the
youth awareness/information about the programs that may lead to their eventual participation in
such programs, cross analyses of the obtained data were made and the findings are presented
below.
Regarding the information/awareness aspect, the majority of the respondents replied that
they were not informed about the existence of governmental employment programs – 58% (Table
8).
Table 8. Respondents breakdown by their information/awareness about the programs
Question/ No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of answ. No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
Were you informed about the existence of governmental employment programs intended for young people
up to 27 years of age?
No 13 13 29 64 12 38 169
Yes 14 30 5 37 19 11 116
No answer 0 3 0 4 1 0 8
Total 27 46 34 105 32 49 293
Data in Table 8 are not in line with the data in Table 9. Although 169 of the respondents said
they were not informed about the existence of governmental employment programs, only 88 failed
to answer the following question which referred to the manner in which the respondents became
informed of these programs. With regard to this question, account should be taken of the fact that
here the respondents were able to give more than 1 answer, thus the number of answers became
somewhat higher than the actual number of respondents8
.
If one was to group the answers into several main categories, it seems that the majority of
the respondents (as many as 139 or 39.6%) found out about these programs through media
(newspaper, TV, Internet), followed by those who became informed through the Employment Service
Agency activities (83 answers – 23.64%), and at the end are those who became informed otherwise
(friends, private employment agencies, RIC) – around 10.54 % (Table 9).
Table 9. Respondents breakdown by the manner in which they were informed
Question/ No. of
answ.
No. of answ.No. of answ.No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
If you are informed, how were you informed?
I saw advertisements in
daily newspapers 7 3 11 27 2 9 59
I saw advertisements on
TV 7 4 7 24 4 12 58
8
Within the Analysis, 293 persons answered the questionnaire, and with this particular question that offers
the possibility to give more than 1 answer - that number is 351.

15
I saw on the website of
the Employment Service
Agency 3 1 2 7 5 4 22
I saw on the
announcement board in
the Employment Centre
2 1 9 3 1 16 32
Employment Centre staff
informed me
6 11 5 3 2 13 40
Job Club staff told me
1 1 2 0 0 7 11
I was told at the private
employment agency
1 1 1 2 2 4 11
I heard from friends/
relatives 2 2 2 12 4 4 26
Some other way –Roma
Information Center
1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Some other way –nobody
informed me 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Some other way –looking
for it myself/ individually 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
No answer 8 22 4 36 12 6 88
Total 38 47 43 114 32 77 351
Tables below (10, 11 and 12) provide an insight into the external factors that could impact
the respondents’ level of interest in participating in the programs, as well as impact the interest
itself. Namely, Table 11 shows that the proportion of those who know someone who had already
participated in such employment program is not low - around 35%, plus the fact that as many as 41%
of the previous participants’ reactions were positive.
Table 12 provides interesting data as well, showing that about 61% of the respondents said
they were considering the possibility to participate at some future time.
Table 10. Respondents breakdown
Question/ No. of
answ.
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of answ.
Do you know someone that has previously participated in such Employment Program?
Yes 6 9 20 34 5 28 102
No 21 36 14 70 24 20 185
No answer 0 1 0 1 3 1 6
Total 27 46 34 105 32 49 293

16
Question/ No. of answ. No. of answ. No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of answ. No. of answ.
If your answer to the previous question is positive, what kind of reactions did you get?
Positive 4 12 21 46 8 28 119
Negative 8 12 0 23 6 7 56
No answer 15 22 13 36 18 14 118
Total 27 46 34 105 32 49 293
Question/ No. of
answ.
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of
answ.
No. of answ.
5. Have you considered the possibility of taking part in such type of programs?
Yes 17 21 21 67 17 35 178
No 10 20 13 30 11 14 98
No answer 0 5 0 8 4 0 17
Total 27 46 34 105 32 49 293
Regarding the questions related to the reasons for the possible (non)participation in the
governmental employment programs, the majority of the respondents replied that they would do it
immediately once the right conditions had been created, i.e. when the next program came, but after
they had become well familiar with the conditions offered by the program.
The young people up to 27 years of age indicated the following as the most common reasons
leading to a lack of interest in participating in such programs: mistrust in the program itself, lack of
transparency, lack of information, age, etc. A more detailed overview of the answers obtained to
these open questions can be seen in Appendix 5 (reasons for possible participation) and Appendix 6
(reasons for possible non-participation).
Starting from the assumption that being informed is one of the preconditions for
participating in a program, additional efforts were made in order to ascertain the information-related
trends broken down by age, ethnicity, place of living and the level of education. It was found that the
majority of the female population became informed via the television medium, whereas the male
population found out about the programs through print media i.e. newspapers (Figure 1). However,
one should not neglect the fact that the majority of the male population became informed through
the bodies of the Employment Service Agency.

