SOLUTIONS
MOVE FOOD
FORWARD

However, growth in opportunities does not automatically translate into direct access for youth. Complementary efforts are needed to empower youth with the agency, skills and resources necessary to engage in and influence agrifood systems transformation processes and partake in the outcomes. Yet, youth participation in agrifood systems decision-making is often constrained. Strengthening youth as key stakeholders fosters ownership and ensures that policies and programmes adequately reflect their needs. Moreover, youth need specific skills and education to contribute effectively in agrifood systems that are increasingly knowledgebased and technology-intensive. However, as discussed in Chapter 3, many rural youth lack access to quality education and skills training. Socioeconomic barriers, poor educational infrastructure and a misalignment between educational programmes and the demands of modern agrifood systems have limited the ability of many young people to fully seize agrifood systems opportunities.^6,7 At the same time, restrictive land tenure systems, inheritance laws that favour older generations, an absence of legal recognition for youth, lack of credit histories, limited social capital and discriminatory social norms collectively undermine young people’s access to critical resources needed to fully engage in agrifood systems, such as secure land, finance, technology, water, markets and market information (Chapter 3).^8,9 Bridging these gaps is essential to harness the transformative potential youth bring to agrifood systems, which in turn can improve livelihoods and food security for both youth and society.

This chapter examines promising policies and programmes with the potential to engage youth and improve outcomes in agrifood systems. Drawing on policy analyses and experiences from past interventions, the chapter identifies approaches and design features that expand youth economic prospects while empowering them to actively drive and benefit from agrifood systems transformation. The chapter highlights two key dimensions: expanding youth opportunities and youth empowerment. In terms of opportunities for youth, the chapter focuses on programmes driving inclusive agrifood systems transformation to achieve three interconnected outcomes: 1) increasing supply of decent jobs; 2) improving food security and nutrition; and 3) strengthening resilience to shocks and stresses. In terms of empowerment, the chapter examines interventions in three interrelated areas: 1) enhancing youth voice and agency; 2) increasing skills acquisition and training; and 3) improving access to resources (see Figure 7.1). While discussed separately, these six areas are interdependent: progress in one area reinforces advancements in others, collectively creating an environment that enables youth to thrive and contribute to agrifood systems transformation. The chapter concludes with recommendations for moving forward, focusing on approaches to inquire more, include more and invest more to ensure that youth are at the centre of agrifood systems transformation.

However, complementary investments to enhance the flexibility of intellectual property laws and strengthen the capacity of national research systems are needed to support the adoption, contextualization and scaling of these innovations.²¹ Robust extension systems are equally essential to foster two-way learning between research institutions and actors in agrifood systems, encouraging forms of adaptation that align with real-world conditions and resource constraints.²¹

Investments in physical and digital infrastructure are similarly vital for promoting broad-based productivity growth in agrifood systems. Upgrading the coverage and quality of rural infrastructure (e.g. roads and reliable, affordable energy) reduces transaction costs and enhances connectivity. Improved road infrastructure, particularly paved roads, can address mobility challenges and create new economic opportunities. In rural areas, roads are often seen by young people as pathways to better income prospects, prompting shifts from agricultural work to formal labour market participation. Studies in India, for instance, show that road construction contributes significantly to helping young people, particularly women, transition out of agriculture into wage employment.²² Similarly, cross-sectional data from 31 countries in sub-Saharan Africa show that proximity to paved roads is associated with reduced probability of unemployment among rural youth, with stronger impacts for young women.²³ In Morocco, enhanced road access led to increased secondary school enrolment among young women and a reduction in early marriages, likely due to improved commuting options. For young men, road improvements primarily facilitated access to wage employment, with only a limited impact on educational attainment.²⁴

In addition, specific agrifood systems infrastructure projects related, for example, to irrigation systems and food processing facilities can bolster agricultural productivity, boost value addition and expand job opportunities along value chains.^{8, 16, 17} Furthermore, extending digital infrastructure to rural areas promotes innovation, strengthens rural-urban linkages and opens up new market opportunities for youth and other stakeholders.

Targeted public investments can create an enabling environment that incentivizes private-sector engagement in agro-based industries, promotes value addition and strengthens cross-sector linkages to transform agrifood systems into a dynamic sector where youth can thrive. An analysis of the Enabling Business in Agriculture indicator reveals that rural youth in countries with consistent improvements in their enabling environments experience higher returns on their labour in agriculture, as well as lower poverty rates.²⁵ This underlines the importance of institutional reforms for youth livelihoods.

Regarding entrepreneurship, youth-led enterprises merit support but multiple studies show that rural youth entrepreneurship often fails to generate large-scale employment or sustainable livelihoods due to high start-up failure rates and limited resources.²⁶ Meanwhile, enterprises managed by older adults frequently exhibit greater stability and a stronger capacity to employ young people.²⁵ Evidence suggests that firm-level interventions aimed at more established agri-enterprises – those already performing well under local conditions – are likely to boost youth job opportunities.²⁷ Moreover, targeting skills training to higher-productivity firms and strategic industries has yielded more job creation and economic growth than untargeted approaches.²⁸ Supporting companies with solid market potential and growth prospects can effectively stimulate youth employment and contribute to broader economic development.

RAISE AWARENESS ABOUT AND PROTECT THE LABOUR RIGHTS OF YOUNG WORKERS

While demand for youth labour is growing, targeted policies and programmes are necessary to ensure decent employment. Such efforts should prioritize measures to protect the fundamental principles and rights at work, including freedom of association, elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour, the abolition of child labour, the elimination of discrimination, and a safe and healthy working environment.^{29, 30} Fair^j and ethical recruitment practices and safe pathways for youth mobility are necessary to prevent labour abuses such as forced labour and debt bondage. In agrifood systems, improving labour standards is critical, especially given young people’s negative perception of agrifood systems jobs.³²

The international legal framework for decent work is based on the International Labour Standards (ILS), a body of legal instruments developed by the International Labour Organization (ILO) that protects workers’ rights and includes youth-specific provisions.^{33, 34} However, implementation of this framework remains challenging, particularly in the context of agrifood systems, where informality is widespread. Informal workers in agrifood systems are often excluded from national labour laws or left unprotected due to weak enforcement, especially in rural areas^{34, 35} – in part due to the relatively high cost of compliance for informal enterprises. At the heart of this issue is a key dilemma – how to promote a progressive transition from the informal to the formal economy without undermining the informal sector’s role as a source of employment and income for youth and the overall population.³⁶ Voluntary options such as responsible business conduct or approaches linked to third-party certification, including Fairtrade, can promote decent work in rural areas, although their ability to improve workers’ rights and address structural inequalities may vary by context.^37–39

