Turkey : review of human resources development.
Date: 2015-02-27
Institutions: European Training Foundation
Subjects: Türkiye, accession to the European Union, education policy, educational system, labour market, manpower planning, pre-accession aid, social integration, social policy, vocational training

CONTACT US

Further information can be
found on the ETF website:
www.etf.europa.eu

For any additional information
please contact:

European Training Foundation
Communication Department
Villa Gualino
Viale Settimio Severo 65
I – 10133 Torino

E info@etf.europa.eu
F +39 011 630 2200
T +39 011 630 2222

TURKEY
REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

-

C
N
E
-
7
5
8
3
1
1
3
A
T

-

-

-

 
HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS

Our priced publications are available from EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu), where you 
can place an order with the sales agent of your choice.

The Publications Office has a worldwide network of sales agents. You can obtain their contact 
details by sending a fax to (352) 29 29-42758.

Europe Direct is a service to help you
find answers to your questions
about the European Union

Freephone number (*):
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow
access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.

More information on the European Union
is available on the Internet
(http://europa.eu).

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of 
this publication.

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the 
European Union, 2013.

ISBN: 978-92-9157-608-1 
doi:10.2816/1839

© European Training Foundation, 2013.

Reproduction is authorised provided the source
is acknowledged.

Printed in Italy

© Cover photos: ETF/A. Jongsma

TURKEY
REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

PREPARED BY LIZZI FEILER, LIDA KITA AND ROSITA VAN MEEL,
WITH SPECIAL THANKS TO DORIANA MONTELEONE AND CRISTINA VIANO
Manuscript completed in December, 2012

3

PREFACE

This document discusses human resources development in Turkey in terms of options relating to the education of
young people and the provision of educational support for adults throughout their professional lives. Special emphasis is
put on the question of general labour market policies and reforms to support growth, particularly in relation to
unemployment and disadvantaged groups in the labour market. This report highlights policies that offer opportunities for
integration, gainful employment and enhanced social cohesion for marginalised and vulnerable citizens.

This report was prepared by the European Training Foundation (ETF) in response to a request from the Employment,
Social Affairs and Inclusion Directorate General of the European Commission. It presents a sometimes challenging
picture of the human resources development situation in Turkey. The document considers the achievements already
made and sets out the opportunities supported by far-reaching policy reform, highlighting the challenges facing Turkey in
various areas during this process, while confirming the great potential of the country.

We believe this report provides a firm basis to progress towards a medium-term operational programme for human
resources development by addressing current challenges and clearly signposting the route ahead through
future-oriented strategies.

The information used as a frame of reference for this study was taken from relevant national and international
publications and research papers, and verified with key national stakeholders. In a series of missions from May to
September 2010, the ETF team conducted interviews and discussions with a wide range of sources including:
representatives from the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (MoLSS), the Ministry of National Education (MoNE), the
Ministry of Family and Social Policies (MoFSP), the Turkish Employment Agency ((cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)), the Independent Industrialists
and Businessmen’s Association ((cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:2)(cid:10)(cid:11)), the Southeastern Anatolia Project (GAP), the Confederation of the Turkish
Real Trade Unions ((cid:12)(cid:10)(cid:4)(cid:13)(cid:2)(cid:3)), the International Labour Organisation (ILO), regional development agencies, the General
Directorate of the Status of Women, the Turkish Confederation of Tradesmen and Craftsmen (TESK), the Turkish
Confederation of Employer Associations ((cid:14)(cid:2)(cid:9)(cid:4)), the Social Security Institution (SSK), the State Planning Organisation, the
General Directorate of Social Assistance and Solidarity (SYDGM), the Turkish Union of Chambers and Commodity
Exchanges (TOBB), the research community and Turkish think-tanks, local governments in the provinces of Samsun and
Amasya, schools and work placement centres in Samsun and Amasya and community-based organisations.

We wish to thank the Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Directorate General of the European Commission for
entrusting us with the task of preparing this review. We would also like to thank all the experts and institutions in Turkey
for their responsiveness, time commitment and valuable contributions.

We hope that this report will make an effective contribution to better-informed decisions and greater continuity in
national policy making. We would like to assure the Turkish government that the ETF will continue to provide support in
fostering the development of human resources in the country.

Madlen Serban
Director
European Training Foundation

CONTENTS

PREFACE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.

POLITICAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC BACKGROUND

5

3

9

13

1.1 EU, regional and national political context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

1.2 Demographic developments and trends, including migration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

1.3

Economic developments and trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Tables and figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

2.

KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION AND
TRAINING IN A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE

25

2.1

Investment in human capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

2.2

Lifelong learning strategies, broadening the education and training supply and
recognising qualifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

2.3 Early school-leavers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

2.4 Access to secondary and post-secondary vocational education and training and

quality of provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

2.5

Learning in schools and teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

2.6 Access to and quality of higher education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

2.7

Institutional aspects in education and training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Tables and figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

3.

KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT

47

3.1 Characteristics of the labour market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

3.2

Labour law and industrial relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

3.3 Active labour market policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

3.4 Unemployment benefit and social security system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

3.5

Job creation, business environment and competitiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

3.6 Policy framework and institutional set up in the employment policy field . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

3.7

IPA programming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Tables and figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

4.

KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN SOCIAL INCLUSION

85

4.1 General policy initiatives and programmes for vulnerable groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

6

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

4.2 Social inclusion in education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

4.3 Social inclusion in employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

4.4

Territorial (regional) cohesion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

Tables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

5.

EU AND INTERNATIONAL DONOR INTERVENTIONS

97

5.1

IPA programming: overview of IPA component IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

5.2

International donor initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

Tables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

6. MAIN CHALLENGES, STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

113

6.1 Horizontal priorities and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

6.2 Education and training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

6.3 Employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

6.4 Social inclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

LIST OF TABLES

131

135

Table 1.1

Population, annual growth rate, number of provinces, districts, towns, villages and population
density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Table 1.2

Age dependency ratio (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Table 1.3

Life expectancy at birth (years) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Table 1.4

Crude rate of net migration plus adjustment per 1 000 people. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Table 1.5

GDP growth rates – purchaser's price (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Table 1.6

GDP based on PPP per capita GDP (current international USD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Table 1.7

GDP in current prices by type of economic activity (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Table 1.8

Foreign direct investment (% of GDP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Table 1.9

Human Development Index trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Table 1.10

Global Competitiveness Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Table 1.11

Corruption Perception Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Table 1.12

Gender GAP Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Table 1.13

Index of Economic Freedom 2011 and its components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Table 1.14

IPA countries and EU benchmarks – macro-economic data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Table 2.1

Schooling ratio by school year and education level (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Table 2.2

Level of internet skills of individuals (%). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Table 2.3

Share of VET enrolment in secondary education by gender (%). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Table 2.4

Student to teacher ratio by education level and programme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Table 2.5

Share of VET enrolment in secondary education by gender and region (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Table 2.6

Student to teacher ratio by education level, programme and region. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

CONTENTS 7

Table 2.7

Literacy rates by gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Table 2.8

Lifelong learning – people (25-64) participating in education and training by gender (%) . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Table 2.9

Early leavers from formal education and training by gender and employment status (%) . . . . . . . . . . 40

Table 2.10

Early leavers from education and training by gender and NUTS level 1 region (%). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Table 2.11 Mean performance in PISA 2003, 2006 and 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Table 2.12

Average performance in reading by school location, 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Table 2.13

Percentage of students in each type of secondary school by education level of parents . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Table 2.14

Perception of education quality, 2009/10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Table 2.15

IPA countries and EU benchmarks – education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Table 3.1

Working age population (15+) by labour force status and gender (million) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

Table 3.2

Working age population by age group, labour force status and gender, 2010 (million) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Table 3.3

Working age population (15+) by educational status, labour force status and gender, 2010 (million) . . . 58

Table 3.4

Activity, unemployment and employment rates (15+) by educational status and gender (%) . . . . . . . 60

Table 3.5

Activity, unemployment and employment rates by age and gender (%). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Table 3.6

Activity and employment rates (15+) – Total and female (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Table 3.7

Unemployment rates (15+) – Total, female and youth (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Table 3.8

Activity, unemployment and employment rates (15+) by region and gender (%). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

Table 3.9

Youth (15-24) activity, unemployment and employment rates by educational status and gender (%) . . . 69

Table 3.10

Employment status (15+) by gender (million) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

Table 3.11

Employment status (15+) of people not registered to any social security institution by
gender (million) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

Table 3.12 Workers’ status and social security coverage, 2010 (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Table 3.13

Employment by industrial sector (% of total employment) and share of GDP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Table 3.14

Employment by economic sector (%). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Table 3.15

Annual average gross earnings by gender and educational attainment, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

Table 3.16 Monthly average gross wage by gender, educational attainment and gender pay gap, 2006. . . . . . . . 76

Table 3.17

Number of registered unemployed by age and gender. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Table 3.18

Registered unemployment and LFS unemployment by unemployment duration and gender . . . . . . . 78

Table 3.19

Participants in active labour market measures by gender. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

Table 3.20

Turkish Employment Agency statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

Table 3.21

Activation rate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

Table 3.22

Turkey and EU benchmarks – labour market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

Table 3.23

IPA countries and EU benchmarks – labour market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

Table 4.1

Poverty rates of individuals according to poverty line methods (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Table 4.2

Poverty rates by gender and educational status of household members (%). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Table 4.3

Distribution of annual equivalised household disposable incomes by quintiles ordered by
equivalised household disposable income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

Table 4.4

GINI coefficient by region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Table 5.1

IPA component I – Transition assistance and institution building (HRD projects) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

Table 5.2

IPA component III – Regional development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

Table 5.3

IPA component IV – Human resources development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

Table 5.4

EU support in education – overview, 2006-11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

Table 5.5

International and bilateral development partners’ support – overview, 1992-2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

Table 5.6

Main ILO projects in the labour market field. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

8

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1

Turkey demographic trends, 2010-25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Figure 2.1

Turkish education system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Figure 2.2

Dropout rates by type of high school, 2008/09 (%). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Figure 2.3

Distribution of students in secondary education by type of high school (%). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Figure 2.4 Mathematics, reading and science skills of Turkish students, 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Figure 3.1

Trends in activity and employment rates (15+) – Total and female (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Figure 3.2

Trends in unemployment rates (15+) – Total, female and non-agriculture (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Figure 3.3

Employment by economic sector and gender, 2009 (1 000s). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

Figure 3.4

Comparison of unemployment data – LFS and administrative data (100s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

Figure 3.5

Annual average equivalised disposable incomes, 2009. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

Figure 3.6

NUTS 2 regions in Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

9

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This review aims to analyse how employment, social
inclusion and education and training in a lifelong learning
perspective contribute to the development of human
resources in Turkey in line with the thematic priorities of
the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) on
human resources development and the remit of the
European Training Foundation (ETF).

Turkey has a population of nearly 74 million inhabitants
and is ranked as the 17th largest economy in the world in
terms of 2010 gross domestic product (GDP), placing it
seventh in Europe excluding Russia. While the global
crisis has had a direct impact on Turkey, the country’s
economy showed considerable resilience and bounced
back with a real GDP increase of 11% in the first half of
2010. Turkey is rapidly developing an open economy
comprising modern industrial and commercial sectors
alongside a traditional agricultural base, and the nation’s
impressive economic performance in recent years
provides a strong basis for the social policies currently
being implemented.

Despite the strong economic performance of the country,
human resources development and gender equality
persist as important challenges. The United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP) Human Development
Index (HDI) places Turkey 83rd in the world ranking behind
the European Union (EU) and Western Balkan countries.
The biggest challenge facing the Turkish education
system is the provision of quality education for the entire
population in a country where teaching and learning
techniques vary considerably and within the school
system where the minority are in selective institutions
and the majority attend non-selective schools. Issues such
as gender, the rural/urban divide and social background
present persistent additional challenges that are evident in
enrolment figures, dropout numbers and graduation rates.
Illiteracy affects 6% of the population – 2.2% of men and
9.9% of women – and net enrolment in primary education
stood at 98.7% in 2011-12.

The government has recognized the challenges, outlining
strategic development goals in the Ninth Development
Plan for 2007-13. This plan establishes a vision of Turkey
with stable growth, more equitable income distribution
and increased global competitiveness as the country
transforms into an information society.

With more than 20 million students, 67,000 education
institutions and over 700,000 teaching staff, Turkey’s
education system is huge and full credit must be given to
the country for recent advances such as: the expansion of
educational coverage; progress made in modernising
curricula; free-text book provision in primary education;
reforms to secondary education and vocational education
and training, and; the introduction of the Bologna process
in higher education.

It is widely recognised that vocational high school
graduates earn higher incomes than general secondary
education graduates, and efforts to increase enrolment in
vocational and technical education have therefore been a
key policy since the 2000s. The European Commission
has supported projects to improve the quality of
vocational and technical education alongside other
initiatives by the private sector and non-profit
organisations. Lifelong learning has gained greater
credence as it has become increasingly important in
upgrading the skills of the working population, but this
sector is only in the very early stages of development.

Public funding for education is low in terms of
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) averages and is calculated simply on an input
basis, but systematic monitoring and evaluation of the
impact of ongoing reforms on learning outcomes is
needed to steer a more effective use of public funds. The
Ministry of National Education (MoNE) has plans for a
decentralization process that will provide increased
autonomy at provincial and school level. Policies related to
the selection and appointment of teachers need to be
reviewed, as do current methods of in-service training as
these practices are not conducive to the creation of
effective learning environments.

The Turkish labour market is characterised by the
underutilisation of human resources. The working age
population (15+) counts for 52.5 million out of a total
population of 73.7 million, but less than half of the
working age population is economically active – 25.6
million. Also, 71.2% of the labour force are men and only
28.8% are women. Moreover, while rural women mainly
work as unpaid family workers, the urban labour market
participation of women is only 20.2%: the lowest of all
candidate and pre-candidate countries (TurkStat, 2010).

Informal employment is another key feature present in
Turkey. Slightly less than two thirds of employed individuals
are regular or casual employees, while almost one third are
self-employed or unpaid family workers. Most of those
working in informal, precarious jobs have low educational
attainment and this widespread informal employment
deprives workers of basic social security while having
negative effects on labour productivity.

Unemployment in Turkey fell to an average of 11.9% in
2010 after peaking at 14% in 2009, although the rates
were higher for women and the youth population (Labour
Force Survey, LFS 2010). Less than half of the number of
unemployed shown in the LFS, 2010 are actually
registered as unemployed with the Turkish Employment
Agency ((cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)), and the unemployment benefit system
has low coverage with only 23.3% of the registered
unemployed receiving cash benefits ((cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) data for
2010).

10

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

Active labour market policies (ALMPs) are relatively new
in Turkey but have become increasingly important against
the backdrop of the economic crisis and given the urgent
need to reduce structural unemployment and meet new
skills shortages. Expenditures on ALMPs have traditionally
been extremely low (0.003% of GDP in 2008), but
substantial increases in 2010 and 2011 provided sufficient
funding for 15.8% of the registered unemployed to have
participated in activation measures in 2011. Vocational
training accounts for the largest proportion of ALMPs,
followed by public works, new internship schemes and
hiring incentives where employers pay reduced social
security contributions for their uptake of new employees.

The ongoing transformation of the Turkish economy
requires modernising the labour market and continuing
reform. The core challenges to its modernisation include
dealing with low activity and employment rates, especially
for women, young people and disadvantaged groups, and
reducing high levels of informality to create more and
better jobs with decent working conditions, social security
coverage and higher labour productivity.
Recommendations include a better balance between
flexibility and security – a concept known as ‘flexicurity’ –
and measures to improve matching between skills
generation and skills demands in the economy.

Turkish institutions have made progress with the fight
against poverty and social exclusion by placing particular
attention on human development, human rights, gender
equality and institutional capacity development. Poverty
has been decreased and the social integration of
vulnerable groups increased through the implementation
of strategic policies to fight poverty such as cash support
programmes, projects for universal basic education, and
the wholesale expansion of education, healthcare
coverage and unemployment insurance. Civil society
involvement has been enhanced by encouraging
institutional dialogue with marginalised groups, boosting
their participation and uptake of responsibility in policy
formulation, implementation and monitoring on both
national and regional levels. New research is contributing
to a redefinition of the poverty agenda in Turkey through
the development of rights-based approaches. However
the concepts of social inclusion, social cohesion and
equity are relatively new to the policy discourse and they
are not yet mainstreamed or explicitly referred to in the
national policy-making processes and much work remains
to be done in raising awareness of the concepts of social
inclusion, social cohesion and equity and their added value
for education and training, employment and broader social
policy making.

Smart, sustainable and inclusive economic growth in
Turkey is hampered by the restricted access and
participation of marginalised groups in education,
employment and society. Economic growth and the
adoption of aspects of economic liberalisation policies has
tended to increase polarisation, segregation and exclusion
in big cities and less developed regions, impacting on
various disadvantaged social groups by imposing stricter
market discipline on some already underprivileged
segments of society. An overarching consensus must be
achieved as a pre-condition to consistent social policies

capable of cutting across the full range of political, cultural,
religious and socio-economic issues. Efforts to combat
social exclusion and poverty in Turkey are hampered by a
somewhat segmented structure. The social inclusion
issue requires research, cooperation and coordination
between the multiple public institutions responsible for
providing services and protection for disadvantaged
people. Decision-making processes will benefit from
enhanced monitoring of outcomes and policy impact
assessments.

Social exclusion is a local and national concern and the
central institutions have a mandate to combat this at
central and regional level. National resources have been
used in the massive expansion of education, health and
employment facilities and in speeding up regional
development. This has gone some way toward
eliminating the economic and social imbalance between
regions. Institutional partnerships have boosted vertical
consultation between territorial levels and horizontal
communication between public and socio-economic
actors, leading to the formulation and implementation of
regional policies that promote multi-level governance.
These efforts and achievements have not, however, been
able to completely resolve the considerable disparities
across Turkey in terms of income, demographic structure,
physical and social infrastructure, entrepreneurship,
human resources, education level, access to health
services, environmental quality, employment and the role
of women. Central policy decisions will need to go hand in
hand with visionary mayors and governors at the regional
and local levels to address the wide range of disparities
and engage all segments of the population. Regional and
local authorities are expected to play an increasingly
important role in the equitable distribution of financial and
human resources to provide those social services which
are considered to be the unquestionable entitlement of all
citizens.

The horizontal conclusions put forward in this report are
that public funds must be geared toward policies and
strategies that promote greater social equity in education,
employment and social inclusion. A state-of-the-art
monitoring and evaluation system is of critical importance
in evaluating the impact of the various policies and
programmes.

The key recommendations for education, employment
and social inclusion proposed in this report are:

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

a well thought through decentralisation approach to
implement change in the various regions of Turkey;
a stronger focus on learning outcomes at all levels of
education to ensure Turkish youth is well prepared for
education challenges in the future. An important
additional challenge lies in continued efforts to
increase enrolment at all levels, especially for girls, on
top of effective intervention strategies to reduce
dropouts. Additional efforts to improve the quality and
labour market relevance of vocational education and
training (VET) and to position VET on an equal level
playing field with other education sub-systems remain
necessary. An intensified and coordinated effort to
promote lifelong learning from its current early stages

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11

(cid:2)

of development in Turkey is needed to carry the
concept forward, especially in the most disadvantaged
regions of the country;
an effective and coherent mix of labour market
policies to counter the under-utilisation of the labour
force, especially of young people and women, with
further strengthened institutional capacity for (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)
and upgraded ALMPs. An appropriate balance must
be found between flexibility and security in
consultation with the social partners as a key

element in the modernisation of the Turkish labour
market. A strategic and coordinated approach is
needed to anticipate skills supply and demand and
improve matching systems in order to reduce skills
mismatch;

(cid:2) efforts to overcome the varied realities and needs of

different social segments and regions within Turkey to
iron out the significant socio-economic disparities that
currently challenge policy makers and practitioners and
present an element of national concern.

13

1. POLITICAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC
BACKGROUND

1.1 EU, REGIONAL AND
NATIONAL POLITICAL
CONTEXT

The economy in Turkey is booming in spite of persistent
structural problems including extensive informality, deep
regional disparities, the prevalence of businesses with a
low return on investment activities and serious challenges
in terms of human resources development and gender
equity.

Turkey ranks 17th in the world in terms of 2010 GDP,
standing in seventh position in Europe excluding Russia,
and Turlu was one of the founder members of the OECD
and the G20. Turkey has a rapidly developing open
economy where modern industrial and commercial
sectors stand alongside traditional agriculture, and
impressive improvements in GDP over recent years (see
TABLES 1.5, 1.6 and 1.15) have provided a stronger basis
for the implementation of current social policies (Eurydice,
2010).

Turkey has a rich entrepreneurial tradition but many of the
most common business activities provide low returns.
Agriculture still accounts for 25.3% of total employment
(TurkStat, 2010b) while micro-enterprises of up to 10
employees coupled with self-employment account for the
overwhelming majority of firms, providing the largest
share of total employment but accounting for less than
10% of total value added. The most dynamic sector of the
economy lies in medium-sized enterprises (employing 10
to 249 people). Turkey also suffers from a prevalence of
informal employment, 86% of which occurs in the
agricultural sector, predominantly in Eastern Turkey (ETF,
2010).