17
Figure 1- Breakdown by gender regarding the way of becoming informed
Regarding how the different ethnicity members were informed, the high proportion of those
who failed to give an answer came as a surprise. Based on the answers obtained, it can be noticed
that the majority of the Macedonians became informed of these programs through print media, the
Roma through the electronic media i.e. television, whereas the rest – Albanians, Serbs etc. – were
informed through the bodies of the Employment Service Agency.
Breakdown by gender
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
M
F
M 32 24 13 15 25 6 4 18 4 47
F 27 34 9 17 15 5 7 8 0 41
Newspaper TV
Internet
of the ESA
Announcement
board of EC
EC staff informed
me
Job Club staff
told me
Private
employment
Agency told me
Friends
/relatives
RIC/Nobody
Informed me
No answer

18
Figure 2- Breakdown by ethnicity regarding the way of becoming informed
As for the place of living, respondents from urban areas became informed through media
(television, newspapers) most of the time, with the number of those who found out about this
through the Employment Service Agency not being low either. The situation with the respondents
from rural areas is similar in that the majority of them became informed through the media.
Breakdown by ethnicity
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Macedonian
Turk
Roma
Albanian
Serb
Vlach
Bosnian
Macedonian 39 36 13 18 16 7 7 14 1 53
Turk 1 1 2 1 2
Roma 2 9 1 2 3 2 7 1 7
Albanian 15 13 5 11 16 4 2 4 2 18
Serb 1 2 3 4
Vlach 1
Bosnian 1 4
N Newspaper TV
Website
of the ESA
Announce-
ment
board of EC
EC staff
told me
Job Club
staff told me
Private
e employment
agency
Friends
/relatives
RIC/Nobody
informed me No answer

19
Figure 3- Breakdown by location regarding the way of becoming informed
Regarding the educational levels, as presented in Figure 4, it can be noticed that individuals
with only primary education degree were for the most part informed through the announcements on
TV; those with general and vocational secondary school degree through newspapers, which also
applies to individuals with a higher education degree; individuals with a postsecondary school degree
were informed through the bodies of the Employment Service Agency.
Breakdown by location
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
urban
rural
urban 46 45 15 22 30 7 10 21 3 64
rural 13 13 7 10 10 4 1 5 1 24
Newspaper
TV
Website of
the ESA
Announcement
board of EC
EC staff
told me
Job Club staff
told me
Private
employment
agency
Friends
/relatives
RIC / nobody
Informed me No answer

20
Figure 4- Breakdown by educational level regarding the way of becoming informed
It was interesting to review the data related to family income and the interest in
participating in an employment program. The finding was that individuals who said their income fell
under the category of “low income - up to 10.000 MKD“ were those who considered the most the
possibility of participating in the employment programs. This should be no surprise, especially in view
of these individuals’ comments about the reasons why they would do it; the majority of them said
that they saw this as a source of income enabling them to enter some kind of employment thus being
able to earn their living.
Breakdown by educational level
Primary education
Secondary general
school
Secondary vocational
school
Postsecondary
education
Higher
education
Master’s or higher
degree
Primary education only 10 17 5 4 10 1 3 9 1 28
General secondary school 11 9 2 3 6 3 1 0 0 11
Vocational secondary school 19 14 6 13 14 4 3 12 3 30
Post-secondary education 2 2 1 1 3 0 1 1 0 3
Higher education 17 16 8 11 7 3 3 4 0 14
Master’s or higher degree 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Newspaper TV
Website
of the
ESA
Announce-
ment
board of EC
EC staff
told me
Job Club
staff told
me
Private
employment
agency
Friends / /
relatives
RIC /
Nobody
Informed
me
No
answer

21
Figure 5 – Respondents breakdown by income and interest in participating in employment programs
regarding the way of becoming informed
Questions related to other indicators presenting the young people’s attitudes about the
employment programs
Regarding the respondents’ opinion on the positive and negative aspects of this type of
employment programs, the majority of them replied that good things about these programs were
that “Such type of programs offer employment to young people“, that “Grants can be received“, and
the fact that “Funds received trough such type of Programs, as additional sources, could lead to
realization of ideas“.
Contrary to the above, the respondents indicated as negative aspects the amount of funds
which some consider insufficient for starting up one’s own business, the opinion that such type of
programs offer only short term solution to the unemployment problem, and the fact that the
conditions in the economy are not so much favorable for starting up a business and for realization of
ideas. A more detailed overview of the breakdown of the answers is given in Table 13.
It can be inferred from Table 13 that the respondents recognized more positive aspects of
the employment programs (633 answers given to the options offered) than negative ones (494
answers).
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Income level
5. Have you considered
the possibility of taking
part in such a program?
Yes
5. Have you considered
the possibility of taking
part in such a program?
No
5. Have you considered the
possibility of taking part in
such a program? Yes
111 60 6 7
5. Have you considered the
possibility of taking part in
such a program? No
59 38 5 7
Low income
up to
10.000
Average
up to
20.000
High income
above
30.000
No
answer

City
Bitola Kumanovo Prilep Skopje Strumica Tetovo Total
Question/ Category
Number
of
answers
Number
of
answers
Number
of
answers
Number
of
answers
Number
of
answers
Number
of
answers
Number of
answers
Such type of programs offer
employment to young people.
20 19 28 56 18 30 171
Grants can be received. 6 15 29 8 15 31 104
The amount of the grants is
sufficient for starting up one’s
own business.
5 9 12 4 8 6 44
Such programs enable
gaining/extending the
entrepreneurship skills.
10 11 18 14 8 19 80
Practical knowledge about the
market and the functioning
thereof is gained.
12 9 21 16 11 17 86
Such programs enable
purchase of needed
equipment/materials for
starting up a business.
8 10 16 7 7 13 61
Funds received trough such
type of Programs, as additional
sources, could lead to
realization of ideas.
15 13 23 10 9 17 87
Total 76 86 147 115 76 133 633
Positive
In your opinion,
what are the
positive and
negative aspects
of this type of
Employment
Programs?