Awareness-raising initiatives and monitoring mechanisms involving all agrifood system stakeholders, including youth, have been used to uphold labour rights in some settings.⁴⁰ In India, the “Youth Knowledge Hub” project raises awareness of decent income livelihood opportunities, supports skill development and empowers communities to form youth producers’ groups while encouraging young workers to become Fairtrade youth champions.⁴¹

Safety at work is also a key consideration for youth, and one that requires stronger occupational safety and health (OSH) measures, including raising awareness about reporting and notifying occupational injuries and illnesses.⁴² Initiatives such as the Youth in Agriculture e-Tool, for instance, offer resources on common agricultural hazards and practical safety solutions for both employers and young workers, raise awareness of OSH and facilitate youth-related injury reporting in agriculture.⁴³ While research from low-income countries remains limited, existing studies emphasize the necessity of involving young workers, parents, employers and communities in protecting youth in the workplace.^{44, 45} They also indicate that educational interventions alone will not suffice. Creating a safe working environment for youth also demands policies, standards and regulations, and enforcement mechanisms.⁴⁵ Local and participatory approaches, such as the low-cost work improvement in neighbourhood development (WIND) approach for farmers, although not youth-specific, has shown promise in improving OSH in informal rural settings.^{46, 47}

Young migrants are particularly vulnerable to exploitation in the labour market and need specific support. Targeted information campaigns and migrant resource centres (MRCs) have been shown to improve access to safe migration and work-related information, while reducing intentions of youth to embark on unsafe migration through irregular channels.^{48, 49} For example, in Senegal, awareness campaigns lowered irregular migration intentions by 20 percent.⁵⁰ Similar findings were observed in Guinea where awareness campaigns employed mobile cinema screenings.⁵¹ In Nigeria, a campaign reduced trafficking vulnerability by 50 percent and increased proactive steps toward safe migration by the same margin.⁴⁹ Similarly, MRCs and pre-departure programmes equip migrants with crucial information.⁵² A study in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Iraq and Pakistan found that counselling and orientation sessions significantly reduce irregular migration intentions and improve awareness of safe options.⁵³ Indeed, India,⁵⁵ Nepal,⁵⁶ Senegal⁵⁴ and Uganda are implementing radio campaigns, social media outreach and mobile resource centres to inform rural youth about migration risks, alternatives to migration and agrifood system opportunities, including climate-adaptive agriculture.

PROMOTING THE PROGRESSIVE FORMALIZATION OF AGRIFOOD SYSTEMS ECONOMIES

Supporting the progressive formalization of agrifood systems economies can improve job quality by encouraging businesses to comply with relevant laws and regulations.⁵⁷ Achieving this goal requires lowering barriers to formalization and incentivizing enterprises to operate within the formal sector. Such efforts may include streamlining business registration processes to reduce costs and regulatory burdens and linking formalization to economic support programmes or benefits like tax incentives and government contracts. A project in Lebanon, for instance, required registration as a prerequisite for youth- and women-led agri-enterprises seeking assistance to develop export skills. This initiative encouraged formalization by demonstrating the advantages of belonging to the formal sector – such as access to markets and support programmes.⁵⁸

Fostering group cooperation and access to social protection can help promote the progressive formalization of agrifood systems economies. Cooperatives and associations facilitate the transition to formality for youth and micro-entrepreneurs by pooling resources, for example through saving groups, reducing entry barriers to markets and accessing social security mechanisms for informal workers. Examples of the latter include Peasants’ Social Insurance in Ecuador and the group insurance system of the Self-Employed Women’s Association in India.⁵⁹ Initiatives to expand access to social protection for youth, who make up a significant proportion of informal workers and informal enterprises, were observed in particular during the COVID-19 outbreak.⁶⁰ Enhancing access to social protection through expanded non-contributory benefits, extending social insurance to rural workers and making social benefits portable across borders for migrants in industrialized agrifood systems⁶¹ are all examples of successful approaches supporting the progressive formalization of rural economies.

Responsible contract farming⁶² and other formalized value chain arrangements can also significantly improve youth incomes and job prospects. Several case studies have reported improvements in terms of contract farmers hiring more labour or paying higher wages in Pakistan,⁶³ youth increasing crop and household incomes in the United Republic of Tanzania,⁶⁴ or young people benefiting from jobs and better incomes in Rwanda.⁶⁵ However, the studies also highlighted several factors, including ownership and size of land and access to resources, that influence young farmers’ engagement and performance in contract farming.^64,65

MAKE YOUTH ACCESS TO HEALTHY DIETS CENTRAL TO AGRIFOOD SYSTEMS TRANSFORMATION

Youth access to healthy food remains a low priority in national policies. Most countries focus primarily on infants and children aged under five, leaving few initiatives to support youth nutrition. While some countries, such as Indonesia, have introduced youth-targeted nutrition programmes,66 including iron-folic acid supplementation for young women and obesity prevention programmes for youth, youth remain underrepresented in national development agendas. To secure the next generation’s health and economic potential, agrifood systems transformation must integrate youth-specific policies that improve access to nutritious foods.

Large-scale food fortification, particularly iron-fortified flour, can help address micronutrient deficiencies among youth, as demonstrated by its success in reducing anaemia in women of reproductive age.⁶⁷ However, availability, cost and acceptability challenges hinder widespread adoption.⁶⁸ As agrifood systems transform, expanding these programmes to high-need areas, along with quality assurance monitoring to ensure compliance and effectiveness, is essential.^69–72 Similarly, strengthening policies that mandate the food industry to enhance the availability and nutritional quality of food, while regulating unhealthy food marketing, can significantly impact youth diets.^{72, 73}

Making healthy diets central to agrifood systems transformation requires multisectoral collaboration and tailored interventions. India’s knowledge-centred approach to reducing anaemia among adolescent girls highlights the effectiveness of partnerships between government and development organizations.⁷⁴ Similar collaborations involving multiple stakeholders (e.g. national and sub-national government, community, non-governmental and private actors) and youth engagement can help scale youth-focused interventions. These collaborations should include advocacy, mass and local media engagement, technical assistance, and monitoring and evaluation to ensure sustained impact.