Human resources development and gender equality
persist as important challenges for Turkey, and the
nation’s position in the global knowledge economy is also
a pressing concern. The UNDP HDI1 places Turkey 83rd in
the world behind the EU and Western Balkan countries
(see TABLE 1.9) where Turkey performs well in terms of
GDP income but lags behind on combined gross
enrolment ratios in education (UNDP, 2010a), while its
position on the gender-related HDI is far lower than for
general HDI due to the immense gender gaps in literacy
rates and combined enrolment ratios. UNESCO (2010)
links the status of women to the degree of democracy in
societies and social and child welfare, meaning this

gender differential is a point of concern for Turkey; indeed,
the World Economic Forum (WEF) Gender Gap Index2
ranked Turkey 126th in the world in 2010 (see TABLE 1.12),
far behind all of the western countries and several of the
Asian, African and Arab states (WEF, 2010b). Turkey’s
HDI outcomes are far lower than they should be in
comparison to countries of similar per capita GDP, mainly
as a result of low educational levels and high gender
inequality. On the issue of preparedness for the
knowledge economy, Turkey ranked 61st in the 2009
World Bank Knowledge Economy Index, coming in close
behind the recently improved rankings of the Gulf States
and Brazil (World Bank, 2009c). Similarly, the country
ranked 61st, behind Tunisia, Malaysia, China and India, in
the Global Competitiveness Index (WEF, 2009).

The government has recognised the challenges outlined
above and established strategic development goals
toward resolving the situation in the Ninth Development
Plan 2007-13. This plan works toward a vision of Turkey
with stable growth, more equitable income distribution
and increased global competitiveness linked to the
transformation to an information society.

The Ninth Development Plan 2007-13 lays out the Turkish
government’s development programme in three key
documents that specify overarching development goals, a
medium-term agenda for reform and specific actions and
responsibilities within the government. The Turkish
General National Assembly approved the plan in 2006 and
passed it as Law No 877. The plan aims to provide an
enhanced quality of life through an inclusive development
process based on embedded development priorities
clustered thematically around improved competitiveness
and employment, equitable human and social
development, and the efficient provision of high-quality
public services, where all of the individual elements place
emphasis on the reduction of regional differences.
Alongside this document, the government action plan
contains separate short and medium-term plans that
translate the broader objectives of the Ninth Development
Plan into specific operational actions according to the
responsibilities of individual ministries and government
agencies, while the Programme for Harmonisation with
the EU acquis provides a detailed plan outlining specific
actions to be implemented in order to fulfil the
requirements of the 35 chapters of law necessary for EU
accession.

MoNE has already initiated a number of the structural
reforms recommended under the Ninth Development

1

2

The Human Development Index (HDI) measures development by combining indicators of life expectancy at birth, adult literacy rate, gross enrolment ratio and GDP per
capita (PPP USD) into a composite index. For more information, see http://hdr.undp.org/en/humandev/hdi/

The WEF Gender Gap Index is probably the most comprehensive tool to indicate the degree of female exclusion as it measures the gap by combining four indicators:
economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment. See
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GenderGap_Report_2010.pdf for the methodology and country rankings.

14

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

Plan, changing primary and secondary education curricula
to promote learning and skills development instead of rote
learning, and introducing student-centred and interactive
teaching techniques. Mandatory secondary schooling has
been extended from three to four years including grades 9
to 12 and work is underway to divide provision between
Anatolian high schools with an emphasis on science and
foreign languages, and vocational and technical high
schools with an emphasis on work-related skills. The
range of foreign languages available has been extended
and many extra-curricular activities have been added. The
ministry has set ambitious targets for secondary
education by 2014 including: increasing gross enrolment
to 90%; reducing regional inequalities; increasing
completion to 96%; reducing dropouts to 5%; increasing
schooling for girls, and; providing free transportation in
rural and underdeveloped areas (Majcher-Teleon and
Bardak, 2011).

1.2 DEMOGRAPHIC
DEVELOPMENTS AND
TRENDS, INCLUDING
MIGRATION

The Turkish population presently has heavy weighting in
the youth category; a situation that can be viewed as
providing a window of opportunity for timely reforms to
upgrade human capital. This period will not endure
indefinitely however.

The population of Turkey is expected to grow from the
present 73.72 million to 83.6 million by 2025 (TurkStat,
2010b) and by this time the population pyramid will be
showing the initial signs of an aging population as can be
seen in FIGURE 1.1. This changing demographic picture
(see TABLES 1.1-1.3) means that providing appropriate
education for the current school-age population will
become a matter of increasing strategic importance as
time goes on.

The decline in the birth rate expected by 2025 will result in
a population profile clearly demonstrating the initial
features of an aging population by 2030. At present,
despite having a young population, Turkey has the lowest
labour force participation rate (LFPR) of all OECD
countries with male LFPR of 69.7% in April 2009 against
female LFPR of 25.5%; the lowest female LFPR in the
world for a country in this income band. The economic
crisis had pushed unemployment up to 16% in mid-2009
against only 10% in mid-2008.

1.3 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS
AND TRENDS

The global crisis initially had a heavy impact on Turkey,
bringing a peak-to-trough decline of nearly 14% of GDP;
the deepest decline of all OECD countries. However, the
Turkish economy showed considerable resilience,

bouncing back with a real GDP increase of 11% in the first
half of 2010 (OECD, 2010a).

Notwithstanding these achievements, potential growth in
Turkey is hampered by high levels of inactivity and
insufficiently broad-based productivity growth linked to
serious skills mismatches. Labour market regulations
place constraints on the capacity to create new jobs and
also provide incentives for the type of informal
arrangements that impact negatively on productivity
growth. Informal firms have restricted access to finance,
are unable to participate in innovation networks and
generally invest less in human capital. Estimates give
labour productivity in the informal sector at 80% below
the productivity expected of a fully-formal sector in a
modern economy.

Turkey’s large industrial zones provide employment for
around one million people. There are 250 areas classified
as ‘organised industrial zones’ (OIZs) across the country,
with especially extensive OIZs located in Istanbul, Izmir,
Gaziantep, Kayseri, Bursa and Eskisehir.

Annual industry and service statistics from 2009 (TurkStat,
2011d) counted 2,483,300 active enterprises, where the
bulk of Turkish economic activity came from small and
medium enterprises (SMEs) and the dominant
employment pattern was still of micro enterprises with
less than 10 workers. Consistent data on SMEs is not
available, but data on enterprises in the manufacturing and
services sector presented by the OECD in 2000 (OECD,
2004) stated that SMEs made up 99.8% of all enterprises,
provided 76.7% of total employment, produced 26.5% of
value added and took 5% of bank credits. The SME sector
suffers from insufficient know-how and a low level of
technology, specifically in information and communication
technologies (ICT). There are a number of support
schemes available for small businesses but these are
unable to plug all the gaps as any activities related to
business creation and self-employment have now been
dropped from IPA component IV and these are now only
available through the regional instruments (GTZ, 2007).
However, a World Bank project with a total budget of
USD 500 million provides financial support to SMEs and
one of the 2010 crisis measures targets artisans and
tradesmen by providing loans and grants as part of an
SME support scheme. This SME support scheme
includes extra supplements for female entrepreneurs and
aims to reach 45,000 beneficiaries (Ercan, 2011).

Employment in the industry and services sectors is not
growing strongly enough to absorb the rapid increase in
the working-age population and provide jobs for all of the
people migrating from rural areas. The consequent
employment rate barely reaches 40%, remaining the
lowest of all OECD countries. Migration to the cities and
the array of interrelated socio-economic factors involved in
the process lead women to withdraw further from the
labour-force, resulting in a female employment rate of
barely 20%. The combination of all these factors means
Turkey’s economy is at risk of becoming trapped at far
below its potential level (OECD, 2010a).

1. POLITICAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC BACKGROUND 15

TABLES AND FIGURES

FIGURE 1.1 TURKEY DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS, 2010-25

Source: TurkStat, 2010b

16

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 1.1 POPULATION, ANNUAL GROWTH RATE, NUMBER OF PROVINCES, DISTRICTS, TOWNS,
VILLAGES AND POPULATION DENSITY

Population

Population
annual
growth rate
(‰)

Number of
provinces

Number of
districts

Number of
towns and
sub-
municipalities

Number of
villages

Population
density

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

70 586 256

71 517 100

72 561 312

73 722 988

74 724 269

–

13.1

14.5

15.9

13.5

81

81

81

81

81

850

892

892

892

892

2 294

1 981

1 978

1 977

1 977

34 438

34 349

34 367

34 402

34 425

92

93

94

96

97

Note: The number and population of provinces, districts, municipalities and villages are determined by taking into account administrative
attachment and legal entity changes recorded by the General Directorate of Population and Citizenship Affairs in the National Address Database
in accordance with the related regulation and administrative registers.

Source: TurkStat, Address-based Population Registration System

TABLE 1.2 AGE DEPENDENCY RATIO (%)

Total age
dependency
ratio

Youth
dependency ratio
(0-14)

Elderly
dependency ratio
(65+)

50.4

49.5

49.2

48.9

48.4

39.7

39.3

38.8

38.1

37.5

10.7

10.2

10.5

10.8

10.9

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Source: TurkStat, Address-based Population Registration System

TABLE 1.3 LIFE EXPECTANCY AT BIRTH (YEARS)

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Total

Males

Females

72.9

70.9

75.0

73.2

71.1

75.3

73.4

71.2

75.6

73.6

71.4

75.8

73.7

71.5

76.1

73.9

71.6

76.3

74.1

71.7

76.6

Note: Demographic indicators are estimated and projected based on the 2008 Address-based Population Registration System and Population
and Health Survey.

Source: TurkStat

1. POLITICAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC BACKGROUND 17

TABLE 1.4 CRUDE RATE OF NET MIGRATION PLUS ADJUSTMENT PER 1 000 PEOPLE

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

EU-27

Montenegro

Croatia

MK

Turkey

1.5

-2.4

-11.7

-1.2

0.9(e)

1.3

-1.8

3.2

-1.3

0(e)

3.8

-1.2

1.9

-12.2

0(e)

4.2

-1.1

2.7

-1.4

0(e)

4

-0.7

2.6

-0.1

0(e)

3.1

-1.5

1.9

-0.4

0(e)

3.7

-0.4

1.6

-0.3

3.9

1.2

1.3

0.1

0(p,e)

1.3(b,e)

2.9

0.1

1.6

-0.3

1.7

1.8(p)

0

-0.3

-0.3(p)

3.3

(b) Break in series. (p) Provisional value. (e) Eurostat estimate.

Source: Eurostat

TABLE 1.5 GDP GROWTH RATES – PURCHASER'S PRICE (%)

GDP growth rates

(current prices)

(constant 1998 prices)

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Source: TurkStat

49.0

59.3

44.1

45.9

29.8

22.9

16.1

16.9

11.2

12.7

0.2

15.4

17.8

-3.4

6.8

-5.7

6.2

5.3

9.4

8.4

6.9

4.7

0.7

-4.8

9.2

8.5

18

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 1.6 GDP BASED ON PPP PER CAPITA GDP (CURRENT INTERNATIONAL USD)

GDP per capita (USD at PPP)

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

Note: Estimates start after 2009.

Source: International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, October 2010

8 122

7 845

8 169

7 748

8 224

8 705

9 844

11 006

12 107

12 901

13 124

12 466

13 392

13 880

14 402

14 982

15 641

16 349

1. POLITICAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC BACKGROUND 19

TABLE 1.7 GDP IN CURRENT PRICES BY TYPE OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY (%)

Agriculture

Industry

Services

Other

Total

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010*

(*) Nine months.

Source: TurkStat

12.9

10.7

10.8

9.4

11.4

11.1

10.7

10.6

9.4

8.5

8.5

9.1

9.5

33.7

31.0

30.0

28.5

27.9

28.0

28.0

28.0

28.2

27.8

27.2

25.1

26.0

53.3

58.1

59.1

61.9

60.6

60.7

61.2

61.2

62.2

63.5

64.1

65.5

64.3

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

TABLE 1.8 FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT (% OF GDP)

Net inflows

Net outflows

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators Database

0.31

0.37

1.71

0.47

0.56

0.71

2.08

3.80

3.41

2.50

1.28

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

0.26

0.33

0.25

0.06

0.16

0.20

0.22

0.17

0.33

0.35

0.25

20

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 1.9 HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX TRENDS

HDI rank
2010

49

51

60

64

68

71

83

Montenegro

Croatia

Serbia

Albania

Bosnia and Herzegovina

MK

Turkey

Source: UNDP, 2010a

1980

1990

1995

2000

2005

2009

2010

Value

0.755

0.768

0.769

0.690

0.720

0.752

0.765

0.767

0.719

0.733

0.735

0.647

0.633

0.670

0.700

0.716

0.719

0.698

0.709

0.710

0.634

0.660

0.678

0.697

0.701

0.467

0.552

0.583

0.629

0.656

0.674

0.679

TABLE 1.10 GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS INDEX

GCI 2010

GCI 2009

Rank

Score

Rank

Change
2009-10

49

61

77

79

88

96

102

4.36

4.25

4.04

4.02

3.94

3.84

3.70

62

61

72

84

96

93

109

13

0

-5

5

8

-3

7

Montenegro

Turkey

Croatia

MK

Albania

Serbia

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Source: WEF, 2010a

1. POLITICAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC BACKGROUND 21

TABLE 1.11 CORRUPTION PERCEPTION INDEX

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

Rank Score Rank Score Rank Score Rank Score Rank Score

Turkey

Croatia

MK

Montenegro

Serbia

Albania

Bosnia and Herzegovina

56

62

62

69

78

87

91

Kosovo

Number of countries

110

178

Source: Transparency international

4.4

4.1

4.1

3.7

3.5

3.3

3.2

2.8

61

66

71

69

83

95

99

4.4

4.1

3.8

3.9

3.5

3.2

3

58

62

72

85

85

85

92

4.6

4.4

3.6

3.4

3.4

3.4

3.2

64

64

84

84

79

105

84

4.1

4.1

3.3

3.3

3.4

2.9

3.3

60

69

105

90

111

93

3.8

3.4

2.7

3

2.6

2.9

180

180

179

163

TABLE 1.12 GENDER GAP INDEX

2010

Rank

Score

2010 rank
among
2009
countries

2009

2008

2007

2006

Rank

Score

Rank

Score

Rank

Score

Rank

Score

MK

Croatia

Albania

49

53

78

0.700

0.694

0.673

49

53

78

53

54

91

0.695

0.694

0.660

53

46

87

0.691

0.697

0.659

35

16

66

0.697

0.721

0.668

28

16

61

0.698

0.714

0.661

Turkey

126

0.588

125

129

0.583

123

0.585

121

0.577

105

0.585

Source: WEF, 2010b

22

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 1.13 INDEX OF ECONOMIC FREEDOM 2011 AND ITS COMPONENTS

Albania

BA

Croatia MK Montene-

Serbia Turkey

gro

Index of Economic
Freedom

Score 2011

Change from 2010

Business Freedom Score 2011

Change from 2010

Trade Freedom

Score 2011

Change from 2010

Fiscal Freedom

Score 2011

Change from 2010

Gov't Spending

Score 2011

Change from 2010

Monetary Freedom Score 2011

Change from 2010

64.0

-2.0

67.1

-0.9

79.8

-6.0

92.1

-0.5

68.7

-5.5

79.9

1.2

57.5

61.1

66.0

62.5

58.0

1.3

1.9

0.3

-1.1

1.1

60.4

65.2

64.6

71.3

59.0

-0.9

3.7

-0.6

1.2

0.1

86.0

87.6

83.6

83.6

75.2

5.2

-0.2

0.3

0.4

0.0

83.9

74.6

90.0

89.4

83.6

0.7

4.3

0.7

-0.6

0.4

24.1

50.3

64.3

28.6

41.9

-4.7

3.2

-1.6

-25.8

0.5

80.6

78.5

84.5

76.0

66.0

5.9

2.7

5.5

2.8

1.5

Investment Freedom Score 2011

65.0

70.0

70.0

60.0

55.0

60.0

Change from 2010

-5.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

0.0

10.0

Financial Freedom Score 2011

70.0

60.0

60.0

60.0

50.0

50.0

Change from 2010

Property Rights

Score 2011

Freedom from
Corruption

Change from 2010

Score 2011

Change from 2010

0.0

35.0

0.0

32.0

-2.0

0.0

20.0

10.0

30.0

-2.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

40.0

35.0

40.0

40.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

41.0

38.0

39.0

35.0

-3.0

2.0

5.0

1.0

Labour Freedom

Score 2011

50.4

60.2

44.1

79.7

92.3

68.9

Change from 2010

-1.7

-1.0

3.3

-3.4

5.9

-3.3

64.2

0.4

68.7

-0.2

85.4

-1.0

78.2

0.1

83.6

0.7

72.7

2.7

70.0

5.0

50.0

0.0

50.0

0.0

44.0

-2.0

39.6

-1.5

(BA) Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Source: The Heritage Foundation

1. POLITICAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC BACKGROUND 23

TABLE 1.14 IPA COUNTRIES AND EU BENCHMARKS – MACRO-ECONOMIC DATA

EU-27 EU
2020
objecti-
ves

2.1

3

30.4

1.8

1.7

(10)

24.7

(10)

73.6

(10)

Gross domestic expenditure on
research and development, % of
GDP (2009)a

GDP per capita (000 PPP)
(2010)b

GDP growth rate (2010)c

Share of agriculture as % of GDP
(2009)d

Share of industry as % of GDP
(2009)d

Share of services as % of GDP
(2009)d

(e) Estimation.

AL

BA

IS

XK ME

RS

HR MK

TR

3.1

0.02

(07)

1.2

(07)

0.3

(07)

0.8

0.2

(07)

0.9

7.5(e) 7.8(e)

36.6

10.7(e) 10.8(e) 17.7(e) 9.7(e) 15.5(e)

3.5

0.8

-3.5

4.0

1.1

1.8

-1.8

0.7

8.9

20.8

8.0

7.1

10.0

12.9

6.7

11.3

9.4

(10)

19.7

28.1

25.3

20.1

27.7

27.2

36.4

26.1

(10)

59.5

63.9

67.6

69.9

59.4

66.1

52.3

64.5

(10)

Sources: (a) EU-27, IS, HR and TR: Eurostat; BA, ME and RS: World Bank, World Development Indicators Database; MK: Eurostat, 2010;
(b) International Monetary Fund; (c) World Bank, World Development Indicators; EU-27: Eurostat; (d) EU-27: Eurostat; AL, BA, ME, RS, HR, MK
and TR: World Bank, World Development Indicators; XK: data unreliable

25

2. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES
AND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION
AND TRAINING IN A LIFELONG
LEARNING PERSPECTIVE

For Turkey to take full advantage of the demographic
window of opportunity described in Chapter 1, the country
must ensure that its young people are adequately
prepared with the skills they need to be employed in the
national and international labour markets.

The Turkish education system is huge – with more than
20 million students, 67,000 education institutions and
more than 700,000 teaching staff – and has undergone a
series of developments in the past decade. Credit is due
to the nation for both the expansion in size and progress
made in a number of teaching and learning threads, most
notably curriculum modernisation and the provision of
free-text books in primary education. The achievements
become clear when we consider that the number of
students enrolled in secondary education increased from
2,300,000 to 4,200,000 between the 2000/01 and
2009/10 academic years, while primary education
enrolment increased from 10,400,000 to 10,900,000 over
the same period (Eurydice, 2010). The overall expansion
of each level of the education system from primary to
higher education is illustrated in TABLE 2.1 which shows
the increased net enrolment ratios over this period.

These achievements are, however, counterbalanced by
problems with enrolment, dropout and graduation rates
partly related to restricted access to education due to
gender, location of residence (rural and urban) and social
background. These problems are persistent and 6% of the
population – 2.2% of men and 9.9% of women – are still
illiterate (see TABLE 2.7 for historical illiteracy figures).
Net enrolment rates in primary education settled at almost
99% for both boys and girls in 2009/10 and 2011/12 (see
Table 2.1) and there has been a steady increase in net
enrolments in secondary education up from 43.9% in
2000 to 67.4% in 2009/10 (68.5% of boys and 66.1% of
girls). By 2011/12, VET was seen to have strongly
increased its share of secondary school students, taking
44% of the total as against 56% in general secondary
education (see TABLE 2.3). Gross and net enrolment in
higher education have practically doubled since 2005, but
still only one in every six students passes the university
entrance examination to make net enrolment in higher
education of 33.1% for 2010/11 (men 33.4%, women
32.7%) (see Table 2.1). The growing participation in
secondary education is expected to exert strong and
steady pressure for the further expansion of higher
education.

A significant increase in average productivity levels will be
needed to improve Turkish living standards (as measured

by GDP per capita), coupled with on-going up-skilling of
the labour force. At present, most workers in the informal
sector have relatively little education, meaning that
significant reform will be required for the education
system to provide primary and high school graduates with
appropriate skills for the required productivity increase
(see TABLE 2.14 for an illustration of the degree of skill
mismatch). The overall educational attainment levels of
the working population in Turkey remain low in
comparison to the EU25 or other candidate countries, in
fact nearly 60% of the Turkish labour force are educated
to basic education or incomplete basic education level.

The government recognises these challenges, and
vocational and technical education has been defined as a
priority in the context of lifelong learning, with the Ninth
Development Plan (2007-13) establishing the following
reforms.

(cid:2) Article 573 – Change to a modular and flexible system
in vocational and technical education, vocational
education at the secondary and higher education level
will be integrated into a single structure with a holistic
programme, and greater weighting will be placed on
the applied education that plays an important role in
creating a qualified workforce.

(cid:2) Article 575 – Mechanisms will be developed within

the organised industrial zones to help create
environments for groups of vocational education
practices to work in collaboration with service
institutions and the private sector to meet the need for
qualified workers.

(cid:2) Article 577 – Efforts toward the development of a

national qualifications network will be completed and a
vocational structure sensitive to this system will be
developed.

The following section will present further details of efforts
undertaken to modernise the education system and will
identify the persistent challenges to be addressed a
precursor to successful implementation of the
government’s lifelong learning strategy.