23
Information about such type of
programs is not always
available to young people.
10 16 5 13 3 8 55
Conditions under which funds
are offered are not favorable in
my opinion.
10 15 3 4 2 7 41
The amount of funds is
insufficient for starting up
one’s own business.
17 17 22 10 11 28 105
Such programs do not offer
any previous knowledge
related to running a business.
11 16 11 4 5 8 55
There are no bodies/
counseling services offering
advices, guidelines, assistance
about how to run a business.
10 17 11 9 6 11 64
Such type of programs offer
only short-term solution to the
unemployment problem.
16 27 13 10 7 19 92
Conditions in the economy are
not so much favorable for
starting up a business and for
realization of ideas.
14 17 15 7 6 23 82
Negative
In your opinion,
what are the
positive and
negative aspects
of this type of
Employment
Programs?
Total 88 125 80 57 40 104 494

6.2 Findings of the focus groups of young people that were not successful
while applying for the 2008 employment programs
In line with the envisaged and approved procedure for carrying out this analysis, interviews
with focus groups were organized by randomly inviting candidates from the database of the project
that was involved in the implementation of the self-employment measure in 2008, which was an
integral part of the governmental employment programs. It is in this context that interviews with the
invited respondents were conducted, and the findings of these interviews are provided below.
Regarding the way of informing oneself about employment opportunities, the candidates
report regularly to the Employment Centers, but they also use the services of private employment
agencies to a lesser extent. However, when it comes to finding a job (temporary or permanent), they
mostly rely on direct contacts and recommendations (by friends, acquaintances). “I mostly rel on
recommendations by friends because they know me, they know what I have done before and which
qualities I have” .9
When it comes to becoming informed about the self-employment measure, the participants
indicated that information is mainly obtained through conversation with the staff in the Employment
Centers, as well as through the announcements posted on the announcement boards in the centers.
Because of their low revenues, the candidates are unable to buy newspapers on a regular basis, but
they keep themselves informed through electronic media, primarily TV, and especially the Internet.
Of great importance, if not the most important/the most relevant manner of becoming informed was
said to be the one through friends that have been beneficiaries of the measure in the past, who are
generally satisfied with the manner of implementing the measure and with the effects thereof.
Reasons leading to giving up or not joining the program include, primarily, lack of feedback
once the candidate has applied for a program, redirecting the candidates to use other support
programs (e.g. crediting), and/or finding a job in the meantime which implies candidate’s voluntary
withdrawal from the program. A particular case that can be exposed is candidates’ withdrawals (after
joining the program) due to insufficient information about the contents of the program.10
Despite failing to join the measure, the participants expressed a great interest in it and
willingness to apply again at the next calls. In small towns and rural areas, the self-employment
measure is considered to be the only possibility for opening one’s own business, thus for entering
employment. The initial assistance received is very important for those who enter employment/open
their own business for the first time, since unless this assistance was there, the candidates would
have been unable to start their own business or they would have done it much later.
The participants pointed to the importance not only of the funds for starting a business, but
also of the support provided to them in defining a business idea and in developing business
plans.”...It was important to me that my vision and calculations made at home be confirmed
regarding their cost-effectiveness and the risks associated with it”`.
6.3 Findings of the focus groups of young people that were successful
while applying for the 2008 employment programs
When it comes to becoming informed about opportunities for employment and for
benefiting from the self-employment measure, the findings are the same as with the group of
9
Citations are taken from the interviews with the focus groups.
10
The candidate wanted to buy livestock (sheep and bees), but the measure does not support that.

