The chart below (taken from the working document\u2019s chapter 3, published on July 28) depicts the distribution of the funds that have been allocated to youth related actions, in three categories (Figure 1): One is directly linked to the labour market (Employment Support and Job Creation); the second refers to Education, Training and Research, while the third refers to tangible assets (Education infrastructure and Equipment).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Furthermore, the working document attempts some projections of the expected impact of the RRF funds on employment and growth by 2026 (Figure 2).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n The data reported and the projections are indicative of the MS intended policies for the next few years. The allocation of financial resources does not follow a common pattern among MS: as Figure 1 indicates, for Italy, for instance, <\/span>Employment Support and Job Creation<\/span><\/i> is seemingly not a priority, while Greece seems to \u201cdisregard\u201d <\/span>Education, Training and Research<\/span><\/i>. Still, one should be careful not to jump to conclusions regarding the underfunding of certain actions: the size of the Recovery and Resilience Facility is not comparable to past initiatives and when assessing the provisions for any action we should take into account the absolute numbers as well.<\/span><\/p>\n The difficulty of drawing direct conclusions regarding the RRF \/ RRP allocations and the NEXT GENERATION EU scheme in general, is also evidenced by the data specifically concerning the proportions of youth-related measures among MS. There, it is clear that some countries acknowledge a need to implement more targeted measures, while others may consider that young people\u2019s problems will be better addressed through more general developmental policies (Figure 3).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Given the diverse local conditions and the turmoil caused by international developments, the national and regional authorities that will be responsible for the plans\u2019 specifications and their implementation need to do some thorough work in order to exploit to the maximum the potential of the available funding.<\/span><\/p>\n Figure 1. Mix of measures\u2019 categories varies across Member States. Youth-related measures categories<\/strong><\/p>\n Source: JRC, TEDAM calculations<\/span><\/p>\n ——<\/p>\n Figure 3. Youth-related measures, % of RRP<\/strong><\/p>\n Source: JRC, TEDAM calculations<\/span><\/p>\n ——<\/p>\n Figure 2. Employment impact of youth-related RRF measures in 2026<\/strong><\/p>\n Source:JRC, TEDAM RHOMOLO simulations<\/span><\/p>\n —–<\/p>\n Full report:<\/span><\/p>\n COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,\u00a0 SWD(2022) 193. COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EMPLOYMENT AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENTS IN EUROPE 2022 Chapter 3. Brussels, 26 July 2022<\/span><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.cowork4youth.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/site-post-29.07.22_a-300x168.png\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.cowork4youth.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/site-post-29.07.22_b-2-300x286.png\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.cowork4youth.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/site-post-29.07.22_c-2-300x300.png\")
<\/p>\n