2.1 INVESTMENT IN HUMAN
CAPITAL

Public spending on education in Turkey stands at about
3% of GDP as against an OECD and EU-19 average of
about 5% of GDP in 2007 (OECD, 2010b). It has,

26

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

furthermore, been argued that the OECD-average does
not in fact indicate an appropriate financing target for
Turkey given the size of the youth population in the
country (SVET, 2005) and that appropriate additional public
funding will be needed for Turkey to implement a truly
ambitious education reform programme. While public
sector spending on education is among the lowest of all
OECD countries, spending on private tuition and school
fees pushes total education spending up significantly.
Private spending at all levels of education is worth the
equivalent of more than half the total public education
budget. According to a study conducted on the basis of
data obtained through the 2006 Household Budget
Surveys (Bakis et al., 2009), private spending on education
is equivalent to 2.5% of GDP in Turkey against a rate of
only 0.7% for OECD countries (Yilmaz, 2007). The high
levels of private spending clearly demonstrate the
importance of education for households here, even if
education – as demonstrated by the levels of expenditure
– does not appear to be such a high priority for public
spending. These high levels of private spending are also
likely to increase the inequalities facing students from less
privileged socio-economic backgrounds.

Despite Turkey’s public and private financial investments
in education, visible results in terms of learning outcomes
for 15 year-old students – as measured by the OECD
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) –
still fall short in comparison to the outcomes for students
in other OECD countries (OECD, 2010c). Turkey’s overall
average score was 441 against an OECD average of 497
in 2003; 447 to an OECD average of 484 in 2006; and 464
to an OECD average of 499 in 2009 (see TABLE 2.11 for a
more detailed breakdown of the scores). The efficiency
and effectiveness of total education spending in Turkey
must be subjected to further scrutiny in order to
determine paths to improve the overall performance of
the education system.

Primary and secondary education budgets are modest,
while one third of public spending is allocated to higher
education. Annual per student expenses amounted to
USD 1,197 in 2008, but actual per-student expenditure
stood at around half that amount in some provinces,
principally in the south-eastern and eastern regions (World
Bank, 2005). Teacher salaries accounted for around 75%
of the public budget, goods and services a further 15%
and capital expenditure only 10%. In a World Bank study
from 2005 a significant persistent equity gap in primary
and secondary school spending was identified where no
attempts were made to redress inter-regional,
inter-provincial or urban-rural educational disparities
through active funding strategies, leading to the
conclusion that Turkey does not obtain results in line with
the high level of combined public and private spending on
education. Another study by the OECD in 2007 confirmed
these findings on the basis of an efficiency analysis of
public spending in primary and secondary education,
ranking Turkey below the OECD countries.

2.2 LIFELONG LEARNING
STRATEGIES, BROADENING
THE EDUCATION AND
TRAINING SUPPLY AND
RECOGNISING
QUALIFICATIONS

Turkey has adopted a Lifelong Learning Strategy Paper,
finalised by MoNE in 2009. The broad-based strategy
covers 16 priority issues for action, where Priority 7 is to
update the curriculum in line with the changing needs of
the country, and Priority 12 is the opening of transition
pathways between the types and levels of education and
between education and the world of work. Priority 12
places new emphasis on the school to business life and
business to school transitions within a lifelong learning
approach, encouraging cooperation between schools and
businesses that extends beyond the bounds of vocational
and technical education. This strategy paper (MoNE,
2009) states that Turkey is falling short of the EU target
for 12.5% of adults to participate in lifelong learning, but
also states the need for reliable data and data
management systems to be used in stocktaking and the
monitoring of future progress.

Training programmes, including classroom-based and
on-the-job vocational training, could improve skills in the
transition from school to work and could help address
concerns about skill insufficiencies raised by young people
in the ALMPs. Non-formal training of this type could be a
particularly important tool for young people and adults
entering the labour market with low or non-existent
educational preparation. Little data or analysis is available
on training outside the formal education system and the
data that is available is scarce and somewhat outdated.
The latest Turkish Statistical Institute (TUIK) data for 2002
show that non-formal vocational education accounted for
1.9% of total education expenditure, with 69% of the
budget spent in public training institutions and 31% in
private training centres.

Training is available through various public agencies and
other departments, as well as universities,
non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and private
sector providers but most of the training is provided by
MoNE and (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6). MoNE provides training through
313 vocational training centres (VTC) for apprentices and
930 public education centres (PEC) for adults. These
courses constitute a significant part of all non-formal
training in Turkey. PEC courses primarily concentrate on
traditional handcrafts of little labour market value, with
additional literacy courses in some regions. (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) offers
limited training courses primarily to those receiving
unemployment benefits. According to a European
Commission report from 2009, the share of adults (15-64)
participating in lifelong learning stood at 2.5% in Turkey,
2.0% in Croatia, 3.2% in the former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, against 9.1% in the EU-27 countries (see
TABLE 2.14). While the EU benchmark target for
participation in lifelong learning by 2010 was 12.5%, many

2. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE 27

member countries exceeded this figure, most notably:
Sweden with 32%, Denmark with 30% and Finland with
23%.

TUIK data shows trainees in private training institutions
outnumber those in public centres. However, private
training is predominantly in the form of dershanes –
private tutoring classes to prepare students for university
and college entrance exams, and driving schools. The
labour market value of these private courses is therefore
very limited and social and economic returns to education
from this investment are likely to be low, although
individual returns may be higher. The remaining private
sector provision is dominated by courses in ICT and
foreign languages.

In-house corporate training, however, is weak in Turkey.
A recent Investment Climate Assessment for Turkey
found that manufacturing firms in Turkey provide less
formal training for their workers than firms in comparator
countries (World Bank, 2008a) and a further study of
higher education and the labour market in Turkey (Ercan,
2010c) confirmed these findings on limited training.

The MoNE Strategic Plan 2010-14 mitigates against this
situation by encouraging Chambers of Commerce,
occupational associations and employer and employee
associations to create initiatives, ensure the provision of
more on-the-job training and set up training units within
enterprises. The private sector is encouraged to train the
workforce to meet labour market demands with promises
of simplified bureaucratic procedures and recognised
certificates once training is complete. The plan also
expects the number of cooperation agreements with
companies to increase, but at this point in time no specific
details have been given of the incentives that will be
introduced to achieve these goals.

For lifelong learning to become a reality, the knowledge,
skills and competences acquired outside of formal
education must be valued and recognised, and Turkey has
made some progress toward national policies on the
validation of non-formal and informal learning. Law
No 5544 of 2006 represents a significant development in
this respect, moving toward determination of the
principles of national qualifications in technical and
vocational fields and establishment of a Vocational
Qualifications Authority (VQA)3 to create and operate a
national qualifications system in accordance with the
European Qualifications Framework. The law also states
that, a document or a certificate approved by the VQA and
indicating the level of professional (technical or vocational)
competency tailored to each profession will be awarded
to individuals who are successful in the examinations.

The VQA was established in 2006 to assess and validate
the skills gained by individuals through the process of
lifelong learning. To date, one national qualification
process has been fully created, with a further 40 in the
pipeline. Occupational standards, testing and certification

3

See the VQA website at: www.myk.gov.tr/

will be performed by authorised organisations, in line with
the legal requirements, while other forms of certification
will be completed by organisations accredited by the
Turkish Accreditation Agency (TÜRKAK) or other
organisations within the European Accreditation
Association, as approved by the VQA.

While firm foundations have been laid, lifelong learning is
still in the early stages of development in Turkey and it
does not yet take place as part of an established and
structured approach. Most of the initial steps have been
taken with the support of international projects, but the
main elements are not yet organised in any usable form.
The lifelong learning targets will only be achieved with
strong political will supported by affirmative public action
including the allocation of significant additional human and
financial resources. There is currently little evidence that
learning will become a lifelong process for a significant
part of the population within the foreseeable future
(Majcher-Teleon and Bardak, 2011).

2.3 EARLY SCHOOL-LEAVERS

The percentage of 18-24 year-olds leaving education and
training early in Turkey with a maximum of lower
secondary studies declined from 48.8% in 2006 to 43.1%
in 2010 (see TABLE 2.9), but Turkey still falls short of the
EU-27 average of 14.1% and the EU2020 objective of
10% (see TABLE 2.15). The percentages of early school
leavers vary widely dependent on locality and gender (see
TABLES 2.9 and 2.10 for greater detail), but the overall
seriousness of the issue is clearly reflected in the 2010
figures, where a total of 37.8% of boys and 47.9% of girls
left school early.

Dropout rates for vocational schools are higher than those
for other high schools: during the 2008/09 academic year,
dropout rates for Anatolian science high schools stood at
0.3%, against rates of 9% for general high schools, 13%
for vocational schools for preachers and prayer leaders,
and 18% for vocational and technical high schools (ERI,
2010), as illustrated in FIGURE 2.2.

In addition, there is a high percentage of young people not
in employment education or training in Turkey. In 2009,
44.3% of the population aged 18-24 attained at most
lower secondary education and half of this group was
unemployed. In 2010, 37% of female early school leavers
and 25.5 % of their male peers were unemployed. Some
32.8 % of female early school leavers expressed no
desire to work, as did 6.2 % of their male peers. These
young people run a heavy risk of becoming disengaged
from socially inclusive experiences, pushing them into
marginalisation at an early age. The high figures for
unemployed early school leavers mean dialogue and
policy making are urgently needed to improve teaching
and learning conditions with special emphasis on region-
and gender-specific issues, and the education of girls in
particular.

28

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

2.4 ACCESS TO SECONDARY
AND POST-SECONDARY
VOCATIONAL EDUCATION
AND TRAINING AND QUALITY
OF PROVISION

Vocational high school graduates earn higher wages than
the illiterate, primary and general secondary education
graduates (Taymaz, 2010) and despite all the setbacks and
inefficiency problems, vocational education appears to
offer some advantages in terms of labour market
outcomes (Tunali, 2003b). VET particularly pays off for
women, making them more likely to be employed,
although the rate does depend on the type of occupational
skills acquired. Vocational education also offers some
protection against unemployment for both sexes in urban
areas and for men in rural areas (ibid.).

Efforts to increase enrolment in vocational and technical
education have been a cornerstone of policy since the
2000s. Projects have been undertaken to improve the
quality of vocational and technical education with the
support of the European Commission, alongside initiatives
from the private sector and non-profit organisations that
aim to increase the demand for vocational and technical
schools.

Direct transfers from high school to two-year higher
vocational schools (Level 5 post-secondary education
programmes) have also contributed to the popularity of
vocational and technical education, and this stream is
currently selected by 46% of boys and 40% of girls.
When compared with figures for the EU-274, however, it
becomes apparent that the popularity of this stream lags
behind the European trend, especially for boys, as 55% of
boys and 44% of girls in the EU-27 selected vocational
education in 2009.

The large increase in enrolment numbers has led to
difficulties in meeting the physical infrastructure demands
placed upon vocational and technical high schools.

While the government has an explicit goal to encourage
greater participation in vocational-technical schools and
firms are reporting difficulties in hiring qualified technical
staff, students continue to select attendance at general
comprehensive high schools over VET schools.

The World Bank Education Sector Study (2005), the
OECD Economic Survey (2006) and the DG Enlargement
Progress Report (2010) show the biggest challenge for
the Turkish education system is to make good quality
education accessible to the whole population. Selection
examinations are held after primary school for secondary
school entrance and after secondary school to enter
university. Better-off parents pay considerable fees for
private tuition before the science or Anatolian high-school
selection exams sat by around 60% of the children in
each age cohort, and the process is repeated for the

4

Eurostat ‘School type preferences of the young population’ 2009

university entrance exams after high school. Only a very
small number of able students are able to study in these
exclusive secondary schools and most will have to attend
non-selective schools. The quality of teaching and learning
in the non-selective schools is far below world class
standard provided in the selective schools.

FIGURE 2.4 shows how the PISA 2009 findings clearly
demonstrate that reading, mathematics and science skill
levels of vocational high school students rank significantly
lower than the national average (see TABLE 2.11 for
OECD comparisons).

In addition, a study conducted by the Education Reform
Initiative (ERI, 2009) reveals that socio-economic
background plays a significant role in determining the type
of secondary education institution to be attended by a
student (the data in TABLES 2.10 and 2.12 also illustrate
this to some extent). The study shows that the places at
the Anatolian high schools tend to be filled by the most
socio-economically advantaged students, while the bulk of
students attend general high schools and the least
advantaged attend vocational schools; a pattern confirmed
by Polat (2009) with the data shown in TABLE 2.13.

The PISA 2009 index on the quality of educational
resources indicated that more resources are available to
advantaged students than disadvantaged students
(OECD, 2010c).

Educational resources continue to migrate toward the
‘higher end’ of the system, and the original concept for a
merit-based system is no longer operational as students
from higher-income families with more resources are
favoured in the selection process, raising concerns related
to both the efficiency and equity (OECD, 2006).

Turkey has a well-established career guidance system in
formal and informal education and a web-based career
guidance system is available to match student interests
and abilities to available educational offerings and career
opportunities (World Bank, 2011b). Additional guidance
services will be developed for non-formal and informal
learning settings as part of the EU-backed lifelong learning
project 2011-13 (Akkök, 2010).

2.5 LEARNING IN SCHOOLS
AND TEACHERS

A lot of emphasis is given to learning outcomes in
mathematics in primary and secondary education as a
pivot for success in future learning. At present, no
systematic information is available on the quality of
mathematics preparation for trainee primary and
secondary teachers in Turkey. Low success levels in basic
science, mathematics and theoretical classes persist in
vocational schools providing higher education (YÖK,
2006). Research conducted on vocational schools
providing higher education reveals that almost 95% of
vocational school graduates lack basic mathematical skills
(Erol and Alp, 2003). Other studies (Kayir et al., 2004)

2. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE 29

showed that students are not satisfied with the system:
48 % of vocational high school students and 58% of
students at technical schools stated that they would not
choose to attend a vocational school if they were able to
make the choice again. Many students in the last year of
schooling question whether they have the necessary skills
to practise their vocation.

In 2010, MoNE launched the Movement of Enhancing
Opportunities and Improving Technology ((cid:15)(cid:10)(cid:14)(cid:2)(cid:12)) project,
which aims to improve the technological infrastructure in
schools and encourage the use of technological tools in
education by providing schools with tablet PCs, smart
boards and electronic content. It is predicted that this
project will be implemented in three years and will cost
between TRY 1.5 and TRY 3 billion. The project offers
support to improve the technological infrastructure in all
MoNE schools, content and software support to facilitate
effective use of the infrastructure in teaching programmes
and in-service training for teachers. All of the 620,000
classrooms in pre-school, primary and secondary schools
will be provided with a laptop and means of projection,
and every school will have a ‘smart’ classroom equipped
with at least one multi-purpose copy machine, a smart
board, a digital camera and a microscopic camera.
However, comprehensive research into how technological
tools can support learning was not undertaken before the
project was initiated and no consideration was given to
growing international experience in this area either (ERI,
2011).

Teachers are the most important factor in influencing
learning outcomes within the education system, but the
2005 World Bank education sector study for Turkey
showed that very few teacher preparation programmes
actually develop the skills teachers need to engage
students and transform them into learners. Furthermore,
the in-service training seminars and workshops organised
by MoNE are relatively ineffective because they do not
provide any opportunity for practice, follow-up or
reflection. Teachers consistently view these programmes
as boring, unrelated to their needs and poorly
implemented, lacking the career planning opportunities
and other incentives required for any real reform process.
As a result, the quality of education delivered is heavily
influenced by traditional teaching and learning methods,
poorly motivated teachers, ineffective teacher training,
low quality and restricted access to teaching materials,
and poor infrastructure in some regions.

The Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS)
research conducted by the OECD in 2007-08 collected
data from around 4,000 teachers and principals employed
in secondary education in Turkey and concluded that a
new perspective is needed in teacher education. The
study results showed Turkish teachers had more limited
experience of vocational development activities than
colleagues in other participating countries. Furthermore,
the average Turkish teacher reported less perceived need
for professional development in 11 areas such as student
evaluation, class management and teaching in
multi-cultural environments, than their colleagues in other
TALIS countries. TALIS data also revealed that the type of
school leadership needed for the professional

development of teachers was not strong in Turkey, and
that policies on vocational development and in-service
training tended to concentrate on centralised practices
with a seminar model that does not allow for dialogue and
peer-learning. There is an urgent need for practices that
emphasise the importance of vocational development in
lifelong learning, allow teachers to learn from each other
and liberate them to consider needs at the local level (ERI,
2011).

Teachers must be given a leading role in the system, as
any type of reform is very unlikely to succeed if school
leaders and teachers do not support the changes. The
morale of teachers in Turkey is also a matter of concern,
and teacher pay is a major contributing factor: for while a
secondary education teacher with 15 years’ experience
earns 2.57 times the per capita income, the relatively high
starting salaries in the profession lead on to the lowest
maximum salaries of all OECD countries. These factors,
coupled with potential resistance to change and the lack
of rewards offered, show that problems continue to blight
the system despite recent reforms to improve education
quality.

2.6 ACCESS TO AND QUALITY
OF HIGHER EDUCATION

Access to university education for students from
vocational schools was subject to discriminatory practices
until 2011 as their scores in the university entrance
examination were multiplied by a negative coefficient,
while the scores for students from selective secondary
schools were multiplied by a positive coefficient. The
penalty coefficient had been introduced by the Turkish
Higher Education Council in 1999, mainly as a device to
discourage enrolment of students in religious schools (the
Imam Hatip schools) that are considered as vocational
schools. The role of courses based on religion in the
public schools in Turkey is a politically and socially
sensitive issue that requires further discussion and a
productive consensus. The penalty coefficient was finally
abolished in November 2011 after many years of debate
in a move widely interpreted as a major step toward an
even level playing field for vocational education.

Turkey has continued to expand university provision with
the inauguration of eight new private universities, bringing
the total to 162 establishments. These universities vary
considerably in terms of staffing and infrastructure. Also,
712 Turkish institutions offer two-year post-secondary
vocational courses for students, most of whom select this
option when they fail to get a place on a university
programme.

Progress has been made in higher education with the
introduction of a qualifications framework and learning
outcome approach. The Bologna Process has been the
top priority on the Higher Education Council agenda since
Turkey first became involved in the process in 2001, and
Turkey is now well-advanced in implementing the Bologna
process recommendations: the Council has translated the
eight reference levels of the EQF into general descriptors

30

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

for Higher Education qualifications and a 2011-13 project
backed by the EU will support the Council in establishing
an autonomous Quality Assurance and Accreditations
Agency in line with European best practices (European
Commission, 2011a).

Secondary VET education feeds into the two-year higher
vocational programmes in higher education (ISCED 4
and/or 5B) and the vocational component at tertiary level
has expanded as the demand for higher education has
increased. The role of the Higher Education Council
(YÖK) in formal vocational education has grown
accordingly. There are around 450 post-secondary
vocational schools (MYOs) in Turkey, most of which
operate within the public university system5. However,
unofficial estimates state that almost 40% of VET
students are given no opportunity for practical training in
enterprises and the situation is even worse for MYO
students who are looked upon as a poorly-educated
second-class choice by employers. In theory, MYOs are
supposed to respond to local and regional needs for
education and training, but, in fact, they continue to
represent the weakest point in the system, although
many new initiatives are currently being implemented.
Many MYOs are poorly equipped and the type of MYO
available in a given region will often not be adequately
matched to essential local needs; professional
organisations are rarely involved in designing or
restructuring the curricula and many faculties do not have
staff with recent industrial experience (Mikhail, 2006).

Despite all the challenges, a World Bank study on higher
education and the labour market in Turkey (2008b)
produced estimates of returns to post-secondary
education that found positive returns for MYO graduates
and university students in particular. The fact that returns
to education are still rising, shows that labour demand has
become more skills-intensive. These increasing returns
refute the notion popularly held in Turkey that labour
demand for highly-skilled workers is weak
(Majcher-Teleon and Bardak, 2011).

2.7 INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS
IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING

The fragmentation of education policy making between
MoNE and the Higher Education Council generally has
eroding effects on secondary education. The university
entrance examination administered by the Higher
Education Council has a negative influence, creating an
incentive for students to skip secondary school classes in
order to prepare for this exam.

Examinations at the end of primary and secondary school
are focused almost entirely on student selection of for the
next step on the education ladder on the basis of
academic ability. This perspective means the tests fail to
provide any indication of the levels of knowledge and
competencies acquired by students; information that
would dramatically increase the broader relevance of this
examination in other areas of life including the labour
market (ERI, 2011c).

MoNE has implemented a number of reform projects to
improve the education system in the last decade, using
donor funding from entities such as the EU, World
Bank, UNDP and the United Nations Children’s Fund
(Unicef).

Other examples of support for education reform can be
seen in: the MoLSS Human Resources Development
Operational Plan prepared under the EU Instrument for
Pre-accession Assistance (IPA); MoNE reforms to primary
education and projects such as the Lifelong Learning
Strategy, Strengthening Vocational Education and
Training, and the Human Resources
Development-Vocational Education and Training initiatives,
and; ALMPs implemented by (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6). Turkey’s inclusion in
the ‘Bologna Process’6 within the EU accession process,
and its corresponding entry into the European Higher
Education Area, create incentives for improvement and
reform of the education and training system and also
present a move toward better quality standards
(Majcher-Teleon and Bardak, 2011). The voluntary
cooperation framework presented for VET within the
‘Copenhagen Process’7 has similar impacts.

An EU-funded MoNE Capacity Building project (MEBGEP)
was completed in 2010 and a draft new Law on ministry
structure was put forward in the 2010 Green Paper along
with recommendations for decentralisation with a distinct
role for provinces government and school boards.