25
candidates that were not successful when applying for the measure (see paragraph 6.2). This focus
group pointed to the aspects that needed to be improved during the course of implementation of
the program in order for it to be more successful for the youth as a target group. These
considerations are presented below.
These participants also pointed to the importance of verbal recommendations by friends or
acquaintances concerning the measure (prior to applying), as well as to the very important role of
the Employment Centers’ staff during the application process in terms of giving advice and directions
when filling in the application form.
In the opinion of these candidates, the funds received are sufficient when opening
businesses that are not capital-intensive (accounting, legal or other types of services). In addition,
this focus group indicated the importance of these funds for businesses requiring a large initial
capital as well, because in this way the funds to be invested by the founder are reduced and/or
redirected to operating costs.
They also pointed to the need for striking a better balance between the different segments
of the process in the context of application phase duration, training events duration, and business
registration. Namely, the candidates indicated that the cycle starting from the application and ending
with the receipt of funds was too long. On the other hand, the segment dedicated to strengthening
the participants’ capacities to define the business idea and actually run the business (the training
“From idea to business” and on business plan development) was evaluated as insufficient and the
participants pointed to the need for expanding it. “... I should for the first time in my life be
accountable before the State and that’s why I need to be as prepared as possible because this is not a
game...”
Additional support is needed regarding business registration in terms of information about
the required documents; businesses that are already registered could be assisted with additional
support in the form of advice and/or money. The latter would be used for further development of
the business.
It can be concluded from the above that the respondents pointed to the need for expanding
the existing businesses (through additional employments, expanding the business activity, etc.). This
would be done sooner if these businesses were given an additional incentive. The participants gave a
positive answer to the question as to whether the business would grow even without the support,
but it would take longer (after one or two years) “ ..it takes time for a business to start operating
smoothly, and a minimum of two years to start thinking about expanding it, but if we have the grant
this time becomes significantly shorter “.
7. CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In general, it can be argued that insufficient information held by the target group – young
people up to 27 years of age – is the main reason for their (non)participation in the employment
programs. Findings of the Analysis show that the design of the programs and the implementation
method are appropriate and suit the target group needs.

26
Employment Centers’ staff are important regarding the provision of information before and
after the application process. “There is a need to organize informative sessions with the potential
candidates prior to the application in order for them to get to know the measure in greater detail,
thus defining the idea on time, before the application.”
It is advisable that the candidates be provided feedback also in writing about the reasons
why their application was not accepted. This feedback would significantly contribute to having
improved applications at a future call and/or to candidates submitting better quality applications at
future calls, which will be a result of the feedback.
Despite the fact that information on the measures was posted on the announcement boards
in the Employment Centers, this target group did not find the announcements very useful and
practical for obtaining new information. “...We have no habit of reading announcements..” The
announcement was noticed by the applicants only after they were referred to it by the staff in the
Employment Centers.
Information should be written in a simple and easy to understand language. “Information
should indicate what is being offered and what is the benefit from the measure for the young people”.
It is advisable to use electronic media as a means of informing the young people since this is
more acceptable for the young generations, especially the use of Internet and the placement of the
announcements (their links) on websites that are popular with and visited by this population group.
Since this measure has a very positive reputation, it should be used in such a way that
potential applicants would learn from the experience of successful beneficiaries. This would be
accomplished by organizing sessions in which the measure would be explained during training events
and/or at individual level.
If the program design allows for it, the applicants should be grouped according to their age
or similarity of business, the aim being the exchange of positive ideas and practices during the
training events.
The efficiency of the implementation of the whole cycle should be improved by striking a
better balance between the duration of the overall cycle and the time dedicated to training.
One positively evaluated the situation that no financial means were given, but instead
resources were given in the form of purposeful support, together with the support aimed at
strengthening the capacity of the applicants for running their business.

27
8. ANNEXES
Annex 1
Questionnaire intended for young people up to 27 years of age
Questionnaire
Introduction
Unemployment in the country is extremely high, including long-term unemployment being
significantly high. There is a particularly serious problem of youth unemployment. Recent studies
showed that, as in the other countries in the region that emerged from Yugoslavia, young people
aged 15-27 are more likely to be unemployed than those in other age groups.
In overall terms, labor market is stagnant with limited opportunities for new entrants. The economy
is characterized with low job creation and generation of new job places.
Considering the existing situation, the Government developed policy and strategy, undertaking series
of activities in the area of employment in order to mitigate the unemployment, which are regulated
with consequential documents. The Government ‘s Operational Plan for Employment is one of the
stated documents, representing annual action plan for distribution of budget funds in the part of
active labor market programs and measures.
In the context of the Government Operational Plan implementation, as well as utilization of available
allocated budget funds, a low level of interest has been detect among the young people up to 27
years of age, despite the fact that part of the envisaged activities in the above stated document refer
to the young people. Considering this phenomenon initiative was made to conduct an Analysis that
should determine weaknesses leading to such situation, or to examine those positive sides that in
future should be even more strengthened.
Your answers to the given questions, will contribute in great extend to receiving one real
presentation of the conditions on the terrain, and at the same time will enable additional
improvements within the activities planned by the Government, especially those referring to the
young people.
NOTICE: The questionnaire is anonymous

28
GENERAL QUESTIONS
1. Gender (Please circle): male/ female
2. Age (Please answer inserting X in the relevant box):
15- 19 20- 24 25- 29
3. Ethnicity (Please answer inserting X in the relevant box):
Macedonian Albanian
Turk Serb
Roma Vlah
Boshnak Other: ______________
4. Place of living (Add your answer)
Village/ Town_________________________, Municipality_______________________
5. Education (Please answer inserting X in the relevant box)
Completed primary education Gymnasium
Secondary Vocational Education High education
University M.A or higher
Other____________________________________________________________
6. Type of education (Please follow the example: primary school, language gymnasium, electro-
mechanical technician, nurse, faculty of economy, faculty of architecture)
__________________________________________________________
7. Person lives with (Please answer inserting X in the relevant box)
a. parents
b. alone
c. own family
8. Family income: (Please answer inserting X in the relevant box)
- Low up to 10.000 D
- Average up to 20.000 D
- High above 30.000 D