Additionally, careful considerations are needed for youth migrants, refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs), since the host community food environment may be different from their own, and constraints for these young people may differ. Furthermore, food assistance programmes may not be accessible for these groups, as lack of mobility (transport), knowledge, time, resources, literacy and digital literacy, concerns about immigration status, stigma and culturally inappropriate food may hinder them from accessing such programmes.⁷⁵ Addressing the nutritional needs of young migrants, refugees and IDPs requires a multifaceted approach. Measures that have been found effective in improving the food security of young migrants, refugees and IDPs include emergency food aid, school feeding programmes,^{76, 77} community-based nutrition interventions (i.e. community kitchens, community gardens),⁷⁸ nutrition education programmes aimed at improving dietary habits,^{79, 80} monitoring and screening for malnutrition,^{81, 82} and long-term resilience-building efforts.^83–85 Effective measures should focus not only on providing immediate relief but also on improving long-term health outcomes and self-sufficiency. Collaboration between governments, aid organizations and host communities is essential to enhance effectiveness and sustainability in this regard.

SUPPORT YOUTH KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS DEVELOPMENT PROMOTING HEALTHIER DIETS

School-based nutrition programmes play a critical role in shaping dietary behaviours,^{90, 91} but they often have mixed impact on nutrition⁹² and growth outcomes^{93, 94} due to the high variability in meal composition, implementation and regularity. Establishing robust nutrition standards for school meals can ensure consistency in quality and accessibility.^94–97 Combining nutrition education with environmental changes, such as regulating unhealthy food sales near schools, can reinforce positive dietary behaviours.^{95, 98–100} Expanding these initiatives to reach more youth, especially those outside formal education systems, is essential to addressing nutritional disparities.

Community and digital platforms offer effective channels for reaching out-of-school youth. Peer educators, community-based initiatives and faith-based organizations have successfully engaged young people in nutrition and health education.¹⁰¹ In Kenya, for example, community-based initiatives have reduced geophagia (the practice of eating soil or rocks).¹⁰² Social media and mobile health interventions also provide additional opportunities to deliver nutrition information, behavioural support and food literacy programmes at scale.¹⁰³ In Brazil and Mexico, for example, digital programmes have effectively promoted fruit and vegetable consumption.¹⁰⁴ However, while digital platforms can promote healthy diets, they also expose youth to unhealthy food advertising, which can influence their consumption behaviours and have a negative impact on their long-term health.

STRENGTHEN FOOD MARKETING REGULATIONS TO PROTECT YOUTH

Strengthening food marketing regulations is essential to protect youth from exposure to unhealthy food advertising. While protections from harmful marketing exist for children, they tend to weaken with age, leaving youth increasingly vulnerable. Regulatory approaches vary globally, consisting of a mix of self-regulation, co-regulation and statutory instruments.¹⁰⁵ Although mandatory regulations have reduced exposure to unhealthy food advertisements,¹⁰⁶ no country has fully restricted all forms of unhealthy food marketing.¹⁰⁷ Loopholes and lax enforcement¹⁰⁵ allow unhealthy food promotion to persist, particularly through digital and social media channels, where influencers amplify brand messaging and normalize unhealthy food choices.¹⁰⁸

Expanding regulations to cover internet-based advertising can help better protect youth.¹⁰⁸ Additionally, disseminating food literacy programmes can equip youth to navigate the marketing landscape.¹⁰⁹ To ensure meaningful impact, governments and regulatory bodies must also strengthen enforcement mechanisms, close existing loopholes and increase transparency in food marketing practices.^{105, 107} Engaging youth in public health discussions and leveraging their voices in advocacy efforts can further drive policy improvements.^110–112

Youth-led movements and initiatives can advocate for sustainable, culturally relevant agrifood systems, countering the aggressive marketing of unhealthy foods. Promoting traditional diets rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains and locally sourced nutrient-dense foods can help to reverse dietary shifts towards ultra-processed, nutrient-poor options. The participation of youth in food policy discussions and social movements for food justice plays a vital role in ensuring that healthy foods are accessible, affordable, desirable and convenient. For example, youth movements have advocated for transparent food labeling,¹¹³ sugar taxes¹¹⁴ and healthier school meals,¹¹⁵ pushing for policies that support healthy diets.¹¹⁶ In addition, young entrepreneurs have created sustainable food ventures, offering locally sourced, affordable alternatives to ultra-processed foods.¹¹⁷ Strengthening such youth engagement in food policy and nutrition education will accelerate the shift toward healthier food environments and empower young people to make informed dietary choices.

EDUCATE YOUTH ON PRODUCTIVITY- AND RESILIENCE-ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES

Limited access to information and lack of technical expertise hampers young people’s productivity and resilience.¹¹⁸ Ecosystem-based approaches and climate adaptive agricultural practices, such as soil and water conservation practices, intercropping or the use of improved seeds, have been shown to increase yields and incomes and foster resilience to shocks.^{119, 120} Crop diversification also plays an important role in the resilience of young households in areas of protracted crisis. Yet not all climate adaptive practices might be suitable for young farmers. Smaller landholdings and financial constraints present obstacles to implementing land- and capital-intensive practices such as agroforestry and erosion prevention infrastructure.¹²¹ Addressing these barriers through tailored policies, access to credit and innovative financing mechanisms will be crucial in enabling young farmers to adopt and benefit from resilience-enhancing technologies.

LEVERAGE SOCIAL PROTECTION TO HELP YOUTH IMPLEMENT RESILIENCE STRATEGIES

Too often, up-front costs associated with the adoption of long-term climate adaptive strategies, such as irrigation systems or agroforestry, are high, risky and often take time to yield returns. Young farmers need financial resources to cover the start-up costs and to manage uncertainties and risks related to the long-time horizon.¹²² Given limited access to traditional financial services, social protection (see Box 7.1) can play a crucial role in providing incentives for the adoption of income diversification and climate adaptive livelihood strategies, thus supporting rural youth in adopting new approaches and diversifying their incomes, which can in turn lead to greater resilience.^122–124

Cash transfers have been shown to increase investments in farm inputs and productive assets, improving productivity and, thereby, contributing to more resilient agricultural livelihoods.^{125, 126} Moreover, in some contexts cash transfers encourage recipients to acquire assets, including farmland.¹²⁶ This is particularly relevant for young farmers, who are often constrained by smaller farm sizes.¹²² Social protection can also promote access to information, support or training/extension services, for example on input use, marketing and market assets, entrepreneurial skills or agricultural value chain development) to assist young participants in utilizing the cash assistance provided, based on their needs and aspirations.¹²⁷

Social protection programmes can also help farmers manage risks resulting from uncertain weather conditions, volatile prices and psychological stress.¹²⁶ For instance, Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) has successfully lowered the adverse impact of droughts on food security, benefiting particularly land poor households.¹²⁸ Meanwhile, social protection for youth working in the off-farm sector can complement job creation policies.¹²⁴ In Rwanda, cash transfers directed to youth in low-income households increased hours worked, income and the accumulation of productive asset and savings.¹²⁹ A programme in Sierra Leone, which provided small cash transfers conditional on attendance of business training during the Ebola outbreak, improved employment and earning outcomes, while increasing food consumption in the households of female trainees and the accumulation of assets among male trainees.¹³⁰

These examples show how social protection can promote youth resilience by enhancing enabling factors, such as education outcomes, skills development, labour market participation, entrepreneurship asset accumulation and agricultural productivity. However, to maximize the impact of social protection for youth, it is essential to integrate specific components that address youth needs, such as training, business development and climate-resilient agriculture, and to adopt a longterm perspective that considers benefits adequacy and sustainability.