The new governance model suggested in the Green
Paper recommended reducing the sixteen Directorate
Generals within MoNE to five, cutting the number of
central organisational entities involved in policy making
and monitoring, and promoting a province-centred model
to bolster provincial directorates for national education as
administrations with special decentralized budgets.

Dialogue on the role of school boards was opened in 2010
and MoNE restructuring began in the autumn of 2011 as
positive signs of change, but the proposed governance
reform will require a continuous participatory process in
order for implementation of the reform agenda to be
successful at all levels.

5

6

7

University education is in high demand in Turkey due to the large size of the youth cohort and securing a place at university is an extremely competitive process with a
centralised student placement exam. The Higher Education Council (YOK) listed the total number of universities at 154 in 2010 (102 State universities and 52 private
universities) including two-year MYO courses (see www.yok.gov.tr/). However, there is ongoing debate on problems with the quality of provision at most new
universities (both public and private) in the last decade due to insufficient preparation of the infrastructure and teaching staff.

The Bologna Process is the process to create the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) based on cooperation between ministries, higher education institutions,
students and staff from 46 countries, with the participation of international organisations. The three objectives of the process are: easily readable and comparable
degrees organised in a three-cycle structure (bachelor-master-doctorate); quality assurance standards and guidelines; and fair recognition of foreign degrees and other
higher education qualifications in accordance with the Council of Europe and UNESCO recognition Convention.

The Copenhagen process is a voluntary cooperation framework in vocational education and training (VET) through: a single framework for transparency; quality assurance
in VET; a credit transfer system, and; validation of non-formal learning within EU member states and candidate countries.

2. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE 31

TABLES AND FIGURES

FIGURE 2.1 TURKISH EDUCATION SYSTEM

Note: In 2011 important reforms were introduced in education. An amendment to the Turkish Education Law (N° 222) was enacted in
April 2012. One key element is the extension of compulsory education from 8 to 12 years, following a 4+4+4 instead of the traditional 8+4
system. The law allows for more flexibility to choose among different school types at lower secondary level (general or vocational schools or
Imam Hatip schools for children from families with a religious inclination).These changes have not been discussed in detail in this report.

Source: Ministry of National Education, 2011

32

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 2.1 SCHOOLING RATIO BY SCHOOL YEAR AND EDUCATION LEVEL (%)

Schooling
ratio

Primary education(1)

Secondary education

Higher education

Total Males Females Total Males Females Total Males Females

2000/01(2)

Gross

100.9

106.3

Net

95.3

99.6

2001/02(2)

Gross

99.5

104.2

Net

92.4

96.2

2002/03(2)

Gross

96.5

100.9

Net

91.0

94.5

2003/04(2)

Gross

96.3

100.3

Net

2004/05(2)

Gross

Net

2005/06(2)

Gross

Net

2006/07(2)

Gross

Net

90.2

95.7

89.7

95.6

89.8

96.3

90.1

93.4

99.5

92.6

98.8

92.3

99.2

92.2

95.3

90.8

94.5

88.5

91.9

87.3

92.1

86.9

91.9

86.6

92.2

87.2

93.4

87.9

2007/08(3)

Gross

104.5

106.4

102.6

Net

97.4

98.5

96.1

2008/09(3)

Gross

103.8

104.9

102.7

Net

96.5

97.0

96.0

2009/10(3,4) Gross

106.5

107.1

105.9

Net

98.2

98.5

97.8

2010/11(3)

Gross

107.6

107.4

107.8

Net

98.4

98.6

98.2

2011/12(3)

Gross

108.4

108.2

108.7

Net

98.7

98.8

98.6

61.0

43.9

67.9

48.1

80.8

50.6

81.0

53.4

80.9

54.9

85.2

56.6

86.6

56.5

87.6

58.6

76.6

58.5

84.2

65.0

89.7

66.1

92.6

67.4

69.7

48.5

76.9

53.0

93.4

55.7

90.7

58.0

90.3

59.1

95.1

61.1

96.2

60.7

94.0

61.2

81.0

60.6

89.1

67.6

94.4

68.2

95.7

68.5

51.8

39.2

58.4

43.0

67.5

45.2

70.8

48.5

71.1

50.5

74.9

52.0

76.7

52.2

80.7

55.8

72.0

56.3

79.0

62.2

84.7

63.9

89.3

66.1

22.3

12.3

23.4

13.0

27.1

14.7

28.2

15.3

30.6

16.6

34.5

18.9

36.6

20.1

38.2

21.1

44.3

27.7

53.4

30.4

58.5

33.1

–

–

25.5

13.1

26.6

13.8

31.0

15.7

32.2

16.6

34.8

18.0

38.8

20.2

41.1

21.6

42.6

22.4

49.1

29.4

58.1

31.2

62.7

33.4

–

–

18.8

11.4

20.0

12.2

23.0

13.5

23.9

13.9

26.6

15.1

29.9

17.4

31.9

18.7

33.6

19.7

39.3

25.9

48.5

29.5

54.0

32.7

–

–

Notes:
(1) Compulsory education was expanded to eight years with law No 4306 dated 18 August 1997 as of 1997/98 school year.
(2) Schooling ratios for the year 1997 and onwards were calculated according to the latest population projection based on the results of General
Population Census 2000.
(3) Schooling ratios as of the 2007/08 school year were calculated according to the results of the Address-based Population Register System
Population Census.
(4) 98,708 persons aged 6-13 who are in the compulsory education age and completed compulsory education are not included in the primary
education net schooling ratio of 2009/10 due to the methodology used.
Gross schooling ratio is obtained by dividing the total number of students in a specific level of education by the population in the theoretical age
group.
Net schooling ratio is obtained by dividing the number of students of a theoretical age group enrolled in a specific level of education by the
population in that age group.

Source: National Education Statistics, Formal Education 2000-12

2. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE 33

TABLE 2.2 LEVEL OF INTERNET SKILLS OF INDIVIDUALS* (%)

2007

2010

All individuals

With no or low formal education

With medium formal education

With high formal education

16-24

With no or low formal education

With medium formal education

With high formal education

25-34

35-44

45-54

25-54

With no or low formal education

With medium formal education

With high formal education

55-74

With no or low formal education

With medium formal education

With high formal education

(*) Individuals who have used a search engine to find information.

Source: Eurostat

13

5

26

41

16

9

24

26

16

15

10

14

5

30

46

3

1

8

25

37

21

68

81

61

50

81

89

50

34

21

37

17

65

83

6

2

18

47

34

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 2.3 SHARE OF VET ENROLMENT IN SECONDARY EDUCATION BY GENDER (%)

Secondary
education

General
high school

Vocational and technical
high school

Total

Males

Females

Total

Males

Females

Total

Males

Females

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

65

67

65

64

64

63

61

59

57

56

56

62

65

62

60

61

60

58

57

55

54

54

68

71

69

68

68

67

64

62

59

59

58

35

33

35

36

36

37

39

41

43

44

44

38

35

38

40

39

40

42

43

45

46

46

32

29

31

32

32

33

36

38

41

41

42

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

2009/10

2010/11

2011/12

Source: National Education Statistics, Formal Education 2000-12

TABLE 2.4 STUDENT TO TEACHER RATIO BY EDUCATION LEVEL AND PROGRAMME

Pre-primary
education

Primary
education

Secondary education

Total

General high
school

Vocational and
technical high
school

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

2009/10

2010/11

2011/12

17.7

21.2

19.7

19.6

26.3

25.9

27.1

27.4

23.0

23.1

21.0

28.1

27.7

27.3

26.3

27.4

26.9

24.4

23.6

22.5

21.8

21.3

17.8

21.9

20.4

18.1

17.6

18.0

17.0

19.5

20.5

21.3

20.2

23.0

26.4

24.7

20.8

20.2

20.7

18.6

21.1

21.6

22.6

21.7

12.5

16.2

15.4

14.8

14.3

14.8

14.9

17.6

19.2

19.9

18.5

Source: National Education Statistics, Formal Education 2000-12

2. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE 35

TABLE 2.5 SHARE OF VET ENROLMENT IN SECONDARY EDUCATION BY GENDER AND REGION (%)

Total secondary education

General

Vocational and technical

Total Males Females Total Males Females Total Males Females

2007/08

Turkey

Istanbul

West Marmara

Aegean

East Marmara

West Anatolia

Mediterranean

Central Anatolia

West Black Sea

East Black Sea

Northeast Anatolia

Centraleast Anatolia

Southeast Anatolia

2008/09

Turkey

Istanbul

West Marmara

Aegean

East Marmara

West Anatolia

Mediterranean

Central Anatolia

West Black Sea

East Black Sea

Northeast Anatolia

Centraleast Anatolia

Southeast Anatolia

2009/10

Turkey

Istanbul

West Marmara

Aegean

East Marmara

West Anatolia

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

61

61

55

57

49

63

67

60

56

50

67

73

75

59

60

54

55

47

60

64

58

53

48

65

69

73

57

59

51

52

46

57

58

60

49

51

45

59

63

56

50

46

66

73

77

57

60

48

50

43

57

60

54

48

45

64

70

76

55

59

46

47

42

54

64

62

62

63

55

67

71

65

63

55

68

72

71

62

61

60

60

52

64

68

63

59

52

65

67

69

59

60

58

58

50

61

39

39

45

43

51

37

33

40

44

50

33

27

25

41

40

46

45

53

40

36

42

47

52

35

31

27

43

41

49

48

54

43

42

40

51

49

55

41

37

44

50

54

34

27

23

43

40

52

50

57

43

40

46

52

55

36

30

24

45

41

54

53

58

46

36

38

38

37

45

33

29

35

37

45

32

28

29

38

39

40

40

48

36

32

37

41

48

35

33

31

41

40

42

42

50

39

36

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

Total secondary education

General

Vocational and technical

Total Males Females Total Males Females Total Males Females

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

60

54

50

46

61

65

72

56

59

50

50

45

57

59

53

50

45

61

64

72

56

59

51

51

46

57

57

53

50

46

60

61

70

57

50

45

42

60

67

76

54

59

44

45

41

54

56

49

45

41

60

65

75

54

59

45

47

42

55

55

50

45

42

60

62

73

64

59

56

50

62

63

68

59

60

57

56

50

60

63

58

55

49

61

62

67

58

59

57

56

50

59

60

57

55

49

60

59

65

40

46

50

54

39

35

28

44

41

50

50

55

43

41

47

50

55

39

36

28

44

41

49

49

54

43

43

47

50

54

40

39

30

43

50

55

58

40

33

24

46

41

56

55

59

46

44

51

55

59

40

35

25

46

41

55

53

58

45

45

50

55

58

40

38

27

36

41

44

50

38

37

32

41

40

43

44

50

40

37

42

45

51

39

38

33

42

41

43

44

50

41

40

43

45

51

40

41

35

Mediterranean

Central Anatolia

West Black Sea

East Black Sea

Northeast Anatolia

Centraleast Anatolia

Southeast Anatolia

2010/11

Turkey

Istanbul

West Marmara

Aegean

East Marmara

West Anatolia

Mediterranean

Central Anatolia

West Black Sea

East Black Sea

Northeast Anatolia

Centraleast Anatolia

Southeast Anatolia

2011/12

Turkey

Istanbul

West Marmara

Aegean

East Marmara

West Anatolia

Mediterranean

Central Anatolia

West Black Sea

East Black Sea

Northeast Anatolia

Centraleast Anatolia

Southeast Anatolia

Source: National Education Statistics, Formal Education 2007-12

2. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE 37

.

3
1
2

.

2
8
2

.

2
8
1

.

9
7
1

.

5
0
2

.

4
9
1

.

4
0
2

.

0
8
1

.

3
7
1

.

6
6
1

.

1
0
2

.

4
1
2

.

8
6
2

.

8
1
2

.

7
8
2

.

7
8
1

.

3
8
1

.

6
0
2

.

0
0
2

.

1
1
2

.

4
8
1

.

4
7
1

.

9
6
1

.

6
0
2

.

3
3
2

.

6
7
2

.

5
2
2

.

4
9
2

.

0
9
1

.

1
9
1

.

8
1
2

.

6
0
2

.

1
2
2

.

5
8
1

.

7
7
1

.

9
6
1

.

3
1
2

.

8
3
2

.

6
8
2

.

6
3
2

.

9
0
3

.

8
9
1

.

9
9
1

.

1
3
2

.

1
1
2

.

9
2
2

.

5
9
1

.

8
8
1

.

1
8
1

.

6
3
2

.

4
5
2

.

8
0
3

4
.
4
2

3
.
2
3

8
.
0
2

1
.
1
2

2
.
4
2

0
.
2
2

7
.
3
2

4
.
0
2

6
.
9
1

8
.
8
1

5
.
2
2

6
.
5
2

9
.
0
3

1
2

4
1

9
1

2
2

1
2

6
1

7
2

2
2

1
2

2
2

9
1

3
2

7
2

3
2

8
1

0
2

5
2

2
2

8
1

7
2

4
2

1
2

3
2

1
2

7
2

7
2

3
2

1
2

8
1

2
2

4
2

7
1

5
2

4
2

1
2

3
2

4
2

6
2

9
2

7
2

0
2

0
2

6
2

0
3

7
1

8
2

2
3

0
3

8
3

5
3

8
3

4
4

7
2

9
1

4
2

3
2

8
2

9
1

7
2

3
3

0
3

1
3

6
3

1
4

7
4

2
1
/
1
1
0
2

1
1
/
0
1
0
2

0
1
/
9
0
0
2

9
0
/
8
0
0
2

8
0
/
7
0
0
2

2
1
/
1
1
0
2

1
1
/
0
1
0
2

0
1
/
9
0
0
2

9
0
/
8
0
0
2

8
0
/
7
0
0
2

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
P

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
p
-
e
r
P

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
e
W

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
a
E

n
a
e
g
e
A

y
e
k
r
u
T

l

u
b
n
a
t
s
I

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
e
W

n
a
e
n
a
r
r
e
t
i
d
e
M

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

l

a
r
t
n
e
C

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
e
W

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
a
E

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
r
o
N

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

l

t
s
a
e
a
r
t
n
e
C

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
u
o
S

I

N
O
G
E
R
D
N
A
E
M
M
A
R
G
O
R
P

I

I

,
L
E
V
E
L
N
O
T
A
C
U
D
E
Y
B
O
T
A
R
R
E
H
C
A
E
T
O
T
T
N
E
D
U
T
S
6
.
2
E
L
B
A
T

38

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

d
n
a

l
a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

d
n
a

l
a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

d
n
a

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

d
n
a

l

a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

d
n
a

l
a
c
i
n
h
c
e
t

l
a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l
a
r
e
n
e
G

l
a
t
o
T

l
a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l
a
r
e
n
e
G

l
a
t
o
T

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

a
r
e
n
e
G

l

a
t
o
T

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

a
r
e
n
e
G

l

a
t
o
T

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l
a
r
e
n
e
G

l
a
t
o
T

2
1
/
1
1
0
2

1
1
/
0
1
0
2

0
1
/
9
0
0
2

9
0
/
8
0
0
2

8
0
/
7
0
0
2

.

5
8
1

.

2
6
2

.

0
6
1

.

6
6
1

.

9
8
1

.

5
5
1

.

4
8
1

.

7
5
1

.

4
5
1

.

4
6
1

.

6
8
1

.

5
8
1

.

5
2
2

.

7
1
2

.

0
7
2

.

9
6
1

.

9
7
1

.

1
0
2

.

7
9
1

.

2
0
2

.

9
8
1

.

6
7
1

.

8
6
1

.

1
2
2

.

5
2
2

.

5
2
3

.

2
0
2

.

7
6
2

.

4
6
1

.

2
7
1

.

5
9
1

.

7
7
1

.

4
9
1

.

3
7
1

.

5
6
1

.

6
6
1

.

5
0
2

.

8
0
2

.

7
8
2

.

9
9
1

.

3
8
2

.

1
7
1

.

0
8
1

.

8
0
2

.

8
6
1

.

9
9
1

.

7
6
1

.

4
6
1

.

6
7
1

.

9
8
1

.

3
0
2

.

2
4
2

.

6
2
2

.

5
8
2

.

4
7
1

.

4
8
1

.

8
0
2

.

4
0
2

.

1
1
2

.

9
8
1

.

0
8
1

.

1
7
1

.

8
3
2

.

0
5
2

.

0
4
3

.

3
1
2

.

4
8
2

.

3
7
1

.

2
8
1

.

8
0
2

.

7
8
1

.

6
0
2

.

8
7
1

.

2
7
1

.

4
7
1

.

6
1
2

.

1
3
2

.

5
0
3

2
.
9
1

2
.
7
2

5
.
6
1

9
.
6
1

7
.
0
2

2
.
5
1

6
.
9
1

1
.
6
1

1
.
6
1

8
.
6
1

8
.
8
1

8
.
0
2

5
.
4
2

6
.
1
2

3
.
6
2

9
.
7
1

2
.
8
1

7
.
0
2

0
.
9
1

8
.
0
2

1
.
8
1

4
.
7
1

9
.
6
1

6
.
2
2

2
.
4
2

7
.
1
3

5
.
0
2

7
.
6
2

2
.
7
1

5
.
7
1

7
.
0
2

2
.
7
1

3
.
0
2

2
.
7
1

7
.
6
1

9
.
6
1

0
.
1
2

9
.
2
2

3
.
9
2

6
.
7
1

8
.
4
2

4
.
5
1

5
.
5
1

3
.
9
1

7
.
3
1

2
.
7
1

6
.
4
1

5
.
4
1

4
.
6
1

3
.
8
1

9
.
9
1

9
.
3
2

1
.
1
2

7
.
5
2

6
.
7
1

6
.
7
1

4
.
0
2

8
.
8
1

4
.
0
2

9
.
7
1

6
.
6
1

7
.
6
1

6
.
3
2

1
.
4
2

0
.
1
3

5
.
9
1

3
.
5
2

5
.
6
1

6
.
6
1

8
.
9
1

3
.
6
1

1
.
9
1

3
.
6
1

6
.
5
1

6
.
6
1

4
.
1
2

6
.
2
2

8
.
8
2

9
.
4
1

1
.
1
2

0
.
3
1

6
.
3
1

3
.
6
1

5
.
1
1

6
.
4
1

5
.
2
1

2
.
2
1

9
.
3
1

2
.
5
1

5
.
6
1

6
.
9
1

6
.
8
1

0
.
2
2

7
.
5
1

7
.
5
1

5
.
8
1

9
.
6
1

4
.
8
1

1
.
6
1

1
.
5
1

1
.
5
1

4
.
1
2

8
.
1
2

2
.
6
2

0
.
7
1

7
.
1
2

4
.
4
1

7
.
4
1

3
.
7
1

4
.
4
1

9
.
6
1

4
.
4
1

6
.
3
1

5
.
4
1

8
.
8
1

1
.
0
2

1
.
4
2

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
d
n
o
c
e
S

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
e
W

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
a
E

n
a
e
g
e
A

y
e
k
r
u
T

l

u
b
n
a
t
s
I

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
e
W

n
a
e
n
a
r
r
e
t
i
d
e
M

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

l

a
r
t
n
e
C

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
e
W

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
a
E

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
r
o
N

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

l

t
s
a
e
a
r
t
n
e
C

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
u
o
S

2
1
-
7
0
0
2
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E

l

a
m
r
o
F
,
s
c
i
t
s
i
t
a
t
S
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

:
e
c
r
u
o
S

2. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE 39

TABLE 2.7 LITERACY RATES BY GENDER

Census year

Total

Female

Male

1935

1940(1)

1945(2)

1950(3)

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

2000

2007(4)

2008(4)

2009(4)

2010(4)

80.8

75.5

69.8

67.5

59.0

60.5

51.2

43.8

36.3

32.5

22.6

19.5

12.7

8.1

7.7

7.1

6.0

90.2

87.1

83.2

80.6

74.4

75.2

67.2

58.2

49.5

45.3

31.8

28.0

19.4

12.9

12.3

11.5

9.9

70.7

63.8

56.3

54.5

44.1

46.4

35.9

29.7

23.8

20.0

13.5

11.2

6.1

3.4

3.1

2.8

2.2

Notes: (1) 1940 data estimated on the basis of 1935 and 1945 data. (2) Population aged seven years and over. (3) Population aged five years
and over. (4) Address-based Population Registration System.

Source: TurkStat Population Census

TABLE 2.8 LIFELONG LEARNING – PEOPLE (25-64) PARTICIPATING IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING BY
GENDER (%)

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

1.8

2.1

1.5

1.5

1.8

1.3

1.9

2.1

1.6

2.3

2.4

2.1

2.5

2.6

2.4

Total

Male

Female

Source: Eurostat

40

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 2.9 EARLY LEAVERS FROM FORMAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING* BY GENDER AND
EMPLOYMENT STATUS (%)

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total

Total

Employment

Non employment

Want to work (whether seeking
employment or not)

Does not want to work

Male

Total

Employment

Non employment

Want to work (whether seeking
employment or not)

Does not want to work

Female

Total

Employment

Non employment

Want to work (whether seeking
employment or not)

48.8

19.3

29.4

6.0

23.4

41.3

28.1

13.2

8.0

5.2

55.6

11.4

44.2

4.2

46.9

18.2

28.7

5.7

22.9

39.0

26.4

12.6

7.7

4.8

54.1

10.8

43.3

3.9

45.5

17.8

27.8

5.7

22.0

37.9

25.3

12.6

7.7

5.0

52.5

11.0

41.5

4.0

44.3

16.7

27.6

7.1

20.5

37.9

23.7

14.2

9.7

4.5

50.2

10.3

39.9

4.7

43.1

17.7

25.3

6.2

19.2

37.8

25.2

12.6

8.4

4.2

47.9

10.9

37

4.2

Does not want to work

40.0

39.4

37.6

35.1

32.8

(*) Early leavers from education and training (formerly ‘early school leavers’) denotes the percentage of the population aged 18-24 having
attained at most lower secondary education and not being involved in further education or training. The numerator of the indicator refers to
persons aged 18-24 who meet the following two conditions: (i) the highest level of education or training they have attained is ISCED 0, 1, 2 or
3c short; and (ii) they have not received any education or training in the four weeks preceding the survey. The denominator in the total
population consists of the same age group, excluding respondents who have not answered the questions ‘highest level of education or training
attained’ and ‘participation to education and training’.