29
QUESTIONS ABOUT CANDIDATES INFORMATION/AWARENESS
1. Are you informed about the Government employment Programs, hat are designed for
young people up to 27 years of age? (Please answer inserting X in the relevant box)
Yes No
2. If you are informed, how were you informed? (Please answer inserting X in the relevant box)
I saw advertisements in the daily newspapers ...................................................................
I saw advertisements on the TV..........................................................................................
I saw on the web page of the Employment Service Agency ...............................................
I saw on the announcement boards in the Employment Centre .........................................
Employment Centre staff informed me...............................................................................
Job Club staff told me .........................................................................................................
I was told at the private employment agency.....................................................................
I heard from friends/ relatives ..........................................................................................
Some other way (Explain)_____________________________________
3. Do you know someone that has previously participated in such Employment Program?
(Please answer inserting X in the relevant box)
Yes No
4. If your answer on the previous question is positive, what are your reactions upon that?
(Please answer inserting X in the relevant box)
positive negative
5. Have you considered taking participation in such type of program? (Please answer inserting
X in the relevant box)
Yes No
6. If your answer on the previous question is positive, what are the reasons behind such
decision? (Explain)
___________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
7. If your answers to the question No. 5 is negative, can you please state the reasons behind
such decision?
____________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

30
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
1. In your opinion, what are the positive and what are the negative sides of this type of
Employment Programs? (Please answer inserting X in the relevant box. More answers are
possible)
Positive Negative
Such type of programs offer employment to the
young people
Information about such type of programs are
not always available to young people
Grants can be received Conditions under which funds are offered in my
opinion are not favorable
Amount of the grants is sufficient for starting up
own business
Amount of funds is not sufficient for starting up
own business
Such programs enable gaining/ incising the
entrepreneurship skills
Such programs do not offer some previous
knowledge related to running a business
Practical knowledge on the functioning of the
market is gained
There are no bodies/ counseling services
offering advices, guidelines, assistance about
how to run a business
Such programs enable purchase of needed
equipment/ materials for string up a business
Such type of program offer only short term
solution of the unemployment problem
Funds received trough such type of Programs ,
as additional sources, could lead to realization
of ideas
Conditions in the economy are not so much
favorable for staring up a business and
realization of ideas
In case you have some additional comments or suggestion, Please provide them below:
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
THANK YOU FOR THE TIME YOU DEVOTED IN FILLING OUT THIS QUESTIONNAIRE

31
Annex 2
Plan for semi- structured interview with Focus group composed of young people that
were not successful within the Employment Program 2008
Plan for semi- structured interview with
Focus group composed of young people that were not successful within the
Employment Program 2008
ACCESS TO INFORMATION
1. How often to you buy daily newspapers?
(on a scale of 1- 5, where 1 is low/ negative and 5 is the high/positive)
2. How often do you read vacancy announcements in the daily newspapers?
3. How often do you watch vacancy announcements on TV?
4. How often do you visit Employment Service Agency web page?
5. How often do you stop and look at the vacancy announcements on the Employment
centers’ boards?
6. Have you been registered in some private employment agency?
7. If your answer is positive, do they, at private employment agency, inform you about such
Employment Programs?
8. Does anyone else provide you with information about such type of employment
Programs? And if Yes- Who?
EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM RELEVANCE
1. Based on your participation in the Governmental Employment Programs for 2008, in
your opinion, what are the reasons for your achieved result within the same?
2. Did you face obstacles in the Program implementation process resulting with your
achieved result and which are they?
3. Have you ever participated in some Employment program, implemented by someone
else? YES/NO
4. If your answer is positive, what is the program title and who implemented it?

32
5. In your opinion, what are the advantages of this type of programs?
6. In your opinion, what are the problems and obstacles within this type of programs?
7. Would you consider possibility of participating in some other Governmental Employment
Program?
8. Can you provide explanation of your answer?
PARTICIPANTS’ OPINION ABOUT EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
1. Do you think that such programs assist young people in solving their problem with the
unemployment?
2. Can you explain your attitude?
3. On a scale of 1- 5, in your opinion, to what extend Employment program assist young
people
In solving their problem with the unemployment___
In realization of ideas for staring up own business ____
In gaining practical knowledge about the manner in which market functions____
Other (Please indicate)____
4. Can you think and list all positive aspect related to your possible participation in some
Employment Program?
5. Can you think and list all negative aspect related to your possible participation in some
Employment Program?
6. What would you do differently in regard to the Employment Programs which are
available to the young people?