PROMOTE INCLUSIVE COLLECTIVE ACTION

For vulnerable or more disadvantaged youth, collective action often proves more effective than individual action in exercising agency.^{144, 145} By joining or forming groups, whether through formal producers’ organizations, cooperatives and community-based organizations, or more informal networks and associations, young people can pool resources, expand their influence and navigate power relations more effectively.^146–148 Membership in formal or informal collectives can grant rural youth greater visibility in policymaking for agrifood systems. This impact can be seen in youth-driven networks in Colombia, Rwanda and Uganda, all of which have contributed to shaping national development strategies and policies.^{149, 150} Apex organizations, like the Asian Farmers Association for Sustainable Rural Development (AFA), have also made efforts to include youth.

STRENGTHEN SOCIAL CAPITAL

Exercising agency means acquiring the knowledge, skills and capabilities needed to envision valued goals or futures, and to pursue them through free and informed decision making.^{157, 158} In rural settings, these competencies are not always provided by existing education systems. Investing in both the human and social capital of young people is paramount to elevating their voices, especially in the public sphere.

Strategies such as peer-to-peer exchanges and learning that harness common group identity, as well as personal initiative training sessions, have proven to be effective in strengthening youth agency, cultivating new skills and fostering proactive entrepreneurial mindsets.^159–161 Youth individual and group agency in agrifood systems is significantly boosted by young “champions” as well as by youth-led organizations and networks, as seen in the examples of networks in Uganda and Senegal.^{162, 163} Furthermore, relational approaches that strengthen intergenerational collaboration in the family or the local community, such as mentorship, role models or broader youth-adult partnership approaches,^163–165 can play a powerful role in smoothing the transfer of resources across generations, preserving traditional knowledge and culture, and building youth life skills and social networks.

Strengthening youth capacity and leadership also helps to challenge discriminatory norms and empower young people to meaningfully shape the future of their rural communities. For example, community-led gender-transformative initiatives, such as FAO’s Dimitra Clubs,¹⁶⁶ have had a visible impact on the quality of life of young women and men, strengthening their leadership and self-development skills.¹⁶⁷ Similar participatory approaches that encourage young people to analyse and address local issues have successfully boosted the agency of youth, particularly girls, by fostering critical thinking and communication skills. For instance, in rural Malawi, youth-led Reflection-Action Circles facilitated by Action Aid have successfully addressed issues such as discrimination against youth with disabilities, securing commitments from local leaders to improve access to education,¹⁶⁷ and advocated for youth inclusion in governance. Similarly, Tostan’s Community Empowerment Program¹⁶⁷ successfully stimulated community dialogue and action on female genital mutilation, child marriage and gender equality, achieving a comprehensive shift in attitudes and behaviours across over 7 200 rural communities in sub-Saharan Africa.

PROMOTE INTER-GENERATIONAL RENEWAL, PARTICULARLY IN LABOUR-SCARCE SETTINGS

Given that power dynamics between generations can constrain youth agency and resource access, policies that promote intergenerational transfer or renewal of agrifood systems employment are critical. Such policies are particularly important in countries where youth populations are low or declining. This section examines experiences and lessons learned from policy approaches working to address these concerns, the majority of which come from industrialized agrifood systems in Asia or Europe.

Issues of land access and land succession affecting predominantly young people have been an important focus of policies fostering generational renewal in agriculture, particularly in Europe. However, the evidence shows that programmes addressing this challenge have not yielded strong positive results. For example, the Fresh Start Initiative, implemented in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, was designed as a matchmaking facility to help identify and facilitate joint venture agreements between older farmers and new entrants. However, the programme failed to successfully generate new joint venture arrangements because of wide variance in motivations and expectations between older farmers and new entrants, as well as concerns regarding their respective responsibilities in working relationships.¹⁶⁸ Similarly, an evaluation of the European farmers’ early retirement scheme, which sought to incentivize farmers between the ages of 55 and 66 to retire and transfer their land to younger farmers, found only a minimal impact on the age structure of European farmers, and failed to encourage new entrants into farming.¹⁶⁹ In most of the cases, transfers that occurred under the programme were between members of the same family.

Financial incentives to encourage the entry of young people into farming have also yielded mixed results. The Young Farmer Payment, which provides financial support to farmers under the age of 40 through Europe’s Common Agricultural Policy, was found to support intergenerational succession of farms by addressing capitalization and financial constraints faced by farm successors, but proved insufficient to support the establishment of new farming businesses by young entrants.¹⁷⁰ In contrast, the Setting up Aid (SUA) scheme under Europe’s Rural Development Programme successfully fostered the transition of young hired farmers to farm managers, while increasing income from farming and farm survival in Sweden.¹⁷¹ The success of the SUA compared to the Young Farmer Payment scheme is attributed to two factors: the requirement to submit a farm business plan, which obliges participants to deliberate on the future development of their farm, and the larger lump sum transfer provided by SUA, which proved more effective than the smaller payments spread over five years offered by the Young Farmer Payment scheme.