Source: Eurostat

2. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE 41

TABLE 2.10 EARLY LEAVERS FROM EDUCATION AND TRAINING BY GENDER AND NUTS LEVEL 1
REGION (%)

2008

2009

2010

Total Male

Female

Total Male

Female

Total Male

Female

45.5

39.4

32.6

41.5

38.5

33.0

47.5

47.8

49.4

36.8

59.4

56.1

70.0

37.9

35.3

29.7

36.7

32.5

29.3

40.4

41.3

39.4

28.2

40.9

40.0

56.6

52.5

43.5

35.5

46.5

44.2

36.5

53.6

53.4

57.6

45.0

72.1

68.9

81.1

44.3

37.7

31.7

41.1

37.3

31.1

45.7

47.4

47.4

37.5

59.4

57.0

65.8

37.9

35.6

29.0

37.0

31.1

26.9

38.8

43.6

38.6

33.3

45.3

41.8

53.4

50.2

39.6

34.4

45.1

42.8

35.0

52.2

51.2

54.5

41.7

69.9

69.9

76.8

43.1

37.8

39

35.7

39

35.4

32.2

42.5

42.4

45.2

36.8

58.1

57.9

60.0

37

33.6

37.8

29.9

29.1

36.2

38.3

39.1

30

46.8

46.1

50.3

47.9

40.9

38

40.1

40.7

35.1

48.6

45.9

50.5

43.9

67

67.5

68.3

Turkey

Istanbul

Bati Marmara

Ege

Dogu Marmara

Bati Anadolu

Akdeniz

Orta Anadolu

Bati Karadeniz

Dogu Karadeniz

Kuzeydogu Anadolu

Ortadogu Anadolu

Güneydogu Anadolu

Source: Eurostat

FIGURE 2.2 DROPOUT RATES BY TYPE OF HIGH SCHOOL, 2008/09 (%)

Source: ERI, 2010

42

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 2.11 MEAN PERFORMANCE IN PISA 2003, 2006 AND 2009*

2003

Total

Boys

2006

Girls

Total

Boys

2009

Girls

Total

Reading scale

Turkey

OECD average

Mathematics scale

Turkey

OECD average

Science scale

Turkey

OECD average

441

497

423

500

–

–

427

495

427

489

418

492

471

502

421

478

430

490

447

484

424

484

424

491

443

474

451

496

448

501

486

513

440

481

460

501

464

499

445

488

454

501

(*) Turkey did not participate in 2000.

Source: OECD, 2010c; 2006 and 2009 gender details come from OECD databases

TABLE 2.12 AVERAGE PERFORMANCE IN READING BY SCHOOL LOCATION*, 2009

Students attending schools located in a…

village, hamlet
or rural area(a)

small town(b)

town(c)

city(d)

large city(e)

Turkey

OECD average

360

467

443

482

467

495

481

509

464

503

Notes: (*) Mean score.
(a) Fewer than 3,000 people. (b) 3,000 to about 15,000 people. (c) 15,000 to about 100,000 people. (d) 100,000 to about 1,000,000 people.
(e) Over 1,000,000 people.

Source: OECD, 2010, PISA 2009 Results, Vol. II

2. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE 43

FIGURE 2.3 DISTRIBUTION OF STUDENTS IN SECONDARY EDUCATION BY TYPE OF HIGH SCHOOL (%)

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

General high school

Vocational and technical high school

31.2

34.1

36.2

36.2

40.8

42.9

68.8

65.9

63.8

63.8

59.2

57.1

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2008/09

2009/10

Source: MoNE, National Education Statistics

FIGURE 2.4 MATHEMATICS, READING AND SCIENCE SKILLS OF TURKISH STUDENTS, 2009

Vocational school score average

Turkey score average

464

454

423

415

445

394

480

460

440

420

400

380

360

340

Mathematics

Reading

Science

Source: EARGED, 2010

44

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 2.13 PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS IN EACH TYPE OF SECONDARY SCHOOL BY EDUCATION
LEVEL OF PARENTS

Science
high
school

Anatolian
high
school

Anatolian
vocational
high school

General
high
school

Vocational
high
school

Multi-
programme
high school

Total

–

2.9

2.9

20.0

5.7

0.9

17.7

9.1

35.7

8.0

2.8

27.7

14.7

28.9

10.7

4.6

29.7

20.1

28.6

5.1

2.5

40.3

26.3

23.5

3.9

7.3

46.5

21.8

18.2

4.4

4.0

32.5

20.6

26.7

5.2

68.6

28.5

15.3

11.8

3.6

1.8

10.9

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Below elementary

Elementary

Middle school

High school

Vocational school
of higher education

University

Total

Source: Polat, 2009

TABLE 2.14 PERCEPTION OF EDUCATION QUALITY, 2009/10

How well does the education system in your country meet the needs of a competitive economy?

Rank

Country

Score

Best performer

1

Singapore

Western Balkans and Turkey

37

54

59

86

89

95

102

Montenegro

Albania

Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Serbia

Croatia

Turkey

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Worst performer

139

Angola

Note: 1 = not well at all; 7 = very well.

Source: WEF, 2010a (indicators derived from the WEF Executive Opinion Survey)

6.1

4.4

3.9

3.9

3.3

3.3

3.2

3.1

2.0

2. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE 45

TABLE 2.15 IPA COUNTRIES AND EU BENCHMARKS – EDUCATION

AL

BA

IS ME

RS

HR MK

TR

EU-27

EU
2020
objecti-
ves

14.1

10

39
(08)

65.1
(07)

22.6 15.5(m)
9.2(f)

10.7
(07)

3.9(u) 15.5

43.1

33.6

40

9.1

15

17.2
(08)

2.0
(08)

40.9

22.6 17.1

15.5

25.2

2.0

3.2

2.5

90.5

≥95

54.9

95.5

29.7

50.9

54.9 22.9

14.3

19.6(1)

<15

56.6

16.8

49.5

32.9

22.5

24.5

Early school leavers (2010)a
% of 18-24 with at most lower
secondary education and not in further
education or training

Tertiary educational attainment (2010)b
% of 30-34 who have successfully
completed university or university-like
education

Lifelong learning (2010)c
% of 25-64 participating in education and
training

Four-year-olds in education (2009)d
participation rate (%)

Low performance in reading (2009)e
% of pupils with low performance in the
reading scale (level 1 or below)

(m) Male. (f) Female. (u) Unreliable. (1) EU-25

Sources: (a) EU-27, IS, HR, MK and TR: Eurostat; AL: LFS (received from the country); BA: UNDP, National Human Development Report 2007;
RS: Eurostat, 2010; ME: UNDP, National Human Development Report 2009; (b) EU-27, IS, HR, MK and TR: Eurostat; AL: LFS; (c) EU-27, IS,
HR, MK and TR: Eurostat; AL: LFS (received from the country); (d) EU-27, IS, HR, MK and TR: Eurostat; AL, ME and RS: UNESCO; (e) OECD,
PISA 2009 results: European Commission, 2011b

47

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES
AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT

The Turkish economy embarked upon the journey toward
an outward-looking, market-oriented economy some
decades ago with the modernisation of the labour market,
privatisation of state enterprises and migration from rural
areas to centres of urban growth. This transformation
process is still ongoing; a situation that flags up the need
for continuing labour market reforms and adaptation to
changing global conditions and the EU acquis.

The Turkish labour market is characterised by the
underutilisation of human resources. The working age
population (15+) totals 52.5 million out of a total population
of 73.7 million, but less than half of those in the working
age bracket – only 25.6 million – are economically active
(LFS 2010). Activity and employment rates here are among
the lowest of all OECD countries, with only Kosovo8, the
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Bosnia
Herzegovina scoring lower in the group of enlargement
countries. Moreover, while 71.2% of the labour force are
men, only 28.8% are women. Only about one quarter of
the female working-age population are in employment even
when unpaid family work in rural areas is taken into
account, while female labour market-participation in urban
areas is even lower, at 20.2% (LFS 2010).

People classed as ‘employed’ include those in waged
employment, but also high numbers of self-employed and
unpaid family workers, and a general picture of
widespread informal employment coupled with the
predominance of micro and small enterprises perpetuates
low productivity and skills demands, especially given the
low educational levels of the workforce. Demographic
pressure from a growing youth sector in the labour force
leads to high demand for new jobs; estimated at 750,000
posts per year (TOBB, 2011). In 2010, the working age
population increased by 855,000 while employment
increased by 1,317 million, leading to a decline in
unemployment from 14.0% in 2009 to 11.9% in 2010
(LFS 2010). This positive trend continued in 2011 (LFS
2011). Turkey is one of few enlargement countries to
reduce unemployment in spite of the negative impact of
the economic crisis on labour markets in 2009. Internal
migration from rural areas to urban centres and more
dynamic areas is transforming the economy, but the share
of employment in agriculture is still very high at around
25%. Finally, the most important problem related to the
youth issue lies in the high numbers of young people in
neither education nor employment; a figure that stood at
around 38% of 15-24 year-olds in 2009 (Ercan, 2010b).

The main challenges in the modernisation of the Turkish
labour market can be summarised as follows:

(cid:2)

improving low activity and employment rates, most
specifically among women, young people and
disadvantaged groups;

(cid:2)

creating more and better jobs, with decent working
conditions, social security coverage, and higher labour
productivity while tackling the large informal sector in
order to increase social security and unleash growth
potential.

Both of these challenges are intrinsically linked to the low
education level of the workforce and any substantial
improvement will be dependent upon major efforts to
increase educational levels for all, in particular through
expansion of the quality and quantity of vocational training
and improved matching between skills generation and the
skills demands of the economy.

3.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
LABOUR MARKET

Turkey ranks very low in international comparisons of
activity and employment rates, close to the levels of
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo or the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, and only Albania and Serbia have
a higher share of employment in agriculture. But the
benchmarks for unemployment are relatively better, with
total unemployment close to that of Croatia, or even the
EU average, and youth unemployment not far from EU
figures, as can be seen in TABLE 3.22 (see TABLE 3.23
for a breakdown of figures for individual IPA countries).

The trends of the last five years as displayed in
FIGURE 3.1 show relatively stable, albeit low, activity and
employment rates, where the moderate increases seen
are largely due to greater female labour market
participation, mostly through economic activity in the
informal economy rather than in waged employment.
Unemployment made a remarkable turnaround in 2010:
down to 11.9% after increasing from 11% in 2008 to 14%
in 2009. However, the 2010 rate is still higher than figures
for the period directly preceding the economic crisis, and
FIGURE 3.2 clearly shows that unemployment in the
non-agricultural sectors is higher than that in the
agricultural sector (see also TABLE 3.4 for further detail).

Structure of employment

A large part of the workforce continues to be engaged in
agriculture, as can be seen in FIGURE 3.3. This sector
accounted for 21.6% of total employment and contributed
9.3% to GDP in 2009, although official growth projections
for the coming years indicate GDP growth for industry and
services, but not for agriculture (Turkish Prime Ministry
and State Planning Organisation, 2010).

8

So-called without prejudice to position on status, and in line with UNSCR 1244 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence, hereafter ‘Kosovo’.

48

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

Distinctly low labour force participation of women

Figure 3.3 also shows the remarkable gender divide by
economic sector, where almost half of all agricultural
workers are female (46.6%), whereas they occupy only
23.7% of posts in the services sector.

The labour market participation of women in Turkey is
lower than that of all the other OECD countries, EU
member states or enlargement countries, and female
activity and employment rates have decreased continually
despite a range of favourable conditions being in place:
women are better educated, they marry later and have
fewer children (World Bank, 2009b). Long-term trends
appear to show the decrease is due to negative impacts
on the economic activity of women due to social and
economic transformation since the 1980s – for while
female employment rates have increased markedly in the
Mediterranean EU member states (Italy, Portugal, Spain
and Greece), the rate for Turkey has decreased from 30%
in 1995 to only 24.2% in 2009 for the 15-64 age group.

The complex social, cultural, economic and political
reasons for women’s low participation in the labour
market have been identified and analysed in many
different studies, and policy goals and actions to counter
the trend were defined in the National Action Plan for
Gender Equality 2008-13 and the Ninth Development
Plan. The challenge now is to implement coherent policies
and obtain suitable results, with (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) playing a key role
in promoting the employment of women.

The figures on female labour market participation are
somewhat misleading however, as the historically higher
levels of 20 years ago were largely due to their core role
as unpaid family workers in small family farms rather than
any participation in waged employment in the labour
market. Unpaid family work has decreased steadily over
the years, while waged employment has increased
insufficiently to cover the total reduction, making a
negative net impact on the overall activity rate. The
decrease in employment in agriculture is a consequence
of urbanisation, modernisation and industrialisation, but
was also further triggered by the government Agricultural
Reform Implementation Programme that reduced
subsidies for farming in several steps over the last ten
years (World Bank, 2009b, p. 16). The women who had
previously worked in small farms were unskilled in terms
of the new labour market and they largely withdrew from
the labour market once they migrated to urban areas.

There are also some obvious barriers to waged
employment for women, including low wages for
low-skilled posts, that make working economically
unviable, especially when extra costs are incurred for
childcare. This gender divide strongly marks
socio-economic and political life in all walks of life in
Turkey, where the share of women in parliament (9%)
and ministerial positions (4%) is lower than for all other
southern EU countries (UNDP, 2009). Government policy
documents such as the Ninth Development Plan and the
National Action Plan for Gender Equality emphasise the
importance of increasing female labour market
participation and even set targets to increase the

employment rate of women from 24% to 29% by 2013
and 35% by 2030. Specific measures include support for
female entrepreneurs and employment benefits in the
form of reduced social security payments for employers
for up to five years when employing women or young
people. The reduced social security contribution
programme approved in Law 5350 of 2005 contributed to
moderate net job creation in 2009, but a greater impact is
expected as the labour market recovers.

There are no consistent statistics available on the type of
work contracts issued to employees, but the Fourth
European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS) did cite that
16.6% of the total population were employed only part
time, with figures closer to 30.8% for women (Eurofound,
2007).

Status of employment and informality

According to survey data from 2005, only 21% of workers
had indefinite contracts, 9.3% had fixed-term contracts
and 68% had no contract at all (Eurofound, 2007). Of the
employed, only 60.9% were regular and casual
employees, 20.1% were self-employed and 13.6% were
unpaid family workers. This composition has remained
almost unchanged over recent years, but there is also a
clear gender divide; with far more male than female
self-employment and with unpaid family work typically
attributed to women. A large part of the employed
workforce is not registered to any social security
institution (43.3% in total are not insured, including almost
all unpaid family workers, more than two thirds of the
self-employed and a quarter of the ‘regular’ employed).
Labour law permits social security coverage for the
self-employed, but many do not pay their contributions
even though the cost of these is low (Ercan, 2010a).

There is a negative correlation between job status and
educational level, where those employed in informal,
precarious work have the lowest educational levels
(Ercan, 2010a). More than 70% of casual workers,
self-employed and unpaid family workers had levels of
education up to complete primary, but as many as 41.9%
of employers were also in this education category.
Regional differences are evident, with most informality in
the eastern provinces due to the prevalence of agriculture
and general low levels of education.

Ercan (ibid.) also estimated unregistered employment at
42%, although there is some apparent contradiction in the
reported impact of the economic crisis on informality: for
while many informal workers in the western industrial
areas lost their jobs, informal female self-employment in
urban areas and unpaid family work has increased to fill
the gap.

The main causes of informal employment, repeatedly
cited in many sources, include the relatively high levels of
minimum wages and non-wage labour costs and the
rigidity of labour legislation on issues such as severance
payments and restrictions on temporary work (World
Bank, 2010b). Supply-side labour market issues also make
an impact, including the rather generous retirement
provisions and early retirement ages that encourage many

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 49

‘young’ pensioners to continue working in the informal
sector. It is estimated that around 4.2 million of the 7.2
million retired people in Turkey (58%) continue to work
after retirement, currently accounting for 17% of the
working population (Majcher-Teleon and Bardak, 2011).
This group represents an important resource for the
informal economy, as these people already have social
security coverage and do not need to pay additional
contributions.

education, employment nor training (NEET) and the high
unemployment rate among young higher education
graduates is especially worrying at 32.5%, with rates of
36.5% for female graduates. This raises the question of
whether specific measures targeted on highly-skilled
women should be considered. High school graduates are
also disproportionally affected by unemployment in
comparison with other educational groups (21.7% in total,
31.8% for women) (LFS 2010).

The high share of informal employment represents an
impediment to the sustainable operation of the social
security system as it deprives workers of basic social
security coverage and has a negative effect on labour
productivity. A mix of approaches is required to effectively
tackle the issue of informal employment in Turkey,
ranging from awareness-raising, incentives and
entrepreneurial training for employers and the
self-employed, to stricter controls and sanctions for
non-compliance with the law. Research findings also
indicate that better-educated entrepreneurs are more
likely to formalise their business (Taymaz, 2009) and this
has obvious implications for the national education
system.

Unemployment

The unemployment rate in Turkey showed a reduction in
unemployment to 11.9% in 2010 (LFS for 15+), although
the rate was closer to 13.0% for women and 23.5% for
the youth population, specifically 20-24 year-olds.

Statistics, however, do not give a realistic picture of labour
market structure. Benchmark data on employment and
unemployment rates do not show a worse labour market
performance in less developed regions. In fact the
opposite appears to be true; figures for the booming
Istanbul area are among the highest for unemployment
and lowest for employment, although the apparent
paradox may be attributed to women migrants exiting the
labour market following the move to urban centres. Closer
examination of the duration of unemployment also gives
surprisingly low rates for long-term unemployment; the
long-term unemployed (out for work for more than one
year) make up only 28% of the total unemployed and only
4% have been out of work for more than three years
(LFS, 2010), while the percentage of long-term
unemployed within the working-age population is a mere
2.3% compared to an EU-27 average of 3% in 2009.

One salient feature, clearly shown in FIGURE 3.4, is that
the administrative unemployment rate stands far below
that given by LFS data, chiefly because less than half of
the unemployed register with (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6). This is presumably
related to the low rate and short duration of
unemployment insurance coverage and widespread
informal employment.

Youth unemployment

The anti-crisis measures of 2009 offered hiring incentives
in the form of reduced social security contributions for
employers of young people and women. Youth
employment was also one of the priority areas covered in
the Decent Work Country Programme drawn up with the
ILO and a national youth employment pilot project was
launched in Antalya within the framework of the UN joint
programme entitled Growth with Decent Work for All
(ILO, 2011a).

Unemployment of women

The disadvantaged labour market position of women
becomes blatantly clear when considering female
non-agricultural unemployment, in view of the fact that
figures for this category stood at 20.2% in 2010; a rate
markedly higher than the average female unemployment
rate of 13.0% (all data from TurkStat, LFS).

Long-term unemployment

The share of long-term unemployed, expressed as the
percentage of people out of work for more than one year
(LFS data), showed a general decrease to 2009 before
rising again to 28.6% in 2010. Women were at a
disadvantage again here, with a markedly higher rate of
long-term joblessness, at 36.8% (LFS 2010).

Regional differences

Regional disparities and gender gaps are interlinked. The
regional differences are relatively modest, but there are
strong differences in the gender dimension. In Southeast
Anatolia, the region with the lowest labour force
participation rate, the labour market participation of
women is only 12.4% (with an employment rate of
11.5%). In contrast, the region with the highest
employment and lowest unemployment rates (East Black
Sea) shows relatively good data for the female population
(45.4% labour force participation and 4.4%
unemployment rate). Central Anatolia (with the capital
Ankara) and the Istanbul region, meanwhile, also have low
female labour force participation rates (23% and 24%) and
high female unemployment rates (14.3% and 17.4%).

3.2 LABOUR LAW AND
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

In age groups, unemployment is highest among 15-24
year-olds, peaking at a rate of 25.3% in 2009 – the highest
since 2000 – before falling to 21.7% in 2010. According to
Ercan (2010b), 38% of this age group were neither in

The cornerstones of the legal framework are formed by
Labour Act No 4857 (enshrining the labour law of 2003),
Trade Unions Act No 2821 and Law No 2822 of 1983
(regulating collective agreements, strikes and lockouts).

50

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

New regulations on temporary work agencies are in the
pipeline and reform of the trade unions act is expected to
bring about the long-expected removal of barriers to trade
union membership.

The flexibility provisions within the 2003 Labour Act
established a legal basis for atypical forms of employment
in Turkey for the first time. Thus, more de jure flexibility
was provided to firms in the formal economy, although
there was actually little uptake of atypical or flexible
contracts in the ensuing years, with only 11.2% of formal
employed workers on fixed-term contracts and 8.3% on
part-time contracts by 2008. It is important to note that
social security coverage for atypical workers is largely
inadequate and part-time workers must pay their own
social insurance. Public authorities and the government
have not implemented any active measures to stimulate
uptake of part-time or flexible employment contracts,
providing no incentives or supporting structures. As a
result, the new flexible working provisions have yet to
achieve predicted outcomes for formal employment or
increased female employment; more frankly, in the words
of the trade unionists, they have ‘still failed to create jobs’
(Majcher-Teleon and Bardak, 2011, p. 46).