33
Annex 3
Plan for semi- structured interview with Focus group composed of young people –
participants in the Employment Program 2008
Plan for semi- structured interview with
Focus group composed of young people – participants in the
Employment Program 2008
ACCESS TO INFORMATION CONCERNING SELF-EMPLOYMENT MEASURE, AS WELL AS MEASURE -FORMALIZATION OF
EXISTING BUSINESSES, PART OF THE GOVERNMENTAL EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
1. How often to you buy daily newspapers?
2. How often do you read vacancy announcements in the daily newspapers?
3. How often do you watch vacancy announcements on TV?
4. How often do you visit Employment Service Agency web page?
5. How often do you stop and look at the vacancy announcements on the Employment
centers’ boards?
6. Have you been registered in some private employment agency?
7. If your answer is positive, do they, at private employment agency, inform you about such
Employment Programs?
8. Does anyone else provide you with information about such type of employment
Programs? And if Yes- Who?
EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM RELATION
1. Did you face any problems within the Employment program?
2. If your answer is positive, what was the nature of the problem(s)?
3. Did you ask for assistance/ help in such case?
4. Were you provided with required assistance/ help?
5. Who did provide you with required assistance/ help?

34
6. In your opinion, was that assistance provided in satisfactory manner and did it help
you?
EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM RELEVANCE
1. Have you ever applied for participation in some Governmental Employment
Program? YES/NO
2. Have you ever participated in some Governmental Employment Program? YES/NO
3. Have you ever participated in some Employment program, implemented by someone
else? YES/NO
4. If your answer is positive, what is the program’s title and who implemented it?
5. In your opinion, what are the advantages of this type of programs?
6. In your opinion, what are the problems and obstacles within this type of programs?
PARTICIPANTS’ OPINION ABOUT EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
1. Do you think that such programs assist young people in solving their problem with the
unemployment?
2. Can you explain your attitude?
3. On a scale of 1- 5, in your opinion, to what extend Employment program assist young
people
In solving their problem with the unemployment___
In realization of ideas for staring up own business ____
In gaining practical knowledge about the manner in which market functions____
Other (Please indicate)____
4. What did you learn from the Employment Program?
Can you state the positive aspects of that experience?
Are there negative aspects and which are they?
5. What would you do differently in regard to the Employment Programs which are available
to the young people?

35
9. Appendixes

36
Appendix 1
UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE DISTRIBUTED ACCORDING TO THE REGIONS AND EMPLOYMENT CENTERS, PER TARGET AGE GROUPS -30,04,2009
No.
Statistical
regions
Employment
Centre
Total number of
unemployed
Age group
15-19
Age group
20-24
Age group
25-29
Total number
in all 3 target
age groups Comment 0.5%
1 East Berovo 4150 63 422 560 1045
2 Pelagonija Bitola 18889 401 2231 2663 5295 6 place 27
3 South- East Valandovo 2488 67 294 327 688
4 Vardar Veles 14360 333 1840 1913 4086
5 East Vinica 3155 91 369 404 864
6 South- East Gevgelija 3581 111 386 429 926
7 Polog Gostivar 16144 408 2288 2156 4852
8 South- West Debar 3837 140 589 534 1263
9 East Delcevo 4378 85 447 557 1089
10 Pelagonija Demir Hisar 2155 39 237 263 539
11 Vardar Kavadarci 8449 169 1029 1214 2412
12 South- West Kicevo 9194 200 1208 1285 2693
13 East Kocani 9978 215 1049 1173 2437
14 North- East Kratovo 2407 29 286 281 596
15 North- East Kriva Palanka 6444 139 738 796 1673

37
16 Pelagonija Krushevo 2130 44 217 258 519
17 North- East Kuamnovo 29590 652 3866 3964 8482 3 place 43
18 South- West
Makedonski
Brod 2647 99 405 306 810
19 Vardar Negotino 4228 105 533 537 1175
20 South-West Ohrid 11484 304 1239 1528 3071
21 Pelagonija Prilep 23895 429 2635 3169 6233 5 place 32
22 East Probistip 2990 59 310 390 759
23 South- East Radovis 6589 163 817 889 1869
24 Pelagonija Resen 3248 65 391 447 903
25 Vardar Sveti Nikole 4176 111 563 542 1216
26 Skopje City of Skopje 81703 1596 8920 10740 21256 1 place 107
27 South- West Struga 8840 310 1217 1095 2622
28 South- East Strumica 19591 619 2674 2952 6245 4 place 32
29 Polog Tetivo 32137 587 4055 4718 9360 2 place 47
30 East Stip 7022 144 640 725 1509
TOTAL 349879 7777 41895 46815 96487 27.58% 288

38
Appendix 2
Review of those that applied and received grant
Measure
Total
number of
candidates
that
received
grants in
2008
Age group
15-19
Age
group
20-24
Age
group
25-29
Total all
3 age
groups
Self- employment 500 11 69 88 168
Formalization of
existing businesses 107 0 4 18 22
Total 607 11 73 106 190
Review of those that applied and did not receive grant
Measure
Total
number of
candidates
that
applied in
2008
Age group
15-19
Age
group
20-24
Age
group
25-29
Total all
3 age
groups
Self- employment 899 21 119 138 278
Formalization of
existing businesses 348 2 18 51 71
Total 1247 23 137 189 349
349/190=159=16 (10% sample for semi- structured interview)- 2 groups