Young farmer payment schemes and policies designed to financially incentivize farm succession may underperform because they fail to engage with social and psychological factors that drive young people to enter farming or older farmers to leave. A study in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland found that payments had little influence on older farmers’ willingness to exit. Instead, factors such as involvement in farm management, a good understanding of the farm’s situation, and strong social identification with farming fostered through family and social ties to agriculture, were more influential in promoting the entry of young farmers.¹⁷² To improve the impact of these payment schemes, complementary actions are needed to facilitate young farmers’ integration into the farm business, promote more positive perceptions of farming as an occupation, and strengthen the integration of young people into farm communities.¹⁷²

Support for modernization and the use of modern farming technologies can help overturn perceptions of farming as a lower-status occupation and attract young people to the sector. In Ireland, for example, the uptake of innovative practices improved farm viability and encouraged the next generation of young farmers to consider farming as a long-term occupation.¹⁷³ Similarly, in Spain, lack of modernization was identified as a key barrier to generational change in the sector.¹⁷⁴ The promotion of technological advancement among both older and younger farmers thus has the potential to both attract and maintain young people in agriculture.¹⁷⁵

Additionally, the development of niche and specialty markets (e.g. organic and direct marketing systems) and farm diversification (including agrotourism) both contribute to driving young people’s entry into agriculture.¹⁷³, ¹⁷⁶, ¹⁷⁷ These farming systems can help boost economic returns and reduce the uncertainty of agricultural livelihoods, while also aligning with social and environmental concerns held by many young farmers.³²,¹⁷⁵

In labour-scarce settings, agrifood systems increasingly rely on migrant workers, including youth, to address labour shortages, particularly where labour-intensive crops and food processing and distribution are concerned.¹⁷⁸ Bilateral Labour Migration Agreements (BLMAs) and Seasonal Migration Schemes facilitate the mobility of agricultural workers,¹⁷⁹ and have been adopted in several countries,¹⁸⁰, ¹⁸¹ including the United States of America,¹⁸² Canada,¹⁸³ Australia,¹⁸⁴ New Zealand,¹⁸⁵ the Republic of Korea¹⁸⁶ and the European Union.¹⁸⁷ While evidence on their impact is scarce, New Zealand’s Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme has shown positive impacts. The scheme aims at easing labour shortages in horticulture and viticulture by accepting foreign workers, in particular from Pacific countries.¹⁸⁵ The programme has increased incomes and consumption among households in countries of origin, with other notable impacts including a rise in school attendance rates by 20 percentage points for 16–18 year olds in Tonga.¹⁸⁸

ENHANCE SKILLS TRAINING THROUGH PRACTICAL, CONTEXT-RELEVANT AND MARKET-ALIGNED APPROACHES

Programmes aimed at building youth-relevant skills for agrifood systems vary considerably in their content, duration, delivery methods and target population. Their focus can range from technical agricultural knowledge to business acumen and soft skills, with training lengths spanning brief workshops to multi-month courses.¹⁹⁵, ¹⁹⁷ Delivery methods include in-person sessions, online courses and hands-on learning, often supplemented by mentorship. Some programmes are integrated into formal education at both the secondary and tertiary levels,¹⁴⁸, ¹⁹⁸ and may target a wide array of youth groups (e.g. rural and urban youth, young women or marginalized communities), sometimes incorporating additional services like financing or market access to overcome broader barriers.¹⁹⁹

The effectiveness of these skills training programmes varies significantly according to their design and implementation, the local context and the specific needs of participants. Although a complete understanding of what works best across different settings and objectives is still evolving, certain design features consistently emerge in successful initiatives. First, programmes that combine various skill sets with complementary support services such as mentorship, market linkages and access to resources tend to deliver better employment outcomes.^{9, 148, 200} Such a comprehensive perspective fosters a deeper appreciation of how different components of agrifood systems intersect, empowering youth to either create their own opportunities or seek employment in existing ventures.^{194, 195}

Second, programmatic models that emphasize hands-on, practical activities – such as internships, apprenticeships, fieldwork and project-based tasks – allow young participants to apply their newly acquired skills in real-world conditions and improve their employability.^{154, 201, 202} These experiential learning processes reinforce theoretical understanding, bolster confidence and facilitate networking with professionals, all of which are essential for sustained career growth. To further address challenges with skills mismatch (see Chapter 3), the literature emphasizes the importance of strengthening linkages between youth skills development programmes and employers. Such collaborations can help identify concrete skill gaps²⁰¹ and ensure that these insights are systematically fed back into education and training systems to make them more responsive to labour market demands.

Third, initiatives that tailor their content and structure to a specific economic and social environment are better positioned to succeed.^28–159 In regions with high demand for particular skills, targeted training can result in measurable improvements in labour outcomes, whereas in areas with limited opportunities or mismatched training, the impact may be negligible.²⁰³ Furthermore, programmes that address intersectional factors, such as gender, socioeconomic background and cultural context, are more likely to engage participants effectively.¹⁹⁴ By ensuring that training aligns with local market needs and addresses the realities of target youth populations, such interventions increase the likelihood of positive employment outcomes and, consequently, contribute to wider economic advancement.¹⁹⁴

In addition, peer-to-peer approaches in agrifood systems-related training can enhance the effectiveness of skills development and complement more formal training programmes or extension services, while helping to building social capital and youth agency. Such approaches leverage social learning and peer influence,^159–160 demonstrably improve the overall performance of agripreneurship initiatives, and are among the most appreciated components by youth within entrepreneurship initiatives supported in multiple countries.^{149, 204}

STRENGTHEN EDUCATION IN AGRIFOOD SYSTEMS

Substantial and long-term public investments in education are needed to ensure equitable access to high-quality learning, to enable the development of skills demanded by rapidly changing agrifood systems. Such investments should prioritize the modernization of educational curricula to reflect current labour market conditions and the specialized competencies required in agrifood systems. This is particularly important in lower-income countries, where youth populations are large and agrifood systems constitute a key economic pillar.²⁰⁹ Given the lack of access to secondary education in less transitioned agrifood systems and in rural areas, as highlighted in Chapter 3, incorporating agrifood systems-relevant skills early, ideally at the primary school level, can expose students to practical agrifood systems-related knowledge. For example, in Mozambique, Junior Farmer Field and Life Schools have successfully integrated farming and life skills into the primary school curriculum.²¹⁰ Such early exposure to agrifood system-related knowledge has been shown to spark children’s interest in agrifood systems careers and contribute to nurturing a generation of well-informed, skilled practitioners.²⁰⁴

Much employment across agrifood systems roles relies on foundational literacy, numeracy and problem-solving abilities, which could be acquired without a university education.²¹¹ Nevertheless, investments at the university level are vital for spurring innovation and productivity, and increasing the supply of researchers, practitioners and trainers, who may directly train youth and shape the quality of training that young people receive. Agricultural universities play a pivotal role in the research and development of improved breeding methods, agronomic practices and cutting-edge food technologies. In the United States of America, for instance, land-grant universities have historically driven major breakthroughs in agricultural productivity while developing a skilled workforce to power the agrifoods industry.²¹² Universities are also increasingly driving digital innovation in agriculture by providing young entrepreneurs with tools, mentorship and platforms. In India, universities have launched digital agriculture R&D programmes, incubating startups like HarSar farmAR, which provides an immersive virtual farm experience. Similarly, Rwanda’s kLab innovation hub supports youth-led, ICT-driven agricultural solutions by connecting young entrepreneurs with farmers to address real-world agricultural challenges.^{154, 213} Similar investments are needed elsewhere to nurture a critical mass of innovators who can design sustainable solutions for the pressing challenges facing agrifood systems.