Employers state that the Labour Act requires many
further improvements in relation to flexibility, as most of
the provisions made cannot be implemented in practice.
Several elements form restrictions on the effective
implementation of flexible working including: excessively
tight conditions on the use of fixed-term contracts;
practical restrictions on workers’ ability to supply
compensatory work in return for leave or reduced working
hours; excessive impediments on the use of
subcontracting; limitations on the use of annual paid leave
and unpaid leave; restrictive conditions for implementing
short-time work; limited referencing periods for working
time arrangements, and; the lack of temporary work
agencies. Most of the rules are not clear in terms of
practical implementation and workers’ representatives
find it easy to block initiatives where their consent is
needed. The new Labour Code did little to change
previous rigid employment protection schemes (especially
on dismissals and enhanced job security) and high firing
costs (especially severance pay). Temporary work
agencies are expected to become permitted under a
planned amendment to labour law.

Trade unions also report that widespread abuses of the
law are common practice and that many employers force
new employees to sign blank letters of resignation that
can be used at a later date to avoid the burden of
dismissal rules and severance pay. The Confederation of
Turkish Trade Unions ((cid:14)(cid:8)(cid:6)(cid:4)(cid:13)(cid:2)(cid:3)) adopts the stance that
flexibility should be achieved through wider unionisation of
the workforce (currently at 12.5%) and enhanced social
dialogue (Majcher-Teleon and Bardak, 2011).

Employment protection and flexibility

The OECD 2008 indicator of employment protection
used to measure employment protection legislation
scored Turkey with a high or ‘very restrictive’

employment protection legislation index of 3.4, against
an OECD average of 2.2 and a maximum rating of 6. This
relatively high score is mainly due to regulations on
temporary employment and the rules on severance are a
further source of criticism as they represent a huge
burden in terms of dismissal costs. Flexibility is
restricted by regulations that establish rules such as:
part-time work is only permitted for contracts with a
minimum of at least 50% of regular working time, and;
overtime must not exceed a ceiling of 45 working hours
per week or 270 hours of extra time per year. The high
levels of informal employment in Turkey make it evident
that de facto flexibility is more important for employers
as it is able to satisfy a wider variety or working
arrangements in a way that outweighs the draw of de
jure protection.

Regulations for short-time working arrangements are
already in place in the event of force majeure (fire, flood,
avian influenza, and earthquake) but they have also been
adapted and implemented more widely as anti-crisis
measure. Short-time work subsidies can be granted by
(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) to prevent imminent lay-offs in the case of
temporary reduction of working time by one third or
suspension for a minimum of four weeks and maximum
of three months (for more details on implementation see
Section 3.3 on ALMPs).

The World Bank (2009a) found the high cost of
compliance with labour regulations (such as severance
pay) prompts employers to increase working hours rather
than create employment. Sural (2009) also states that
strict dismissal regulations increase the cost of firing
workers making companies reluctant to take on new staff
and rendering the strict employment protection legislation
one of the driving forces behind the over-sized informal
sector. According to the Global Competitiveness Index
(WEF, 2011), Turkey ranks 133rd out of 142 countries on
labour market efficiency, mainly due to the notable
disadvantages of low female labour participation, high
redundancy costs and weak industrial relations.

Severance pay applies to workers who have been working
for at least one year and who have been dismissed, but is
also applicable in the case of termination of a work contract
in specified conditions including: the death of a worker;
compulsory military service, retirement or disability
benefits, and; a female worker leaving to get married.
Severance pay amounts to 30 days' pay for each year
worked in the company and with a ceiling set at the level of
the retirement bonus paid to the highest-ranking civil
servant (TRY 2,500 per month in 2010) but with no limit on
the number of years for which the benefit will be received.

Severance pay was traditionally an important element in
income security in the case of job loss, as no
unemployment insurance system was in place until 1999.
There has been much debate recently on whether
severance pay should continue to be provided in the same
way now that the unemployment insurance scheme has
come into operation. One option under discussion in order
to reduce extra wage costs is the introduction of a
common severance payment fund.

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 51

Industrial relations and social dialogue

The foundations of modern industrial relations in Turkey
were laid in the 1961 constitution where employees were
given the right to unionise and conduct collective labour
agreements with employers and the rights to strikes and
lock outs were also outlined.

In the private sector, unionisation predominantly exists in
the textiles, food and metallurgical industries with
geographical coverage limited to Istanbul, Izmir, Bursa and
Ankara. According to official employment data, around
12% of workers are affiliated to a union and only a very
low share of workers are covered by collective bargaining
agreements (Majcher-Teleon and Bardak, 2011). Concern
has been expressed over the discrepancies between
legislation and practice (ETUC, 2010), but a planned
amendment concerning the right of workers to join a trade
union should finally bring the law in line with ILO
Convention 879.

There are three main trade union confederations open to
workers, all of which are members of the European Trade
Union Confederation (ETUC). The largest of these is
(cid:14)(cid:8)(cid:6)(cid:4)(cid:13)(cid:2)(cid:3), founded in 1952, followed by (cid:12)(cid:10)(cid:4)(cid:13)(cid:2)(cid:3), since
1976, and (cid:11)(cid:2)(cid:9)(cid:4), from 1967. Together, they represent
about 60% of the Turkish workforce eligible for trade
union membership, but this number only actually covers
5.4 million of the approximately 24.3 million workers in
the country, due to the high levels of informal
employment (ETUC, 2010). There are also five civil service
trade union confederations that have a total union density
of 57%, with membership strongest in the education
sector.

Collective bargaining is mainly restricted to the enterprise
sector, but even here it is regulated within strict thresholds
and the number of workers covered by collective
agreements has been decreasing over recent years.

For employers, the largest confederations include: the
Turkish Confederation of Employer Associations ((cid:14)(cid:2)(cid:9)(cid:4)),
since 1962; the Turkish Union of Chambers and
Commodity Exchanges (TOBB), with compulsory
membership since 1950; the Turkish Confederation of
Tradesmen and Craftsmen (TESK); the Turkish
Industrialists and Businessmen’s Association ((cid:14)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:2)(cid:10)(cid:11)),
and; the Independent Industrialists and Businessmen’s
Association ((cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:2)(cid:10)(cid:11)) amongst others.

Tripartite social dialogue

(managed by (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)), the Vocational Qualifications
Authority and the Social Security Institution. These
institutions provide openings for dialogue and discussion
between social partners and the government, but the
efficiency of this dialogue and the participation of social
partners (namely the trade unions) in policy decisions is
said to be weak.

Provincial employment and vocational training boards
have been organised in the 81 provinces since 2008,
constituting the most significant dialogue mechanisms at
local level. Their task is to improve effectiveness and
efficiency on issues of vocational training and
employment at provincial level with varying degrees of
effectiveness.

3.3 ACTIVE LABOUR MARKET
POLICIES

Active labour market policies (ALMPs) have a short history
in Turkey and are not yet embedded in the draft national
employment strategy that has yet to be published.
However, ALMPs gained momentum following the heavy
impact of the 2008-09 economic crisis under which the
economic transformation process was forced to deal with
the combined effects of structural unemployment and
skills shortages.

An initial employment package was implemented to
tackle rising unemployment in 2008. This consisted largely
of hiring incentives to encourage the employment of
young people and women. The impact of these measures
was moderate during the first year, but take-up of the
offer improved as the economic framework conditions
became more favourable. These hiring incentives have
been further extended and promoted to include VET
graduates, extending the maximum duration of the
subsidies to up to 54 months.

To keep people in work through the crisis, the
government re-launched the programme of Short-Time
Work Compensation in 2009 previously enacted within
Labour Law No 4857 of 2003. The measure benefitted
3,247 companies with a total of 503,000 employees,
providing modest average per worker annual
compensation of EUR 160. A change in the regulations
broadened the possible applications of the programme
from the event of an ‘economy-wide crisis’ to include an
‘emerging regional or sectoral crisis’ (Ercan, 2011).

There are a number of tripartite advisory and consultative
bodies at national level, including: the Economic and
Social Council established in 2001; the Tripartite
Consultation Board, since 2003; the Supreme Arbitration
Board, and; the Minimum Wage Determination Board.
Social partners are represented in the Apprenticeship and
Vocational-Technical Training Council, National
Occupational Health and Safety Council, Labour Market
Information and Consultation Board, the board of
management of the Unemployment Insurance Fund

Another wide-ranging employment measure was initiated
with the implementation of a combined training and
employment programme known as Beceri’10 (Skills’10 in
English). The project was launched by the MoLSS and
implemented by (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) and TOBB with the ambitious goal
of training one million unemployed people within five
years, placing 90% of them in jobs. In January 2011, the
Turkish Economy Policies Research Foundation (TEPAV –
a TOBB think tank) conducted labour market demand
analyses in 19 pilot provinces accounting for 75% of

9

At present, any private sector worker who wants to join a trade union must complete an application form and have this certified by a public notary before it is forwarded
to the union.

52

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

registered employment and 80% of registered
unemployment in Turkey. The results confirmed that there
is a mismatch between the skills level of the workforce
and employer demand, with shortages in occupations
such as metal worker, welder, and textile and clothing
worker.

Under the project plan, 120 pre-selected specialised
occupation training centres (UMEM) will be modernised
and their teaching staff re-trained. (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) is to organise
training for the unemployed, in line with identified
demands, and will follow this up by placing trainees in
jobs offered under hiring incentives. The (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) projected
goals imply a total of 200,000 new jobs each year and a
four-point reduction in the unemployment rate. According
to information provided by (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6): 28,022 unemployed
people (24% of them women) began training during the
first eight months of 2011. This approach is based on the
identification of short-term needs at local level with
innovative elements in the ex-ante research phase,
partnership with the employer organisation TOBB, close
cooperation with employers, and fully fledged public
relations campaign (see also www.umem.org.tr).
Monitoring and evaluation should provide more
information about achievement of the highly ambitious
goals and employment effects as time goes on.

Active labour market measures with a relevant dimension
only started in 2009 with most offering vocational training
and a lower number constituting public works (see
TABLE 3.19 for a breakdown of participant numbers).
Internships were first offered in October 2009 for young
job seekers with low skills to provide them with job
experience and improve their employability. In 2009, 555
internships were organised with 1,285 participants (558 of
whom were women). Plans for 2010 foresaw a total of
45,000 young people being placed in internships, but only
4,671 actually occurred (data provided by (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) and Ercan
(2010b, p. 7)).

The increased impact of ALMPs over the last two years
has contributed to an activation rate of 15.8% of the
registered unemployed, but this activation rate is only
valued at 7.3% when unemployment is calculated on the
basis of LFS data (ETF calculation based on (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) data
and LFS, see also TABLE 3.21 for a year on year
breakdown of comparative numbers).

The overall share of female participants in ALMPs stands
at around 45% (43.8% in 2009 and 46.0% in 2010,
dropping to 38.9% in January through August 2011).
Women are included in ALMPs, but their representation
varies according to the type of measure. When we
consider that the share of females among the registered
unemployed is less than one third (29.3% in 2010) the
numbers tell an interesting story. While women occupy
about 50% of places on labour market courses, they are
underrepresented in public works (23%), and only 8.6%
of employee training is provided to women. The recently
initiated Skills’10 programme is expected to draw only low
levels of female participation as the training sectors and
enterprises selected are mainly focussed on the
male-dominated technical-industrial occupations.

Some IPA-funded projects are specifically targeted on
disadvantaged women, but female participation in ALMPs
is generally not aligned with gender mainstreaming
policies (GTZ, 2007). A combination of targeted and
mainstream approaches is needed to achieve tangible
impacts for women. The same applies for other groups
such as young people or those who encounter difficulties
in finding employment, such as the Roma and people with
disabilities.

In 2010, 23.3% of the registered unemployed received
cash benefits, but, if the unemployment figures from the
LFS are taken as basis, coverage of the benefit was only
actually around 10%. An overhaul of (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) offices and
service procedures was initiated within phase 1 of an IPA
project to improve the quality of public employment
services, and this new service model will now be rolled
out to all offices.

(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) also offers occupational guidance and counselling
services for clients and organises school visits to provide
information, however, a state-of-the-art career
information, guidance and counselling service with
relevant outreach remains to be developed. The majority
of future new posts will be created to provide information,
guidance and counselling services in career information
centres.

In addition to the (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) provision, the Small and Medium
Enterprises Development Organisation (KOSGEB)
supplies some support for the self employed and
entrepreneurial start-ups. These services comprise
entrepreneurial training (8,300 places in 2010) and
micro-credits. A total of 60 business incubators provide
services to improve the survival and growth prospects of
start-ups.

The development of a solid and up-to-date evaluation
practice, with ex-ante and ongoing, internal and external
evaluation is of key importance in improving the
relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of ALMPs.

3.4 UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFIT
AND SOCIAL SECURITY
SYSTEM

The unemployment benefit system makes a relatively
limited contribution to the social security of people who
are out of work and thus encourages employment in the
informal labour market. Coverage is low at only
approximately 10% of the unemployed population
according to LFS data (Ercan, 2011) and (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) figures
show 23.3% of the registered unemployed were
receiving cash benefits in 2010. In this context, it is
important to point out the existence of a universal ‘green
card’ health insurance system for those without work or
insurance coverage.

The limited application of the unemployment insurance
system is largely due to tight eligibility criteria that
require 600 days of work in the last three years prior to

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 53

job loss (of which a minimum of 120 days must have
been in the current year) in order to qualify for benefit.
The maximum duration of the benefit ranges for
between 180 and 300 days. These rules limit inflow to
the register and create high outflows from it; a
complication that goes some way toward explaining the
discrepancy between the number of unemployed
registered with (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) and the number shown in the LFS
(about double the amount). Obviously, the vast majority
of people losing a job in the informal sector economy
have no entitlement to benefits and even for those
within the system the wage replacement rate is low as
benefits amount to only 50% of their average wage
during the last four months, with a ceiling set at the
official minimum wage (Ercan, 2011).

The unemployment insurance system is funded by
employee and employer contributions (1% from the
employee, plus 2% of the employers’ total payroll) and is
managed by (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6). No additional contributions are made
by the state.

The pension system and the traditionally low retirement
age threaten the sustainability of the entire social security
system, and the employment rate for elder people is
accordingly low (34.8% for 55-59 year-olds and 27% for
60-64 year-olds in 2010). For those entering the insurance
system after September 1999, the retirement age was
raised to 60 for men and 58 for women, while for those
insured before September 1999, the retirement age
ranges from a mere 41 to 56 years, having an impact that
continues to exert heavy pressure within the system.
Retirement ages will be gradually increased further from
2036, to reach a maximum of 65 for men by 2046, and 65
for women by 2048. Workers in the informal sector have
no access to any form of pension system, although low
levels of social assistance (around TRY 90.70 per month in
2009) are available for those elderly people classed as
being in need.

3.5 JOB CREATION, BUSINESS
ENVIRONMENT AND
COMPETITIVENESS

A constantly high rate of close to a million new jobs must
be created every year to maintain current employment
levels and provide work to new labour market entrants.
Job losses amounted to 1.3 million at the peak of the
crisis (Ercan, 2011). Job creation has returned to a positive
balance since 2010, albeit partly due to an increase in
female unpaid family work and self-employment.

Minimum wage levels are set by a tripartite commission
of government representatives, employers’ entities and
(cid:14)(cid:8)(cid:6)(cid:4)(cid:13)(cid:2)(cid:3). From July 2011, the gross minimum wage was
set at TRY 837.00 resulting in a net wage of TRY 655.57.
The minimum wage presents a structural problem, as it
does not respond to regional differences in cost of living
or take account of the fact that taxes on low wages
encourage employers and employees to rely partly or fully
on undeclared labour.

The difference between before-tax and after-tax wages,
otherwise known as the ‘tax wedge’, on labour in Turkey
is among the highest of all OECD countries (World Bank,
2009a). This is partly caused by the high social insurance
contributions paid by employers and employees, and a
relative flat level of income tax that creates a high tax
burden for low wages. This factor further fuels the
informal employment option in order to avoid the payment
of tax as the tax wedge is about 40% for a single worker
on an average or above average wage.

Productivity gaps between the formal and informal
economy are high with a substantial 30% to 40%
difference (McKinsey Global Institute, 2003). Even larger
gaps were found in a more recent study by Taymaz (2009)
where the gap in manufacturing was seen to be about
107% compared with 60% in services.

There are marked differences in working conditions in the
formal and informal economies. In 2006, waged workers
in the informal economy were paid 47.8% less per month
than formal workers. Workers in the informal economy
also worked longer hours than their peers in the formal
economy at 55.4 hours per week compared with 51.1
hours. Then again, part-time jobs are offered far more
frequently in the informal economy. While the figures
stated that 32% of waged workers were employed in the
informal economy in 2006, this figure rose closer to
56.3% when part-time workers were included in the
calculations (Ercan, 2010a).

There is no explicit system yet in place to anticipate skills
demands, although the Skills’10 programme and other
ALMPs and pilot projects base their measures on
short-term assessments of skills demands in close
cooperation with their local economies. Provincial VET and
employment boards would also be suitable institutions for
the further development and strengthening of cooperation
between education and labour market systems in order to
achieve improved matching at the local level. A more
forward-looking national approach has still to be
developed.

3.6 POLICY FRAMEWORK AND
INSTITUTIONAL SET UP IN
THE EMPLOYMENT POLICY
FIELD

Policy framework

To date, Turkey has no explicit policy framework for
employment. The draft National Employment Plan (NEP)
has not yet been finalised and disseminated and the same
applies to the Joint Assessment Paper of Employment
Policy Priorities (JAP) which entered the first stages of
preparation in 2003. The four priorities of the NEP are
expected to be: (i) strengthening links between education
and the labour market; (ii) flexicurity; (iii) strengthening
links between social protection and employment; and
(iv) increasing the employment rate of women, young
people and disadvantaged groups. Implementation of an

54

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

action plan relating to the first priority began in 2010, and
a monitoring committee made up of representatives from
key ministries including MoLSS, MoNE, the Ministry of
Industry and the State Planning Organisation was
established. Until recently, all employment policies and
programmes lacked quantitative targets or measurable
outcomes but anti-crisis employment measures and the
Skills’10 programme appear to have changed this pattern.

The Ninth National Development Plan 2007-13 contains
long-term objectives defined in five priority axes. The
priority entitled ‘increasing employment’ defines the
improvement of labour market conditions, the
establishment of better links between education and the
labour market, and the development of ALMPs as its
objectives. The main function of the State Planning
Organisation Medium-Term Programme 2011-13 is to
support the operational achievement of the plan. The
policy framework also includes the National Action Plan
for Gender Equality 2008-13 which sets a goal to increase
female labour force participation from 27.6% in 2010 to
29.6% in 2013 and 35% in 2030.

cooperation at the local level. The new boards are
expected to develop provincial employment strategies,
review annual labour market training plans and, monitor
and evaluate the programmes. Their operational functions
vary, mainly dependent upon the initiative shown by the
local administration.

A few hundred private employment agencies are active in
Turkey and planned changes to legislation are expected to
permit the operation of temporary work agencies.

In terms of institutions, Turkey has a range of government
organisations and boards in place at national and provincial
levels, and work is underway with social partners and
NGOs in the relevant fields. However, the consultation
processes should be strengthened to include stakeholders
at local levels as well as higher numbers of social
partners. Finally, further strengthening of capacities for
the planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation
of employment policies is of paramount importance at all
levels, with regular scheduling of policy and programme
evaluation.

Institutional set up

The department for labour at MoLSS handles employment
policy and labour market statistics, as one responsibility of
the Under-Secretary of State. The IPA department at the
Ministry currently has a staff of 60 and a further increase
of 50 new posts has been approved.

The former General Directorate on the Status of Women
was integrated into the new Ministry of Family and Social
Policies (MoFSP).

(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6), the public employment service, has the same
status as the Social Security Institute and the National
Qualification Agency. These affiliated organisations
function under the political responsibility of the Minister of
Labour and Social Security. (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) has 81 regional offices
and some sub-provincial offices are also in operation,
dependent on the size of the local workforce. In
September 2011, these offices had a total of 3,500 staff
but plans are in place for a considerable staff increase to
7,500 in two-years’ time, 4,000 of whom will deliver
career guidance services. Given that there are 1,415
million registered unemployed, this will still imply a high
client to staff ratio and will result in a very high caseload.
More regular staff training has now been organised with
the support of IPA funding.

Expenditure on ALMPs has been extremely low in the
past, at 0.003% of GDP in 2008 against an EU-27 average
of 0.45%, but levels of spending increased considerably in
2010 and 2011. The development of modern,
state-of-the-art job placement and referral systems is a
matter of some urgency and importance, as this one
thread should constitute the core business of any public
employment service. Only about 20,000 people received
individual counselling services in 2010 ((cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6), 2011a).

A new approach came into operation with the provincial
employment and vocational training boards as these were
chaired by the provincial governor and entailed horizontal

3.7 IPA PROGRAMMING

The Operational Programme for Human Resources
Development (HRD OP) is consistent and in line with
national policy papers as well as with IPA, European
Social Fund (ESF) and European Employment Strategy
(EES) standards. The indicators given in the HRD OP are
mainly output indicators and give little information on
expected impact and results, making meaningful
evaluation difficult.

The regional development component of the IPA
programme (component III) is closely related to the HRD
component and while implementation of support for
self-employment and SMEs is planned exclusively under
the regional development component, synergy and
coordination may present a challenge within such a
structure.