Appendix 3
DISTRIBUTION OF SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATES WITHIN THE SELF-EMPLOYMENT II PROJECT, 2008
No. Statistical region
Employment
Centre Municipality
Total number of involved
in the Self-employment
ALMM up to 29 years of
age
Total number of
involved in the
Formalization ALMM
up to 29 years of age
Total number
of involved
up to 29 years
of age
Based on target
group- young up
to 27 years of
age
East Berovo 6 1 7 4
1 East
Berovo
Pehcevo 2 0 2 2
Pelagonija Bitola 3 1 4 1
2
Pelagonija
Bitola
Mogila 2 0 2 0
3 South- East Valandovo Valandovo 3 0 3 1
4 Vardar Veles Veles 2 2 4 1
5 East Vinica Vinica 0 0 0 0
6 South- East Gevgelija Gevgelija 2 0 2 1
7 Polog Gostivar Gostivar 6 0 6 3
Skopje Aerodorom 2 0 2 1
Skopje Butel 0 0 0 0
Skopje Gazi Baba 0 0 0 0
Skopje Gjorce Petrov 0 0 0 0
Skopje Zelenikovo 0 0 0 0
Skopje Ilinden 2 0 2 0
Skopje Karpos 1 0 1 0
8
Skopje
City of Skopje
Kisela Voda 3 0 3 1

40
Skopje Centar 2 0 2 1
Skopje Cair 1 0 1 0
9 South- West Debar Debar 4 0 4 2
East Delcevo 2 0 2 2
10
East
Delcevo
Makedonska Kamenica 0 0 0 0
11 Pelagonija Demir Hisar Demir Hisar 2 0 2 1
12 Vardar Kavadarci Kavadarci 7 2 9 4
South- West Drugovo 0 1 1 0
South- West Zajas 0 0 0 0
South- West Kicevo 3 2 5 2
13
South- West
Kicevo
Oslomej 1 0 1 1
East Kocani 1 1 2 0
14
East
Kocani
Cesinovo- Oblesevo 0 0 0 0
15 North- East Kratovo Kratovo 1 1 2 0
North- East Kriva Palanka 19 1 20 10
16
North- East
Kriva Palanka
Rankovce 0 0 0 0
17 Pelagonija Krusevo Krusevo 2 0 2 0
North- East Kumanovo 16 1 17 3
North- East Lipkovo 1 0 1 118
North- East
Kumanovo
Starno Nagoricane 1 0 1 0
19 South- West Makedonski Brod Makedonski Brod 2 0 2 0
Vardar Demir Kapija 1 0 1 1
20
Vardar
Hegotino
Hegotino 9 2 11 5

41
21 South-West Ohrid Ohrid 8 0 8 4
Pelagonija Dolneni 1 0 1 0
Pelagonija Krivogastani 2 0 2 022
Pelagonija
Prilep
Prilep 12 2 14 5
23 East Probistip Probistip 5 0 5 3
South- East Konce 2 0 2 0
24
South- East
Radovis
Radovis 2 0 2 0
25 Pelagonija Resen Resen 2 0 2 1
26 Vardar Sveti Nikole Sveti Nikole 2 0 2 1
South-West Vevcani 0 0 0 0
27
South-West
Struga
Struga 4 1 5 3
South-East Bosilovo 2 0 2 2
South-East Vasilevo 0 0 0 0
South-East Novo Selo 1 0 1 0
28
South-East
Strumica
Strumica 3 0 3 2
Polog Bogovinje 0 0 0 0
Polog Tearce 1 0 1 129
Polog
Tetovo
Tetovo 6 3 9 3
East Karbinci 0 0 0 0
30
East
Stip
Stip 6 1 7 1
TOTAL 168 22 190 74
Out of 74=16 (20% sample for semi- structured interview)- 2 groups

42
Appendix 4
REVIEW PER REGIONS
No.
StatisticalRegion
EmploymentCenter
Totalnumberof
unemployed
Totalnumberof
unemployedintheregion
Agegroup15-19
Totalnumberof
unemployedinagegroup
15-19intheregion
Agegroup20-24
Totalnumberof
20-24intheregion
Agegroup25-29
Totalnumberof
25-29intheregion
Totalnumberinall3age
group
Totalnumberof
unemployedinall3age
groups
Comment
0.5%
Numberofsuccessful
candidatesin2008ALMMSelf-
employment–ageupto29
Numberofsuccessful
candidatesin2008ALMM
Formalization–ageupto29
Totalnumberofsuccessful
candidates,perboth
ALMMsin2008
Totalnumberofinvolved
candidatesinbothALMMs,
perregions
Veles 14360 333 1840 1913 4086 2 2 4
Kavadarci 8449 169 1029 1214 2412 7 2 9
Negotino 4228 105 533 537 1175 10 2 12
1
Varda
r
Sveti Nikole 4176
31213
111
718
563
3965
542
4206
1216
8889
2 0 2
27
Berovo 4150 63 422 560 1045 8 1 9
Vinica 3155 91 369 404 864 0 0 0
Delcevo 4378 85 447 557 1089 2 0 2
Kocani 9978 215 1049 1173 2437 1 1 2
Probistip 2990 59 310 390 759 5 0 5
2 East
Stip 7022
31673
144
657
640
3237
725
3809
1509
7703
6 1 7
25
Debar 3837 140 589 534 1263 4 0 4
Kicevo 9194 200 1208 1285 2693 4 3 7
Makedonski
Brod 2647 99 405 306 810 2 0 2
Ohrid 11484 304 1239 1528 3071 8 0 8
3
South
-
West
Struga 8840
36002
310
1053
1217
4658
1095
4748
2622
10459
4 1 5
26