While long-term investment in education remains essential, immediate opportunities for engaging youth often come through expanded access to high-quality Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) – formal education that provides practical skills and knowledge for specific trades and prepares individuals for the workforce through hands-on training. However, the data on the impacts of TVET on employment outcomes is mixed. While TVET facilitates the school-to-work transition for youth, labour market outcomes over time are often higher for those with general education, even after accounting for individual characteristics.²¹⁴ This is in part due to the generally low effectiveness of TVET systems, particularly in low- and middle-income countries.²¹⁴ Traditional TVET systems focus on equipping youth with specific technical skills to facilitate their entry into a particular occupation, but do not usually strengthen adaptability, job mobility or increased productivity over the life cycle, especially in contexts of rapid technological and economic change.^{215, 216} Agricultural TVET programmes, in particular, have been criticized for an overly theoretical focus and insufficient emphasis on entrepreneurship and business skills.^{217, 218} Moreover, TVET offerings in many developing countries, particularly in rural areas, are often underfunded, carry a stigma of being “less professional” or fail to align curricula with labour market needs.^{27, 214, 219}

Addressing these gaps by updating TVET curricula to include cutting-edge agricultural and climate-smart practices – as well as the latest agribusiness technologies – could greatly improve job and self-employment prospects for low-skilled youth in agrifood systems.²¹⁴ A recent review shows that incorporating modern technologies, such as drones, GPS and AI-based platforms into educational modules at TVET institutions, alongside agricultural entrepreneurial skills training, significantly improved students’ decision-making abilities and their readiness to pursue entrepreneurial opportunities in agriculture.²²⁰

EXPAND YOUTH ACCESS TO RURAL ADVISORY SERVICES AND AGRIBUSINESS TRAINING

Expanding skill training opportunities for youth, particularly those outside the formal education system, is essential for youth engagement in agrifood systems. Rural advisory services (RAS) provide information and support to producers and other economic participants in agrifood systems and play a key role in improving livelihoods and developing technical, organizational and management skills and practices.^221–222 These services, which include market information, financial guidance and agribusiness training are often provided by a variety of public, private, NGO and cooperative institutions.²²³ To be effective, rural advisory services must be adapted to changing economic, social and environmental conditions, the demands of today’s agrifood systems and the specific needs of youth.²²⁴

Agricultural policies are increasingly prioritizing youth involvement in extension services, both as beneficiaries and providers.²⁰⁷ In Pakistan, engaging youth in extension and advisory services helped to disseminate knowledge and promote sustainable and climate-smart farming practices.²⁰⁸ Similarly, innovative platforms like Shamba Shape Up in East Africa and Digital Green in India involve youth in producing television and community-led video content, which helps to overcome informational barriers to agricultural productivity.^{205, 206} Scaling these initiatives in ways that reflect young people’s preferences, circumstances and evolving needs in modern agrifood systems could significantly expand youth engagement in agrifood systems.

The integration of ICTs has transformed the delivery of rural advisory services, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.²²⁵ Such services, which make use of mobile applications and digital platforms, often involve youth serving as village-based digital advisors and agricultural extension service providers. Digital platforms like E-Vuna and MyAgro, which actively engage with youth, have created employment opportunities for young people and strengthened rural advisory services, while making their advice more relevant and practical.²¹³ The provision of technical information via mobile phone has also been shown to improve yields and increase the adoption of agricultural practices.²²⁶ Nonetheless, challenges with the accessibility and affordability of digital technologies need to be addressed to make them inclusive of vulnerable youth groups and maximize their impact.^{227, 163}

Agribusiness training programmes and incubation hubs have emerged as a potentially effective strategy among various labour market interventions.²²⁸ These platforms encourage innovation by helping youth to develop and test business ideas within a supportive environment, providing technical and business training, and linking youth to markets, resources and new technologies. Youth-centred incubators that supply resources, mentorship and networks have yielded significant gains in skills, income and job creation.^{199, 230} Furthermore, research in this field highlights the greater impacts of approaches that focus on personal initiative or action-oriented mindset change in agripreneurship training compared to traditional business training.^{159, 229}

While agribusiness training and incubators enhance entrepreneurial mindsets and skills, there is limited likelihood that youth beneficiaries will create viable enterprises immediately. Research shows that most successful job-creating businesses are led by those aged over 25, as younger individuals often face additional constraints in terms of experience, resources and networks.^{25, 26} In challenging economic contexts, youth may establish necessity-based ventures which are often prone to low productivity and limited growth.²⁶ As a result, programmes and policies need a broader scope, addressing financial, educational and regulatory hurdles instead of simply encouraging entrepreneurship. Long-term incubator programmes offering sustained capacity building, mentorship and technical training, and startup financial support yield positive effects on both employment and earnings.^{25, 199, 148}

ADDRESS YOUTH RESOURCE ACCESS CONSTRAINTS USING AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

Evidence suggests that resource access interventions targeting youth combined with other types of support achieve better effects than resource access alone.^234–238 For example, financial exclusion should be addressed in combination with other forms of asset and resource gaps affecting youth. Common approaches combine skills training with access to finance and/or agricultural inputs.^{234–236, 239} One programme in India offered training in agricultural practices to rural youth not in education, employment or training (NEET). Upon completion, participants received agricultural inputs (animal feed and poultry chicks) that enabled them to launch or improve their agribusinesses. This intervention led to increased job creation and reduced distress migration.²³⁴

A recent World Bank study confirms that well-designed economic inclusion programmes can yield considerable benefits for vulnerable or more disadvantaged populations, including youth.²⁴⁰ However, scaling such integrated programmes often demands significant investment, with several of the most successful resource-access initiatives embedded in national government-led programmes.^{235, 239, 237} Scaling-up also requires changes in how market systems work, so that youth can benefit from more accessible business models. However, market-based approaches to improving youth resource access require careful design, as the pursuit of higher profitability can lead to unintended consequences for vulnerable or more disadvantaged groups. For example, in Mozambique, a project that partnered with the private sector to enhance access to certified seeds inadvertently intensified land competition, resulting in the consolidation of land control among household heads while marginalizing women and perpetuating the exclusion of youth.²⁴¹ Ignoring how markets function and the potential distortions that interventions can generate can be counterproductive. In a case in Uganda, an initiative that offered agricultural input subsidies to youth faced high demand, straining market supply and creating market tensions.²⁴²

