European and national policies on Vocational Education and Training (VET) need to be informed by sound and internationally comparable statistical evidence. The VET country statistical overviews are concise, descriptive and user friendly statistical reports. For each country, they quantify and compare key aspects of VET and lifelong learning. The selection is based on the indicators' policy relevance and their importance in achieving the Europe 2020 objectives.
VET indicators for Latvia for the last available year
Index numbers (EU=100)
NB: The index numbers are derived from data summarised in the table. Data in the table have been rounded to one or two decimal places. The calculation of index numbers is instead based on not rounded data.
Latvia’s performance on a range of indicators selected to monitor progress in VET and lifelong learning across the European Union (EU) is summarised below. The chart compares the situation in Latvia with that of the EU, based on the most recent data available (this differs by indicator). Data in the chart are presented as an index where the EU average equals 100. If the index for a selected indicator for Latvia is 100, then its performance equals the EU average. If the index is 90, its performance is 90% of (or 10% below) the EU average. If the index is 200, Latvia’s performance is twice (or 200%) the EU average. For some indicators, such as early leavers from education and training, a country is performing better if its score is below that of the EU average.
Data on which the index is calculated are presented in the table, which also shows developments over time. A technical definition of each indicator is provided in the annex.
Access, attractiveness and flexibility
The percentage of upper secondary students enrolled in IVET in Latvia (39.8% in 2015) is lower than the EU average (47.3%), but all IVET students are reported to be enrolled in combined work- and school-based programmes (compared with 28.4% in the EU, data for 2015). The share of students of upper secondary IVET in programmes providing direct access to tertiary education (87.0%) is also well above the EU average (66.7%).
The share of adults participating in lifelong learning (7.3% in 2016) is lower than the EU average (10.8%): Latvia remains below the average target (15%) set by the strategic framework Education and training 2020. Similarly, lifelong learning participation rates for particular subgroups of adults (older, at 4.4%, low-educated, at 3.0%, and unemployed people, at 8.2%) are relatively low when compared with the EU (7.0%, 4.2%, and 9.6% respectively).
Based on 2010 CVTS data, the percentage of enterprises providing training (40%) is below the EU average (66%). The percentage of employees participating in CVT courses at 24% is also below the EU average of 38%. This difference between Latvia and the EU as a whole is even more pronounced for employees of small firms (14% compared to 25%). In contrast, employee participation in on-the-job training is almost on par (1 percentage point higher).
Skill development and labour market relevance
Indicators for Latvia on skill development and labour market relevance show a mixed picture. At 0.43%, IVET expenditure as a share of overall GDP is below the EU average of 0.56%. This is also reflected in the lower expenditure per student, at 5 000 PPS units compared with the EU average of 8 400 PPS units (data on expenditure refer to 2014 and to IVET at ISCED 3-4). The average number of foreign languages learned in IVET in Latvia (1.3) is above the EU average (1.0). The percentage of graduates in STEM subjects from upper secondary-level IVET is higher than the EU average (35.8% and 30.8% respectively). Graduates from short-cycle VET account for a large share of first time graduates at tertiary level (29.8%, which is well above the EU average of 9.0%). Data from 2014 reveal that enterprises in Latvia are less likely to provide training to support innovation (34.6%) compared with enterprises in the EU as a whole (44.8%).
The employment rate for IVET graduates (aged 20-34) at ISCED levels 3-4 (80.4%) is higher than the EU average (78.1%). Their employment rate is 7.1 percentage points higher than for graduates from general education (this is above the EU average premium of 5.7); their employment rate is also 19.0 percentage points higher than that for graduates with lower-level qualifications (though this is below the EU average premium of 23.4). All these employment figures relate to 2016 and exclude young people in further education and training.
Overall transitions and labour market trends
In this section all data refer to 2016 unless otherwise stated.
The percentage of early leavers from education and training in Latvia (10.0%) is slightly below the EU average (10.7%): it is at the Europe 2020 average target (10%) which is also the national target. The percentage of 30 to 34 year-olds with tertiary-level education is higher than the EU average (42.8% compared with 39.1%). It surpasses the national target (34-36%) as well as the Europe 2020 average target (40%). In addition, the percentage of people with a low level of educational attainment is relatively low (9.3% compared with 23.0% in the EU).
The employment rate for 20 to 64 year-olds (73.2%) is slightly higher than the EU average (71.0%). This rate has increased between 2010 and 2016 by 8.9 percentage points. The employment rate of recent graduates (81.4%) is also higher than the EU-average (78.2%) and has increased by 18.8 percentage points since 2010. The NEET rate (at 14.9%) is slightly below the EU average (15.2%) and has decreased by 7.7 percentage points since 2010. The unemployment rate of 20 to 34 year-olds (10.9%) is lower than the EU average (11.8%) and has decreased by 11.9 percentage points since 2010.
Score on VET indicators in Latvia and in the EU, 2010,
last available year and recent change
EU refers to EU-28, unless otherwise specified. Arrows ↗ or ↘ signal a positive or negative change. Arrow → indicates: no change.
(A) UOE back reconstruction of 2010 values based on ISCED 2011 not yet available. (B) AES 2011, used as proxy for 2010 baseline. (C) 2014 b flags in Eurostat online tables ignored on the basis of other relevant Eurostat metadata. (D) Forecast made in 2016. (E1) Based on 28 countries, with partial information for NL. (E2) Based on 28 countries, with partial information for EL, ES, NL, PL, RO. (E3) Based on 28 countries, with partial information for IT, NL. (E4) Based on 23 countries (missing: DK, EL, HR, IT, PT), with partial information for IE and FR. (E5) Based on 23 countries (missing: DK, EL, HR, IT, PT), with partial information for IE and FR. (E6) Based on 28 countries, with partial information for DK, EL, NL. (E7) Based on 25 countries (missing: HR, IT, UK), with partial information for BE, CZ, DK, DE, EE, EL, LU, NL, PL, SE. (E8) Based on 25 countries (missing: IE, FR, UK), with partial information for BE, EL, LU. (E9) Based on 26 countries (missing: IE, UK), with partial information for DK, DE. (E10) Based on 28 countries. (b) Break after 2010, therefore baseline data not included. (u) Eurostat: ‘low reliability’. (z) Eurostat: ‘not applicable’. (e) Eurostat: ‘estimated’.