43
Valandovo 2488 67 294 327 688 3 0 3
Gevgelija 3581 111 386 429 926 2 0 2
Radovis 6589 163 817 889 1869 4 0 44
South
- East
Strumica
19591
32249
619
960
2674
4171
2952
4597
6245
9728
4
32 6 0 6
15
Bitola
18889 401 2231 2663 5295
6
plac
e 27 5 1 6
Demir Hisar 2155 39 237 263 539 2 0 2
Krusevo 2130 44 217 258 519 2 0 2
Prilep
23895 429 2635 3169 6233
5
plac
e 32 15 2 17
5
Pelag
onija
Resen 3248
50317
65
978
391
5711
447
6800
903
13489
2 0 2
29
Gostivar 16144 408 2288 2156 4852 6 0 6
6 Polog
Tetovo
32137
48281
587
995
4055
6343
4718
6874
9360
14212 2
plac
e 47 7 3 10
16
Kratovo 2407 29 286 281 596 1 1 2
Kriva Palanka 6444 139 738 796 1673 19 1 20
7
North
- East
Kumnovo
29590
38441
652
820
3866
4890
3964
5041
8482
10751 3
plac
e 43 18 1 19
41
8
Skopj
e City of Skopje 81703 81703 1596 1596 8920 8920 10740 10740 21256 21256
1
plac
e 107 11 0 11 11

Appendix 5
Number Question Category Answers to the open question Number of answers
No answer No answer 146
Total 146
In the next month if such a program is still
going on.
5
In the shortest time. 24
As soon as possible. 3
Right away. 25
Once they have called me. 2
In some time. 4
When I would have the opportunity. 14
In the coming
period
In the next open competition. 29
Total 106
I don’t know I don’t know 15
Total 15
When I have minimum conditions for
realization of the idea.
1
6 If your answer to the
previous question is
positive, what are the
reasons for you to do
that?
When conditions
for that are there
I don’t know, I will ask someone to advise
me.
1

45
When I have a concrete project. 1
Maybe after I have fully reviewed the
conditions and the opportunities, unless I
find a job in the foreseeable future.
1
Soon. 8
When there are projects related to my
profession.
1
I consider applying for it when the
Government adopts a program that will
be acceptable for me.
6
When I’m ready. 2
Since it is difficult to find an adequate job
nowadays, this is how we would manage
to do what we want to do and what we
have studied for.
1
When I have the opportunity. 2
The credits should be more favorable and
there should be some guarantee.
1
When I’m informed. 1
Total 26

46
Appendix 6
Number Question Category Answers to the open question
Number of
answers
No answer No answer 229
Total 229
I don’t know I don’t know 12
Total 12
Because I think that hiring always goes in a way that one
knows in advance who will be selected for the job, and all
the others that have applied at an open competition or
have joined such a program will be rejected for some
invented reasons, such as for example: he/she does not
have any work experience, or incomplete documentation,
etc., and it has also happened that you were not notified
at all that your application at some open competition was
rejected.
1
Because I’m not informed at all about the employment
programs of the Government.
1
Whatever the program is about, this in the Republic of
Macedonia is one thing; only connections and political
party affiliation matter – nothing else!
1
I’m not informed enough about the existence of such
programs and I don’t know enough how one should run
one’s own business.
5
7 If your answer to question
No. 5 is negative, please
list the reasons for that?
It takes acquiring knowledge about a multitude of issues. 1

47
I’ve never heard about this program. 7
Not any time soon. 1
Not interested. 9
I wouldn’t become employed with this employment
measure.
1
There is no employer offering employment that
corresponds to my knowledge.
1
I’m not in a position to enter employment and I don’t
know any employer that would hire me.
1
There is no employment for my profession. 1
I don’t want to. 1
There aren’t any additional funds. 1
There was no employer offering a job for my particular
education, and regarding the self-employment measure –
I’m not in a position to become self-employed.
1
I’m not in a position to become self-employed. 3
I still think I’m too young for such a business. 3
The conditions for starting up a business aren’t favorable. 1
The reason is my employment. 1
I live in a small rural community. 1
I don’t want that as a job. 1
Fixed monthly salary. 1
Rest of the
answers
I think this can be achieved only with a membership card
of some political party.
1

48
Because I’m doing simultaneously internship time at a
lawyer’s and post-graduation studies, due to which I have
no time to participate.
1
Because I live far away and the pay is low. 1
I want to do as a job what I have studied for. 1
No trust. 1
No results. 1
I’m not sure. 1
I don’t have any particular reason at the moment. 1
Total 52

Analysis-Youth and self-employment

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

En vedette

En vedette (15)

Similaire à Analysis-Youth and self-employment

Similaire à Analysis-Youth and self-employment (20)

Analysis-Youth and self-employment