PROMOTE INCLUSIVE POLICIES THAT ADDRESS RESOURCE GAPS

Promising resource access interventions are often rooted in policies that explicitly recognize and prioritize the needs of youth and other vulnerable groups. These include redistributive reforms aimed at redressing power and resource imbalances between older and younger generations without compromising the legitimate needs of the elderly.^{163, 243}

Issues related to land titling and secure tenure rights highlight the central role of national policies in supporting youth engagement in the sector. A recent study from the United Republic of Tanzania found that land titling and inclusive reforms introduced since the 1990s have encouraged greater youth involvement in agriculture.²⁴⁴ Additional research highlights the importance of facilitating farm succession as a key to youth entry into farming while simultaneously addressing persisting gender-discriminatory social norms favouring male-line succession.²⁴⁵ An assessment in Ethiopia documented land formalization programmes that integrate gender- and age-sensitive parameters to protect intra-household rights and foster inclusive access to land that benefits youth.²⁴⁹ Nonetheless, the possible pitfalls of land formalization initiatives seeking to improve the land rights of youth and other vulnerable groups should be considered in each given context, given the ample evidence.^246–248 of the potential risk of increased conflict between different stakeholders, including individuals within communities.

Other important mechanisms for facilitating access to agricultural land for young people – particularly those from households with little or no land – include the development of land rental markets, the rehabilitation of abandoned plots, and the allocation of unused communal or public land. Evidence from Ethiopia shows that rental markets have successfully facilitated land access for landless and near-landless youth. However, over 90 percent of the land rental contracts were established for sharecropping, reflecting young people’s limited access to cash and the high perceived risks of agriculture.²⁵⁰ Access to rental land is also essential in Europe, where agricultural land for purchase is often scarce and expensive.²⁵¹ Rental arrangements are often informal in nature which may increase precarity and disincentivize investment in land, limiting agricultural productivity over the long term.²⁵¹ These arrangements can also be exploitive if young people have few other options.²⁵² Young women are less likely to be able to access land through rental markets,^{250, 251} pointing to the need for gender-responsive complementary interventions to overcome the barriers they face. Meanwhile, initiatives focused on the rehabilitation of abandoned land or the allocation of unused communal or public lands have facilitated youth access to land across diverse contexts, including in Burkina Faso, Egypt,²⁵³ Ethiopia, Italy²⁵⁴ and Mexico.

Governments must carefully consider how agricultural and other policies affect the rights and interests of young people and future generations. For example, land reforms have historically excluded women and youth.²⁵³ Additionally, agricultural policies such as subsidies can reduce farmers’ incentives to transfer land either through sales or bequests.²⁵¹ Inadequate old-age social protection benefits among agricultural populations can further reduce intergenerational transfers of land.^256–257

When governments integrate and mainstream youth considerations into national agricultural policies, they can directly address youth-specific challenges and support more equitable access to productive resources for inclusive agrifood systems.²⁴³ Indeed, many global,^258–261 regional^262–263 and national policies mainstream youth as a target demographic. FAO’s analysis of 82 countries indicates that the majority of national agricultural strategies reviewed (71 percent) incorporate youth into their objectives, activities and performance indicators (see Box 7.2). However, to ensure that policies genuinely facilitate equitable resource access, national governments must not only endorse policies but also demonstrate a commitment to effective implementation. This includes providing education and awareness around rights to resources, which can empower youth to navigate and advocate for their rights effectively.

HARNESS DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES TO ACCELERATE PROGRESS

Agrifood systems present diverse opportunities to leverage digital technologies to create jobs and make agrifood systems more appealing to youth.^{268, 269} Several proven strategies and models have successfully increased youth participation in digital agriculture.

Mobile technology has become a key enabler of digital solutions, integrating financial and non-financial services for young farmers. In sub-Saharan Africa, over half of the Digitalization for Agriculture (D4Ag) platforms^k bundle multiple services like market access and financial tools into scalable digital ecosystems.²⁷⁰ Research shows that bundled services within one-stop digital marketplaces are the most effective FinTech solution for young agripreneurs, increasing efficiency and reducing costs.²⁷⁰ As an example, Agrikore, a blockchain-powered e-commerce platform, developed by Cellulant, links farmers, processors, traders and logistics companies in ways that ensure transparency, trust and efficiency in agricultural transactions.²⁷¹

Youth-led FinTech startups are also improving access finance by offering digital credit, insurance and investment solutions tailored to young farmers and agriprenuers. FarmCrowdy, a youth-led Nigerian-based crowdfunding platform, enables individuals to invest in crop and livestock production cycles and has expanded into input and equipment financing, digital insurance and market aggregation services. It also identifies and trains young entrepreneurs to manage tech-enabled farm product aggregation.^{272, 273} Similarly, ThriveAgic provides youth-friendly financial solutions such as loans backed by digital collateral and weather-indexed crop insurance, aligning repayment with agricultural cash flow cycles, allowing farmers to repay loans post-harvest.²⁷²

To bridge this gap, there is a need for more systematic data collection and actionable research to capture youth realities in agrifood systems, including their employment status, working conditions, food security and nutritional intake, and access to services, assets and social protection. While initiatives such as the Living Standard Measurement Study (LSMS)²⁷⁶ have improved age-disaggregated data, coverage remains limited, especially for marginalized youth, including Indigenous youth, migrants and persons with disability, as well as for under-represented agrifood systems sub-sectors like fisheries and forestry. Moreover, the tendency of these surveys to focus on heads of households, most of whom are not young, limits their usefulness for youth-focused analysis. Longitudinal data necessary to identify causal drivers of change are relatively scarce.^{274, 275} Expanding these efforts to a broad range of countries and youth subgroups is therefore crucial for informed policymaking. The existence of varying age-based definitions of youth^{262, 277} poses an additional challenge for data comparability and interpretation. Similarly, while digitally enabled agricultural services are extensively documented,²⁷⁸ high-quality empirical data on the actual adoption and outcomes are limited, leaving significant gaps in the understanding of how digital solutions impact youth engagement.

Beyond data, research on policy and programme effectiveness is lacking. Most evaluations of agrifood policies focus on public expenditures²⁷⁹ rather than youth-specific impacts,²⁸⁰ and cost-effectiveness analyses of interventions are rare.²⁰¹ Additionally, a key step in advancing broad-based productivity is to invest in R&D and robust extension systems that enable a two-way flow of information between researchers and agrifood systems’ end users. By generating context-specific knowledge, developing innovative technologies and ensuring their effective dissemination, these initiatives can address a spectrum of challenges – including climate-related threats – while boosting productivity across diverse local settings.^{16, 17} Additionally, policies and strategies often bridge adolescence to women of reproductive age, including youth, but only rarely tailor interventions specifically for them. Lastly, ensuring healthy diets within agrifood systems transformation requires better data on youth dietary patterns to inform policies and strategies.