Close to 44% of IPA component IV funds for the 2007-11
period are dedicated to Priority axis 1, defined as
‘Employment’, with a total of EUR 353 million available,
including national co-financing (see TABLE 3.23 for a more
detailed breakdown). Some 55% to 60% of these funds
are earmarked for the 12 statistically disadvantaged eastern
sub-regions defined under the Nomenclature of territorial
units for statistics as NUTS 2 regions (see FIGURE 3.6 for
more details). A further 20% to 25% can be used to
support activities in the other 14 NUTS 2 regions, and the
remaining 20% is earmarked for programmes of national
coverage. According to the HRD OP ex ante evaluation, the
critical issue lies in the mainstreaming of outcomes, largely
expressed as the transfer of experiences and results to
other regions of the country.

Planned budget allocations for component IV over the
next few years are: EUR 77.6 million for 2011, EUR 89.93
million for 2012, and EUR 96.00 million for 2013 on the
basis of information provided by MoLSS from the
Multi-annual Indicative Planning Document 2011-13.

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 55

Priority axis 1 on employment has the following
objectives:

1. promote women's participation in the labour market,

increase female employment, including those
formerly employed in agriculture;

2. increase employment of young people;
3. promote registered employment;
4. improve the quality of public employment services.

Measures 1.1 and 1.2 will be implemented only in the
12 disadvantaged NUTS 2 regions, whereas measures 1.3
and 1.4 will be approached at national level. The measures
for the 2010-11 period constitute a continuation of
phase 1 efforts during the 2007-09 period (see the
summary table on p. 98 for a more detailed breakdown).
Some of the projects from the 2007-09 period are still
being implemented, however, as funding for this phase
remained unspent.

56

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLES AND FIGURES

l

-
a
u
p
o
P

t
o
n
n
o
i
t

r
u
o
b
a

l

n

i

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
e
n
U

d
e
y
o
p

l

d
e
y
o
p

l

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
E

r
u
o
b
a
L

l

a
t
o
T

-
a
l
u
p
o
P

t
o
n
n
o
i
t

r
u
o
b
a
l

n

i

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
e
n
U

d
e
y
o
p

l

d
e
y
o
p

l

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
E

r
u
o
b
a
L

l
a
t
o
T

-
a
l
u
p
o
P

t
o
n
n
o
i
t

r
u
o
b
a
l

n

i

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
e
n
U

d
e
y
o
p

l

d
e
y
o
p

l

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
E

r
u
o
b
a
L

l
a
t
o
T

l

e
a
m
e
F

e
l
a
M

l
a
t
o
T

.

6
3
9
1

6
9
0

.

.

7
4
9
1

8
9
0

.

.

3
5
9
1

3
7
0

.

.

6
4
9
1

6
6
0

.

.

6
1
9
1

6
6
0

.

.

4
9
8
1

4
6
0

.

.

2
6
8
1

2
6
0

.

.

6
4
7
1

4
6
0

.

.

2
3
7
1

8
4
0

.

.

1
1
7
1

9
3
0

.

3
4
6

.

7
8
5

.

0
6
5

.

6
3
5

.

6
2
5

.

1
1
5

.

5
0
5

.

2
1
6

.

7
9
5

.

0
8
5

.

8
3
7

.

5
8
6

.

3
3
6

.

2
0
6

.

2
9
5

.

5
7
5

.

7
6
5

.

6
7
6

.

5
4
6

.

9
1
6

.

4
7
6
2

.

4
5
.
7

2
3
6
2

.

7
4
.
7

6
8
5
2

.

4
4
.
7

8
4
5
2

.

2
4
.
7

8
0
5
2

.

6
2
.
7

9
6
4
2

.

7
9
.
6

9
2
4
2

.

0
9
.
6

1
2
4
2

.

7
7
.
6

7
7
3
2

.

5
3
.
6

0
3
3
2

.

3
0
.
6

9
0
.
2

9
4
.
2

8
8
.
1

2
7
.
1

7
6
.
1

5
7
.
1

6
7
.
1

3
8
.
1

9
4
.
1

1
1
.
1

7
1
.
6
1

6
2
.
8
1

0
8
.
5
2

0
9
.
6
2

5
0
.
3

9
5
.
2
2

4
6
.
5
2

4
5
.
2
5

1
4
.
5
1

0
9
.
7
1

7
3
.
5
2

4
9
.
6
2

7
4
.
3

8
2
.
1
2

5
7
.
4
2

9
6
.
1
5

0
6
.
5
1

8
4
.
7
1

2
9
.
4
2

7
9
.
6
2

1
6
.
2

9
1
.
1
2

1
8
.
3
2

7
7
.
0
5

8
3
.
5
1

0
1
.
7
1

1
5
.
4
2

8
8
.
6
2

8
3
.
2

4
7
.
0
2

1
1
.
3
2

9
9
.
9
4

7
1
.
5
1

4
8
.
6
1

9
0
.
4
2

2
4
.
6
2

3
3
.
2

2
4
.
0
2

5
7
.
2
2

7
1
.
9
4

6
9
.
4
1

0
7
.
6
1

7
6
.
3
2

0
9
.
5
2

9
3
.
2

7
0
.
0
2

5
4
.
2
2

6
3
.
8
4

9
5
.
4
1

5
3
.
6
1

5
2
.
3
2

3
5
.
5
2

9
3
.
2

3
6
.
9
1

2
0
.
2
2

4
5
.
7
4

3
2
.
5
1

6
0
.
7
1

3
8
.
3
2

2
2
.
4
2

6
4
.
2

5
3
.
1
2

2
8
.
3
2

4
0
.
8
4

6
5
.
5
1

4
0
.
7
1

9
3
.
3
2

7
6
.
3
2

7
9
.
1

2
5
.
1
2

9
4
.
3
2

6
1
.
7
4

8
7
.
5
1

9
8
.
6
1

2
9
.
2
2

3
1
.
3
2

0
5
.
1

8
5
.
1
2

8
0
.
3
2

1
2
.
6
4

0
1
0
2

9
0
0
2

8
0
0
2

7
0
0
2

6
0
0
2

5
0
0
2

4
0
0
2

2
0
0
2

1
0
0
2

0
0
0
2

e
s
a
b
a
t
a
D
s
c
i
t
s
i
t
a
t
S
e
c
r
o
F
r
u
o
b
a
L
,
t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T
:
e
c
r
u
o
S

)

N
O
I
L
L
I
M

(

R
E
D
N
E
G
D
N
A
S
U
T
A
T
S
E
C
R
O
F
R
U
O
B
A
L
Y
B

)
+
5
1
(

I

N
O
T
A
L
U
P
O
P
E
G
A
G
N
K
R
O
W
1
.
3
E
L
B
A
T

I

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 57

l

-
a
u
p
o
P

t
o
n
n
o
i
t

r
u
o
b
a

l

n

i

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
e
n
U

d
e
y
o
p

l

-

m
E

d
e
y
o
p

l

r
u
o
b
a
L

e
c
r
o
f

l

a
t
o
T

-
a
l
u
p
o
P

t
o
n
n
o
i
t

r
u
o
b
a
l

n

i

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
e
n
U

d
e
y
o
p

l

-

m
E

d
e
y
o
p

l

r
u
o
b
a
L

e
c
r
o
f

l
a
t
o
T

-
a
l
u
p
o
P

t
o
n
n
o
i
t

r
u
o
b
a
l

n

i

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
e
n
U

d
e
y
o
p

l

-

m
E

d
e
y
o
p

l

r
u
o
b
a
L

e
c
r
o
f

l
a
t
o
T

0
5
2

.

5
8
1

.

4
9
1

.

2
9
1

.

8
6
1

.

4
5
1

.

4
5
1

.

6
4
1

.

4
2
1

.

2
0
1

.

6
6
2

.

0
1
0

.

6
2
0

.

1
2
0

.

3
1
0

.

1
1
0

.

7
0
0

.

4
0
0

.

3
0
0

.

1
0
0

.

0
0
0

.

0
0
0

.

6
3
9
1

.

6
9
0

.

2
4
0

.

8
7
0

.

8
9
0

.

3
9
0

.

9
8
0

.

0
8
0

.

8
5
0

.

2
4
0

.

9
2
0

.

8
1
0

.

7
1
0

.

3
4
6

.

1
5
0

.

4
0
1

.

9
1
1

.

7
0
1

.

0
0
1

.

7
8
0

.

2
6
0

.

4
4
0

.

9
2
0

.

8
1
0

.

7
1
0

.

8
3
7

.

1
0
3

.

9
8
2

.

3
1
3

.

9
9
2

.

8
6
2

.

1
4
2

.

6
1
2

.

0
9
1

.

4
5
1

.

0
2
1

.

3
8
2

.

9
0
2

.

8
6
0

.

4
2
0

.

4
1
0

.

2
1
0

.

5
1
0

.

3
3
0

.

4
6
0

.

5
7
0

.

6
6
0

.

5
7
1

.

4
7
6
2

.

4
5
7

.

2
2
.
0

9
3
.
0

9
3
.
0

8
2
.
0

3
2
.
0

0
2
.
0

7
1
.
0

2
1
.
0

7
0
.
0

3
0
.
0

1
0
.
0

9
0
.
2

3
9
.
0

3
3
.
1

8
4
.
2

3
6
.
2

4
3
.
2

8
0
.
2

9
6
.
1

4
1
.
1

0
7
.
0

2
4
.
0

2
4
.
0

5
1
.
1

2
7
.
1

7
8
.
2

1
9
.
2

7
5
.
2

8
2
.
2

6
8
.
1

6
2
.
1

7
7
.
0

4
4
.
0

3
4
.
0

4
2
.
3

0
4
.
2

1
1
.
3

4
0
.
3

0
7
.
2

4
4
.
2

9
1
.
2

0
9
.
1

1
5
.
1

0
1
.
1

8
1
.
2

9
5
.
4

3
5
.
2

8
1
.
2

6
0
.
2

0
8
.
1

9
6
.
1

7
8
.
1

9
0
.
2

9
9
.
1

8
6
.
1

1
4
.
4

1
3
.
0

5
6
.
0

0
6
.
0

1
4
.
0

4
3
.
0

7
2
.
0

1
2
.
0

4
1
.
0

7
0
.
0

3
0
.
0

1
0
.
0

5
3
.
1

1
1
.
2

5
4
.
3

6
5
.
3

3
2
.
3

8
8
.
2

7
2
.
2

6
5
.
1

9
9
.
0

0
6
.
0

9
5
.
0

6
6
.
1

6
7
.
2

6
0
.
4

7
9
.
3

7
5
.
3

5
1
.
3

8
4
.
2

0
7
.
1

6
0
.
1

2
6
.
0

0
6
.
0

5
2
.
6

0
3
.
5

4
2
.
6

3
0
.
6

7
3
.
5

4
8
.
4

5
3
.
4

0
8
.
3

5
0
.
3

1
3
.
2

1
0
.
5

7
1
.
6
1

6
2
.
8
1

0
8
.
5
2

0
9
.
6
2

5
0
.
3

9
5
.
2
2

4
6
.
5
2

4
5
.
2
5

l

e
a
m
e
F

e
l
a
M

l
a
t
o
T

9
1
-
5
1

4
2
-
0
2

9
2
-
5
2

4
3
-
0
3

9
3
-
5
3

4
4
-
0
4

9
4
-
5
4

4
5
-
0
5

9
5
-
5
5

4
6
-
0
6

+
5
6

l
a
t
o
T

e
s
a
b
a
t
a
D
s
c
i
t
s
i
t
a
t
S
e
c
r
o
F
r
u
o
b
a
L
,
t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T
:
e
c
r
u
o
S

)

I

N
O
L
L
I
M

(
0
1
0
2
,

R
E
D
N
E
G
D
N
A
S
U
T
A
T
S
E
C
R
O
F
R
U
O
B
A
L
,

I

P
U
O
R
G
E
G
A
Y
B
N
O
T
A
L
U
P
O
P
E
G
A
G
N
K
R
O
W
2
.
3
E
L
B
A
T

I

58

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

l

-
a
u
p
o
P

t
o
n
n
o
i
t

r
u
o
b
a

l

n

i

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
e
n
U

d
e
y
o
p

l

d
e
y
o
p

l

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
E

r
u
o
b
a
L

l

a
t
o
T

l

-
a
u
p
o
P

t
o
n
n
o
i
t

r
u
o
b
a
l

n

i

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
e
n
U

d
e
y
o
p

l

d
e
y
o
p

l

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
E

r
u
o
b
a
L

l
a
t
o
T

-
a
l
u
p
o
P

t
o
n
n
o
i
t

r
u
o
b
a
l

n

i

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
e
n
U

d
e
y
o
p

l

d
e
y
o
p

l

e
c
r
o
f

-

m
E

r
u
o
b
a
L

l
a
t
o
T

6
0
4

.

5
9
1

.

6
0
7

.

3
3
2

.

7
8
0

.

3
6
1

.

6
8
0

.

2
0
0

.

3
0
0

.

1
2
0

.

0
1
0

.

5
0
0

.

8
1
0

.

3
1
0

.

7
7
0

.

7
4
0

.

3
2
2

.

8
4
0

.

3
2
0

.

4
5
0

.

4
4
0

.

9
7
0

.

0
5
0

.

4
4
2

.

8
5
0

.

8
2
0

.

1
7
0

.

7
5
0

.

5
8
4

.

5
4
2

.

0
5
9

.

1
9
2

.

5
1
1

.

4
3
2

.

2
4
1

.

2
6
0

.

1
6
0

.

6
3
2

.

9
6
1

.

1
4
0

.

4
9
0

.

5
4
0

.

5
0
.
0

2
1
.
0

5
7
.
0

0
3
.
0

0
2
.
0

6
2
.
0

1
2
.
0

1
3
.
0

2
6
.
0

7
3
.
6

0
3
.
1

2
7
.
1

6
7
.
1

4
7
.
1

6
3
.
0

4
7
.
0

2
1
.
7

0
6
.
1

2
9
.
1

2
0
.
2

5
9
.
1

8
9
.
0

5
3
.
1

7
4
.
9

9
2
.
3

4
3
.
2

6
9
.
2

0
4
.
2

7
6
.
4

5
5
.
2

1
4
.
9

1
0
.
4

8
2
.
1

8
5
.
2

1
3
.
1

7
0
.
0

6
1
.
0

6
9
.
0

0
4
.
0

5
2
.
0

3
4
.
0

3
3
.
0

8
0
.
1

9
0
.
1

0
6
.
8

8
7
.
1

5
9
.
1

9
2
.
2

8
1
.
2

5
1
.
1

4
2
.
1

6
5
.
9

8
1
.
2

1
2
.
2

3
7
.
2

1
5
.
2

l

e
a
m
e
F

e
l
a
M

l
a
t
o
T

3
8
.
5

0
8
.
3

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

o
o
h
c
s

o
n
t
u
b
e
t
a
r
e
t
i
L

e
t
a
r
e
t
i
l
l
I

7
9
.
8
1

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
P

0
2
.
6

9
4
.
3

0
3
.
5

2
8
.
3

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
r
o
n
u
J

i

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

l

i

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e
r
o

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
H

i

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
t
a

i

l

e
v
e

l

2
6
0

.

4
2
0

.

7
2
1

.

1
5
1

.

3
1
2

.

7
4
0

.

1
2
.
0

4
3
.
2

5
5
.
2

2
0
.
3

9
0
.
1

5
4
.
0

1
6
.
3

6
0
.
4

5
1
.
5

r
e
h
t
o
r
o
y
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
U

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
r
e
h
g
h

i

6
3
9
1

.

6
9
0

.

3
4
6

.

8
3
7

.

4
7
6
2

.

4
5
7

.

9
0
.
2

7
1
.
6
1

6
2
.
8
1

0
8
.
5
2

0
9
.
6
2

5
0
.
3

9
5
.
2
2

4
6
.
5
2

4
5
.
2
5

n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l
a
t
o
T

e
s
a
b
a
t
a
D
s
c
i
t
s
i
t
a
t
S
e
c
r
o
F
r
u
o
b
a
L
,
t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T
:
e
c
r
u
o
S

)

I

N
O
L
L
M

I

(
0
1
0
2

,

R
E
D
N
E
G
D
N
A
S
U
T
A
T
S
E
C
R
O
F
R
U
O
B
A
L
,

S
U
T
A
T
S
L
A
N
O
T
A
C
U
D
E
Y
B

I

)
+
5
1
(

I

N
O
T
A
L
U
P
O
P
E
G
A
G
N
K
R
O
W
3
.
3
E
L
B
A
T

I

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 59

FIGURE 3.1 TRENDS IN ACTIVITY AND EMPLOYMENT RATES (15+) – TOTAL AND FEMALE (%)

60.0

50.0

40.0

30.0

20.0

10.0

0.0

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Activity rate

Female Activity rate

Employment rate

Female employment rate

Source: TurkStat, Labour Force Statistics Database

FIGURE 3.2 TRENDS IN UNEMPLOYMENT RATES (15+) – TOTAL, FEMALE AND NON-AGRICULTURE (%)

30.0

25.0

20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total unemployment rate
Total non-agricultural unemployment rate
Female unemployment rate
Total female non-agricultural unemployment rate
Youth unemmployment rate (15-24)

Source: TurkStat, Labour Force Statistics Database

60

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

.

9
5
1

.

0
9
1

.

5
3
2

.

6
6
1

.

0
0
2

.

8
2
2

.

8
0
3

.

7
9
5

.

0
4
2

.

5
4
1

.

5
7
1

.

1
1
2

.

7
4
1

.

2
8
1

.

4
2
2

.

0
9
2

.

3
9
5

.

3
2
2

.

2
4
1

.

4
7
1

.

3
4
1

.

1
0
2

.

1
8
1

.

9
5
2

.

0
3
2

.

6
6
2

.

9
3
2

.

0
6
1

.

2
0
2

.

1
8
1

.

4
6
2

.

8
9
1

.

7
9
2

.

2
4
2

.

0
8
2

.

1
7
2

.

3
6
1

.

9
1
2

.

5
4
1

.

4
8
1

4
2

.

8
6

.

6
8

.

.

7
6
1

.

9
8
1

.

9
4
2

.

5
2
2

.

9
5
1

.

0
3
1

0
3

.

1
9

.

4
9

.

.

3
8
1

.

0
0
2

.

3
6
2

.

9
5
2

.

3
6
1

.

3
4
1

5
2

.

9
5

.

.

3
6
1

.

4
0
2

.

7
5
2

.

9
9
1

.

6
4
2

.

4
0
3

.

8
9
3

.

0
1
7

.

6
7
2

.

0
5
1

.

2
9
1

.

3
3
2

.

0
8
1

.

8
2
2

.

4
0
3

.

1
9
3

.

8
0
7

.

0
6
2

.

5
4
1

.

5
8
1

.

8
1
3

.

2
6
4

.

2
7
6

.

5
9
3

.

7
3
7

.

5
9
5

.

7
2
7

.

5
7
7

.

7
2
6

.

6
0
3

.

4
3
4

.

5
5
6

.

3
4
3

.

8
1
7

.

7
8
5

.

8
0
7

.

1
5
7

.

7
0
6

.

0
1
3

.

6
2
4

.

9
4
2

.

0
3
2

.

3
3
1

.

6
1
2

.

5
1
1

.

5
3
1

.

1
1
1

2
8

.

.

2
3
1

.

0
9
2

.

1
8
2

.

3
6
1

.

1
7
2

.

6
4
1

.

1
6
1

.

4
3
1

8
9

.

.

0
6
1

.

8
3
2

.

