A new Eurostat analysis shows 5.8% of young people aged 15–29 in the European Union faced severe material and social deprivation in 2024. The finding underscores persistent challenges around poverty and social exclusion among youth in one of the world’s wealthiest regions. For Thailand, the report resonates with domestic concerns about economic hardship among young people and the need for robust safety nets and opportunity pathways.
Severe material and social deprivation means lacking basic needs—such as adequate housing, nutritious food, heating, and essential appliances—along with limited social participation, like meeting friends or joining activities. This is not a measure of absolute poverty, but of what a society typically considers essential. The EU framework clarifies this nuance, and contemporary research on deprivation supports the approach. Data in 2024 reveal notable country contrasts: Bulgaria, Romania, and Greece report the highest deprivation rates among youth, while several nations including Croatia, Slovenia, and Poland show rates below 3%. The differences point to how policy design, labor markets, and family support shape youth prospects, especially after economic shocks.
Beyond deprivation, the broader “at risk of poverty or social exclusion” (AROPE) rate for EU youths reached 24.1% in 2024—more than three percentage points higher than the general population. This composite metric signals that nearly a quarter of young Europeans face fragile pathways to financial and social stability. Research also shows that early adversity increases the likelihood of NEET status—Not in Education, Employment, or Training—during youth, with long-term consequences for health and earnings. These findings come from established European research bodies and policy institutions.
Experts emphasize urgency in addressing these gaps. Analysts note that young people face higher poverty and exclusion risks than the broader population due to structural labor-market challenges and the lingering effects of past health and economic crises. Targeted interventions, inclusive policies, and secure support systems are essential to close the gaps.
Translating European insights to Thailand requires careful adaptation. UNICEF Thailand highlights gaps in coverage for vulnerable children within national programs, including exclusions from child grants that can affect families during the crucial youth years. Studies from Thai universities link socio-economic background to educational and labor-market outcomes—the same channels that drive long-term exclusion if not addressed. Surveys cited by major Thai media show that a substantial portion of out-of-school or unemployed youth report little or no social protection, underscoring a critical policy blind spot.
Longitudinal research in Denmark and elsewhere confirms the lasting costs of childhood adversity. Persistent poverty, family instability, and weak social support can lead to mental health challenges, social withdrawal, and heavy reliance on public services in adulthood. The social and economic costs of inaction are high, including healthcare expenditures, unemployment, and intergenerational poverty.
Thailand has advanced in several areas, such as expanding free basic education and improving access to health care. Yet scholars from a leading Bangkok research institute caution that nuanced, multifaceted deprivation—especially among rural and migrant youths—requires more targeted policy tools and outreach. The Thai context also highlights how culture shapes deprivation. In a society that values community, merit-making, and family ties, youth unable to afford travel, learning technology, or school essentials risk social isolation alongside financial hardship.
Global evidence suggests that addressing youth deprivation benefits overall health, social cohesion, and the future workforce. Proven approaches—cash transfers, school meals, affordable housing, and mental health services—need local adaptation and ongoing evaluation. International organizations stress data-driven policy design, youth consultation, and early intervention as pillars of any effective strategy.
For Thai readers, the takeaway is clear: social safety nets must reach the children and youth most in need; education and job pathways must remain accessible and adaptable; and community-based organizations should play a central role in keeping all young Thais connected to the country’s progress. Policymakers, educators, families, and NGOs alike are urged to identify and support marginalized youths across Bangkok, rural provinces, and migrant communities.
Practical steps for individuals and communities include staying informed about existing grants and social programs, supporting local NGOs working with marginalized youth, encouraging conversations about mental health and social participation, and advocating for stronger, more transparent public policy on childhood and youth deprivation.
In the Thai context, readers can consider:
- Engaging with local social programs and tracking eligibility for youth support initiatives.
- Supporting school-based meals and learning resources to reduce barriers to education.
- Championing affordable access to mental health services and youth counseling.
- Encouraging private-sector and civil-society partnerships to extend safe, inclusive opportunities for young people.
No external URLs appear in this revised piece. All institutional references are integrated into the narrative.