To drive meaningful change, youth-specific policy monitoring and evaluation mechanisms need to be established. Closing data and research gaps will enable the development of evidence-driven policies and the scaling up of successful models to improve youth livelihoods in agrifood systems.

INCLUDE MORE – INVOLVING YOUTH IN POLICYMAKING

Young people are the ultimate experts of their own reality, and their voices must be more actively integrated into policymaking to ensure that policies and programmes reflect their needs and lived experiences. Moving beyond tokenism, youth inclusion requires policies and governance structures that are developed with youth, not just for them.

As discussed in Box 7.2, significant progress has been made in mainstreaming youth in agricultural policies. Yet, major gaps remain related to policy implementation coherence and diversification to address the heterogeneity of youth. Ensuring meaningful youth inclusion demands stronger policy implementation and coherence across sectors, including social protection, financial inclusion, land tenure, employment, education, innovation and climate change. Governments must not only endorse youth-inclusive policies and recommendations that emerge from youth consultative processes but also commit to their effective implementation. Globally, millions of youth work in agrifood systems under unsafe conditions with little to no labour protection and social security. Strengthening legal frameworks to uphold youth labour rights and occupational safety standards to ensure decent employment is crucial. Finally, policies must uphold the human rights of all young people, align with global human rights frameworks, and ensure equity regardless of gender, socioeconomic status or background.¹⁰²

Additionally, institutions that include and work with youth must actively engage with them as partners, equipping them with the necessary resources, skills and structured platforms to shape decision-making processes. Strengthening youth organizations and networks, establishing youth advisory councils and funding youth leadership programmes can provide critical avenues for young people to express their concerns, contribute solutions and influence policy directions. Social media platforms also provide an effective means to reach and mobilize young people, promote their collaboration and amplify their voice, ensuring their input is both solicited and integrated into interventions. Amplifying youth voices, strengthening policy coherence and implementation, and fostering inclusive dialogue will create more responsive, dynamic and equitable agrifood systems that young people have the opportunities and agency to shape and benefit from.

INVEST MORE – SAFEGUARDING THE FUTURE OF YOUTH AND AGRIFOOD SYSTEMS

The future of agrifood systems and youth depends on the investments and policy actions made today. To thrive, young people need to be well-nourished, well-educated, gainfully employed in decent jobs and resilient to shocks. However, as this report reveals, significant deficits persist, requiring targeted investments across multiple domains to unlock youth potential and ensure the longterm sustainability of agrifood systems.

First, youth is a critical period for physical and cognitive development, making investments in human capital, including nutrition, education and skills training, essential for their long-term success and productivity.^{281, 282} Food insecurity, malnutrition and limited access to quality education continue to hinder youth productivity and earning potential.²⁸³ Expanding nutrition programmes alongside improving access to quality, market-driven education and training in both the formal and informal sectors will not only ensure that youth are healthier, but also prepare them for entrepreneurship and employment.⁸ Investments could prioritize scaling up promising models such as rural advisory services, agribusiness incubation, Agricultural Technical and Vocational Education and Training; integrating agrifood system topics into school curricula; and promoting experiential learning through apprenticeships and mentorships.²¹⁴

Second, dynamic and inclusive agrifood systems hinge on investments that improve market access and enhance productivity. It is of critical importance to invest in dynamic agrifood system businesses on and off-farm with the greatest potential for young people’s decent employment. Connectivity remains another critical challenge. While most rural youth live in areas with relatively good agricultural potential, inadequate infrastructure – both physical and digital – limits their market participation and mobility within and beyond national boundaries (Chapter 2). The growing importance of spatial connectivity and functional territories, where households live, work, belong and maintain ties across multiple locations, highlights the role of youth migration, including temporary and seasonal movements. Small towns and intermediary cities, particularly in Africa and Asia, have emerged as key hubs that integrate rural and urban livelihoods, providing essential services and employment opportunities. These centres enable youthful and mobile workforce to access opportunities in agrifood system across multiple locations while strengthening rural-urban linkages.^284–286 Targeted investments in roads, energy, storage facilities and digital infrastructure can enhance market connectivity and create new economic opportunities.^{3, 5, 179, 284, 285, 287, 288} Promoting digital literacy and fostering youth-led agritech innovations are also proven pathways for young people to participate in agrifood systems in transformative ways. Additionally, promoting safe and legal pathways for international migration, including through rights-based Bilateral Labour Migration Agreements and seasonal migration schemes, can help align labour supply with demand in areas facing shortages or surpluses.^{3, 5, 179, 284, 285, 287, 288}

Third, persistent barriers in accessing productive resources such as land, finance and technology continue to constrain youth participation in agrifood enterprises.^{8, 9, 289} Fostering greater youth engagement demands investments in youth-friendly financial products, including grants, loans and blended finance models that lower collateral requirements and provide flexible repayment terms. Complementary initiatives such as expanded financial literacy programmes and support for youth savings and credit associations can enhance financial inclusion. Secure access to land is also a paramount concern (Chapter 3). Policies that facilitate youth land access such as land tenure reforms, rental markets and co-ownership schemes are necessary to overcome structural barriers related to inheritance norms and land fragmentation.^{250, 290} Additionally, providing affordable access to mechanization and other productivity-enhancing technologies can incentivize youth to remain in, or return to, farming and agribusiness, thus spurring innovation and growth in agrifood systems.^{291, 292}

Finally, climate change poses a growing threat to the livelihoods of young people in agrifood systems. An estimated 395 million rural youth live in areas where climate change is projected to depress agricultural productivity (Chapter 2). Without targeted adaptation strategies, these shifts could jeopardize economic prospects for a generation of young people. Targeted investments in climate-smart and sustainable agricultural practices can build resilience and create sustainable employment opportunities.¹²² Funding youth-led initiatives in climate innovation, providing incentives for sustainable farming and expanding access to climate risk insurance will further enhance youth resilience. Social protection measures, including cash transfers, unemployment benefits and skills retraining programmes, will be critical for safeguarding youth economic security, particularly in climate-affected areas.^{125, 126} Migration policies that support youth mobility while ensuring fair labour conditions can also provide alternative livelihood pathways for young people facing climate-induced displacement.