7
4
2

7
.
3
1

3
.
6
1

5
.
0
1

9
.
8
1

4
.
0
1

6
.
2
1

5
.
0
1

0
.
8

4
.
1
1

6
.
7
1

2
.
9
1

0
.
3
1

6
.
3
2

2
.
3
1

1
.
5
1

7
.
2
1

6
.
9

9
.
3
1

1
.
4
1

0
.
6
1

8
.
6
3

2
.
5
5

1
.
5
7

7
.
8
4

3
.
2
8

1
.
8
6

2
.
1
8

3
.
4
8

8
.
0
7

1
.
7
3

7
.
3
5

3
.
5
7

9
.
4
4

8
.
2
8

1
.
9
6

0
.
1
8

1
.
3
8

5
.
0
7

0
.
6
3

7
.
0
5

6
.
8
1

7
.
8
2

3
.
5
4

8
.
8
2

0
.
6
5

3
.
3
4

1
.
7
5

1
.
0
7

0
.
3
4

3
.
7
1

8
.
6
2

2
.
3
4

1
.
5
2

9
.
3
5

6
.
2
4

2
.
5
5

5
.
8
6

2
.
1
4

9
.
6
1

6
.
6
2

1
.
1
2

3
.
2
2

1
.
4
1

5
.
2
2

9
.
2
1

9
.
6
1

0
.
4
1

2
.
1
1

8
.
4
1

4
.
5
2

7
.
7
2

9
.
6
1

7
.
7
2

7
.
5
1

2
.
9
1

5
.
6
1

3
.
2
1

4
.
7
1

7
.
0
2

2
.
3
2

0
.
6

5
.
2
1

0
.
0
1

3
.
8
1

5
.
1
1

9
.
5
1

2
.
3
1

0
.
1
1

9
.
1
1

0
.
8

3
.
5
1

2
.
2
1

2
.
2
2

0
.
4
1

0
.
8
1

6
.
5
1

1
.
2
1

0
.
4
1

3
.
6

1
.
2
1

8
.
9
1

8
.
2
3

4
.
0
5

2
.
5
3

3
.
3
6

4
.
1
5

8
.
5
6

8
.
8
7

8
.
8
4

8
.
8
1

6
.
1
3

2
.
9
4

3
.
2
3

7
.
2
6

0
.
2
5

4
.
5
6

0
.
8
7

9
.
7
4

1
.
8
1

2
.
0
3

.
l

p
m
E

e
t
a
r

-
i
r
g
a
-
n
o
N

.
l

p
m
e
n
U

r
u
o
b
a
L

l
a
r
u
t
l
u
c

.
l

p
m
e
n
u

e
t
a
r

e
t
a
r

e
c
r
o
f

-
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p

e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t

.
l

p
m
E

e
t
a
r

-
i
r
g
a
-
n
o
N

.
l

p
m
e
n
U

r
u
o
b
a
L

l
a
r
u
t
l
u
c

.
l

p
m
e
n
u

e
t
a
r

e
t
a
r

e
c
r
o
f

-
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p

e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t

.
l

p
m
E

e
t
a
r

-
i
r
g
a
-
n
o
N

.
l

p
m
e
n
U

r
u
o
b
a
L

l
a
r
u
t
l
u
c

.
l

p
m
e
n
u

e
t
a
r

e
t
a
r

e
c
r
o
f

-
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p

e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t

l

e
a
m
e
F

e
l
a
M

l
a
t
o
T

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

l

i

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e
r
o

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
r
o
n
u
J

i

i

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

o
o
h
c
s
o
n
t
u
b
e
t
a
r
e
t
i
L

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
P

e
t
a
r
e
t
i
l
l
I

0
1
0
2

l

e
v
e

l

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
t
a

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
H

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

l

i

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e
r
o

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
r
o
n
u
J

i

i

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

o
o
h
c
s
o
n
t
u
b
e
t
a
r
e
t
i
L

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l
a
t
o
T

9
0
0
2

e
t
a
r
e
t
i
l
l
I

n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

i

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
r
e
h
g
h
r
e
h
t
o
r
o
y
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
U

i

n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

i

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
r
e
h
g
h
r
e
h
t
o
r
o
y
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
U

i

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

o
o
h
c
s
o
n
t
u
b
e
t
a
r
e
t
i
L

l
a
t
o
T

8
0
0
2

e
t
a
r
e
t
i
l
l
I

l

e
v
e

l

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
t
a

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
H

i

)

%

(

R
E
D
N
E
G
D
N
A
S
U
T
A
T
S
L
A
N
O
T
A
C
U
D
E
Y
B

I

)
+
5
1
(

S
E
T
A
R
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E
D
N
A
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E
N
U

,

I

I

Y
T
V
T
C
A
4
.
3
E
L
B
A
T

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 61

.

5
9
1

.

5
4
1

.

8
7
1

.

1
3
2

.

4
0
3

.

0
0
6

.

6
1
2

.

2
4
1

.

6
6
1

.

1
9
1

.

7
3
1

.

4
9
1

.

1
2
2

.

8
8
2

.

8
9
5

.

0
1
2

.

5
4
1

.

2
7
1

.

5
9
1

.

6
1
1

.

2
9
1

.

5
1
2

.

6
8
2

.

9
9
5

.

0
1
2

.

9
6
1

.

5
4
2

.

0
1
2

.

9
1
2

.

6
1
2

.

4
4
1

.

1
8
1

4
8

.

.

2
1
1

.

8
4
1

.

7
3
2

.

6
7
1

.

7
3
2

.

8
1
2

.

9
3
1

.

3
7
1

4
9

.

.

2
4
1

.

0
7
1

.

6
3
2

.

8
9
1

.

6
4
2

.

7
1
2

.

0
3
1

.

9
7
1

5
7

.

.

2
4
1

.

6
7
1

.

6
0
2

.

6
0
2

.

3
4
1

.

6
1
1

7
1

.

3
4

.

5
6

.

.

0
4
1

.

7
4
1

.

1
2
2

.

9
0
2

.

9
3
1

.

0
1
1

6
1

.

6
4

.

6
7

.

.

9
3
1

.

2
6
1

.

0
3
2

.

9
0
2

.

0
3
1

.

1
1
1

.

1
1
2

.

9
6
1

.

6
1
2

.

1
9
2

.

3
8
3

.

0
0
7

.

5
4
2

.

4
4
1

.

3
7
1

.

5
0
2

.

0
6
1

.

7
2
2

.

4
8
2

.

4
6
3

.

4
9
6

.

6
3
2

.

7
4
1

.

0
8
1

.

1
1
2

.

5
3
1

.

9
2
2

.

9
7
2

.

2
6
3

.

8
8
6

.

6
3
2

.

6
7
6

.

8
4
3

.

6
4
7

.

3
8
5

.

9
2
7

.

0
6
7

.

6
2
6

.

3
2
3

.

5
2
4

.

0
8
6

.

7
0
3

.

9
4
7

.

7
7
5

.

7
2
7

.

4
6
7

.

7
2
6

.

9
4
3

.

5
3
4

.

5
8
6

.

6
5
2

.

5
3
7

.

8
8
5

.

3
2
7

.

3
6
7

.

9
2
6

.

4
2
1

.

7
1
2

.

1
1
1

.

6
2
1

8
9

.

.

2
8

0
.
0
1

0
.
9
1

0
.
0
1

8
.
1
1

2
.
9

1
.
8

.

3
2
1

7
.
0
1

.

1
2
2

.

7
0
2

.

4
1
1

.

3
0
2

.

5
0
1

.

6
1
1

.

2
0
1

6
7

.

.

4
1
1

.

8
8
1

.

9
7
1

.

6
1
1

.

9
7
1

.

4
1
1

.

8
1
1

9
9

.

8
7

.

.

3
1
1

4
.
2
1

3
.
4
1

4
.
9

8
.
7
1

6
.
9

0
.
1
1

7
.
9

4
.
7

0
.
0
1

0
.
1
1

0
.
2
1

5
.
9

6
.
5
1

4
.
0
1

1
.
1
1

4
.
9

7
.
7

9
.
9

1
.
5
7

9
.
2
4

9
.
2
8

2
.
6
6

3
.
0
8

7
.
2
8

1
.
0
7

9
.
6
3

6
.
9
4

0
.
5
7

3
.
7
3

8
.
2
8

9
.
4
6

6
.
0
8

6
.
2
8

8
.
9
6

2
.
9
3

4
.
9
4

7
.
5
7

4
.
0
3

0
.
2
8

2
.
6
6

8
.
9
7

6
.
2
8

9
.
9
6

3
.
3
4

3
.
5
2

9
.
5
5

9
.
2
4

4
.
7
5

5
.
9
6

7
.
1
4

1
.
7
1

3
.
6
2

2
.
3
4

8
.
2
2

1
.
6
5

1
.
2
4

8
.
6
5

8
.
9
6

5
.
1
4

8
.
7
1

4
.
7
2

6
.
3
4

4
.
9
1

3
.
4
5

7
.
2
4

3
.
6
5

8
.
9
6

5
.
1
4

0
.
3
1

2
.
2
2

1
.
2
1

0
.
5
1

3
.
2
1

5
.
0
1

6
.
3
1

4
.
7
1

6
.
8
1

9
.
1
1

0
.
1
2

3
.
1
1

7
.
4
1

6
.
2
1

8
.
9

6
.
2
1

5
.
5
1

1
.
7
1

3
.
2
1

0
.
9
1

4
.
2
1

9
.
4
1

4
.
2
1

7
.
9

7
.
2
1

4
.
9

7
.
7
1

9
.
0
1

1
.
4
1

7
.
1
1

3
.
0
1

0
.
1
1

2
.
5

6
.
0
1

7
.
8

8
.
6
1

2
.
0
1

9
.
3
1

0
.
2
1

7
.
9

3
.
0
1

8
.
4

3
.
9

1
.
9

2
.
5
1

2
.
1
1

0
.
4
1

8
.
1
1

6
.
9

2
.
0
1

8
.
7
4

7
.
0
3

7
.
2
6

9
.
9
4

0
.
5
6

6
.
7
7

9
.
6
4

1
.
8
1

4
.
9
2

4
.
7
4

4
.
7
2

5
.
2
6

8
.
8
4

5
.
4
6

3
.
7
7

2
.
6
4

7
.
8
1

2
.
0
3

9
.
7
4

9
.
2
2

1
.
1
6

7
.
9
4

8
.
3
6

2
.
7
7

3
.
6
4

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

i

l

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e
r
o

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
r
o
n
u
J

i

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

l

i

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e
r
o

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
r
o
n
u
J

i

i

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

o
o
h
c
s
o
n
t
u
b
e
t
a
r
e
t
i
L

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l
a
t
o
T

7
0
0
2

e
t
a
r
e
t
i
l
l
I

n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

i

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
r
e
h
g
h
r
e
h
t
o
r
o
y
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
U

i

l

e
v
e

l

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
t
a

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
H

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

l

i

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e
r
o

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
r
o
n
u
J

i

i

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l

o
o
h
c
s
o
n
t
u
b
e
t
a
r
e
t
i
L

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l
a
t
o
T

6
0
0
2

e
t
a
r
e
t
i
l
l
I

n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

i

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
r
e
h
g
h
r
e
h
t
o
r
o
y
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
U

i

n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

i

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
r
e
h
g
h
r
e
h
t
o
r
o
y
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
U

i

e
s
a
b
a
t
a
D
s
c
i
t
s
i
t
a
t
S
e
c
r
o
F
r
u
o
b
a
L
,
t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T
:
e
c
r
u
o
S

l
a
t
o
T

l

e
v
e

l

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
t
a

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
H

i

l

e
v
e

l

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
t
a

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
H

i

62

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

.

8
3
1

.

9
6
2

.

2
1
3

.

2
1
3

.

2
3
3

.

1
3
3

.

9
6
2

.

0
2
2

.

8
8
1

.

9
4
1

9
5

.

.

0
4
2

.

5
3
1

.

3
5
2

.

8
8
2

.

0
0
3

.

1
0
3

.

0
9
2

.

7
8
2

.

5
1
3

.

4
2
2

.

6
6
1

.

2
6
1

.

4
2
1

.

2
2
1

.

8
4
1

5
7

.

8
7

.

3
1

.

.

5
8
1

.

2
5
2

.

9
7
1

.

5
2
1

.

2
1
1

0
8

.

3
6

.

7
5

.

8
1

.

1
1

.

1
0

.

.

2
0
2

.

0
3
1

.

0
3
3

.

8
2
3

.

6
3
2

.

1
8
1

.

4
6
1

.

0
5
1

.

2
2
2

.

5
6
2

.

4
9
1

.

8
3
1

.

7
1
1

7
9

.

.

0
7
1

.

0
6
3

.

0
8
3

.

7
5
3

.

4
7
3

.

0
6
3

.

7
8
2

.

4
3
2

.

1
9
1

.

0
5
1

9
5

.

.

6
7
2

.

3
7
1

.

5
4
3

.

8
5
3

.

8
4
3

.

1
4
3

.

1
2
3

.

8
8
2

.

6
5
5

.

7
9
7

.

5
6
8

.

8
6
8

.

5
5
8

.

1
7
7

.

2
0
6

.

3
6
4

.

7
7
3

.

5
9
1

.

7
2
6

.

0
8
2

.

4
3
5

.

2
7
7

.

2
3
8

.

5
4
8

.

0
4
8

3
.
2
2

5
.
4
2

5
.
4
1

0
.
0
1

7
.
9

7
.
9

8
.
0
1

9
.
1
1

4
.
3
1

0
.
1
1

2
.
7

2
.
3
1

2
.
8
2

5
.
8
2

8
.
7
1

0
.
3
1

9
.
1
1

4
.
1
1

0
.
9
1

4
.
2
2

6
.
3
1

5
.
9

0
.
9

7
.
8

3
.
9

2
.
9

7
.
8

7
.
5

1
.
2

4
.
1
1

2
.
4
2

2
.
6
2

7
.
6
1

2
.
2
1

0
.
1
1

3
.
0
1

6
.
5
3

6
.
1
7

3
.
2
9

5
.
5
9

4
.
5
9

7
.
3
9

0
.
5
8

4
.
6
6

7
.
0
5

0
.
0
4

9
.
9
1

8
.
0
7

0
.
7
3

3
.
2
7

7
.
2
9

7
.
4
9

0
.
5
9

6
.
3
9

6
.
1
2

9
.
9
3

4
.
5
5

1
.
9
5

1
.
0
6

5
.
9
5

1
.
2
5

1
.
1
4

4
.
2
3

8
.
5
2

8
.
1
1

0
.
3
4

0
.
1
2

1
.
8
3

9
.
2
5

9
.
6
5

4
.
7
5

7
.
6
5

9
.
3
2

0
.
7
2

6
.
6
1

5
.
1
1

2
.
1
1

3
.
0
1

0
.
1
1

3
.
2
1

7
.
2
1

7
.
0
1

6
.
6

8
.
4
1

5
.
9
2

0
.
0
3

3
.
9
1

1
.
4
1

9
.
2
1

1
.
2
1

8
.
8
1

5
.
3
2

9
.
4
1

3
.
0
1

6
.
9

5
.
8

6
.
8

3
.
8

7
.
6

4
.
4

5
.
1

9
.
1
1

6
.
3
2

3
.
6
2

5
.
7
1

6
.
2
1

2
.
1
1

2
.
0
1

6
.
6
2

2
.
2
5

0
.
5
6

9
.
5
6

5
.
6
6

0
.
5
6

0
.
7
5

8
.
4
4

8
.
4
3

0
.
7
2

0
.
2
1

8
.
8
4

5
.
7
2

7
.
1
5

1
.
4
6

1
.
5
6

6
.
4
6

1
.
3
6

l

e
a
m
e
F

e
l
a
M

l
a
t
o
T

.
l

p
m
E

e
t
a
r

-
n
o
N

l
a
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
a

e
t
a
r

.
l

p
m
e
n
u

.
l

p
m
e
n
U

e
t
a
r

e
c
r
o
f

r
u
o
b
a
L

n
o
i
t
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p

.
l

p
m
E

e
t
a
r

e
t
a
r

-
n
o
N

l
a
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
a

e
t
a
r

.
l

p
m
e
n
u

.
l

p
m
e
n
U

e
t
a
r

e
c
r
o
f

r
u
o
b
a
L

n
o
i
t
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p

.
l

p
m
E

e
t
a
r

e
t
a
r

-
n
o
N

l
a
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
a

e
t
a
r

.
l

p
m
e
n
u

.
l

p
m
e
n
U

e
t
a
r

e
c
r
o
f

r
u
o
b
a
L

n
o
i
t
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p

e
t
a
r

0
1
0
2

9
1
-
5
1

4
2
-
0
2

9
2
-
5
2

4
3
-
0
3

9
3
-
5
3

4
4
-
0
4

9
4
-
5
4

4
5
-
0
5

9
5
-
5
5

4
6
-
0
6

+
5
6

l
a
t
o
T

9
0
0
2

9
1
-
5
1

4
2
-
0
2

9
2
-
5
2

4
3
-
0
3

9
3
-
5
3

4
4
-
0
4

)

%

(

R
E
D
N
E
G
D
N
A
E
G
A
Y
B
S
E
T
A
R
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E
D
N
A
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E
N
U

,

I

I

Y
T
V
T
C
A
5
.
3
E
L
B
A
T

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 63

.

9
3
2

.

7
0
2

.

4
7
1

.

3
4
1

9
5

.

.

3
2
2

.

9
3
1

.

7
5
2

.

3
8
2

.

0
8
2

.

6
9
2

.

8
6
2

.

3
3
2

.

6
9
1

.

2
6
1

.

0
3
1

7
5

.

.

6
1
2

.

5
3
1

.

1
5
2

.

3
7
2

.

7
3
1

.

6
1
1

7
9

.

.

1
4

0
2

.

0
7

.

5
4

.

1
2

.

6
0

.

3
0

.

.

9
1
2

.

3
4
1

.

8
8
2

.

3
8
2

.

6
8
1

.

5
4
1

.

6
2
1

.

2
1
1

.

1
1
1

.

2
9

.

2
8

1
7

.

.

6
1
1

.

1
8
1

.

6
7
2

.

4
7
2

.

9
7
1

.

6
8
1

.

6
2
2

.

0
5
1

.

0
1
1

8
8

.

8
6

.

4
5

.

4
3

.

6
1

.

8
0

.

6
0

.

.

6
1
1

.

9
8
1

.

7
1
2

.

3
4
1

.

7
5
2

.

7
1
2

.

8
7
1

.

4
4
1

9
5

.

.

0
6
2

.

1
7
1

.

2
3
3

.

3
3
3

.

5
1
3

.

4
2
3

.

7
8
2

.

7
4
2

.

3
0
2

.

4
6
1

.

1
3
1

8
5

.

.

5
4
2

.

6
6
1

.

1
2
3

.

8
1
3

.

0
4
7

.

1
8
5

.

9
4
4

.

9
5
3

.

2
9
1

.

7
0
6

.

3
9
2

.

3
7
5

.

7
0
8

.

0
6
8

.

2
7
8

.

9
5
8

.

1
4
7

.

5
9
5

.

6
4
4

.

8
5
3

.

2
9
1

.

6
2
6

.

1
9
2

.

7
7
5

.

2
1
8

9
.
1
1

0
.
4
1

1
.
5
1

2
.
1
1

4
.
6

0
.
6
1

1
.
3
2

8
.
1
2

3
.
3
1

9
.
9

7
.
8

7
.
8

5
.
9

2
.
0
1

6
.
1
1

5
.
9

0
.
4

3
.
2
1

7
.
2
2

8
.
0
2

5
.
2
1

3
.
0
1

8
.
0
1

8
.
9

6
.
5

8
.
1

9
.
3
1

1
.
0
2

1
.
0
2

6
.
2
1

2
.
9

1
.
8

0
.
8

2
.
8

9
.
7

5
.
7

9
.
4

2
.
1

7
.
0
1

0
.
0
2

3
.
9
1

8
.
1
1

5
.
2
8

1
.
5
6

7
.
9
4

1
.
8
3

6
.
9
1

5
.
0
7

7
.
6
3

8
.
1
7

3
.
2
9

8
.
4
9

8
.
4
9

4
.
3
9

7
.
0
8

6
.
4
6

2
.
8
4

7
.
7
3

4
.
9
1

1
.
0
7

3
.
6
3

4
.
1
7

0
.
2
9

1
.
9
4

4
.
9
3

0
.
1
3

5
.
4
2

7
.
1
1

2
.
1
4

0
.
2
2

9
.
9
3

4
.
4
5

4
.
7
5

4
.
8
5

7
.
6
5

8
.
8
4

5
.
9
3

2
.
0
3

7
.
3
2

6
.
1
1

7
.
1
4

6
.
1
2

9
.
9
3

1
.
4
5

2
.
2
1

7
.
3
1

6
.
4
1

6
.
0
1

9
.
5

4
.
7
1

5
.
4
2

0
.
4
2

6
.
4
1

8
.
0
1

5
.
9

1
.
9

7
.
9

1
.
0
1

3
.
1
1

3
.
9

6
.
4

6
.
3
1

9
.
3
2

9
.
2
2

7
.
3
1

5
.
9

2
.
9

7
.
7

1
.
4

4
.
1

0
.
4
1

6
.
9
1

0
.
1
2

2
.
3
1

7
.
9

2
.
8

7
.
7

6
.
7

8
.
6

0
.
6

7
.
3

0
.
1

0
.
1
1

7
.
9
1

1
.
0
2

4
.
2
1

2
.
4
5

4
.
3
4

6
.
3
3

6
.
5
2

9
.
1
1

9
.
7
4

3
.
7
2

6
.
0
5

7
.
2
6

5
.
3
6

7
.
3
6

4
.
1
6

8
.
2
5

4
.
2
4

1
.
2
3

7
.
4
2

7
.
1
1

9
.
6
4

8
.
6
2

9
.
9
4

7
.
1
6

9
4
-
5
4

4
5
-
0
5

9
5
-
5
5

4
6
-
0
6

+
5
6

l
a
t
o
T

8
0
0
2

9
1
-
5
1

4
2
-
0
2

9
2
-
5
2

4
3
-
0
3

9
3
-
5
3

4
4
-
0
4

9
4
-
5
4

4
5
-
0
5

9
5
-
5
5

4
6
-
0
6

+
5
6

l
a
t
o
T

7
0
0
2

9
1
-
5
1

4
2
-
0
2

9
2
-
5
2

64

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

.

3
7
2

.

2
8
2

.

4
6
2

.

1
2
2

.

9
8
1

.

7
5
1

.

2
3
1

8
5

.

.

0
1
2

.

2
4
1

.

4
4
2

.

2
7
2

.

4
6
2

.

2
8
2

.

4
6
2

.

1
2
2

.

4
9
1

.

3
6
1

.

8
2
1

7
5

.

.

0
1
2

.

6
3
1

.

1
2
1

8
9

.

6
8

.

3
6

.

6
9

.

9
5

.

-

.

0
0
1

1
8

.

9
5

.

3
4

.

2
2

.

6
1

.

8
0

.

0
0

.

.

3
7
1

.

0
1
1

.

9
7
2

.

2
8
2

.

6
8
1

.

2
5
1

.

4
1
1

.

4
0
1

9
7

.

.

8
6

.

2
8

5
2

.

5
3

.

.

1
8
1

.

1
2
2

.

6
4
1

.

9
0
1

7
7

.

0
6

.

0
4

.

3
2

.

5
1

.

3
0

.

3
0

.

.

9
7
1

.

1
1
1

.

3
0
3

.

7
0
3

.

0
8
2

.

1
3
2

.

3
9
1

.

9
5
1

.

3
3
1

8
5

.

.

6
3
2

.

3
7
1

.

3
1
3

.

9
1
3

.

7
9
2

.

5
0
3

.

1
8
2

.

0
3
2

.

8
9
1

.

6
6
1

.

9
2
1

7
5

.

.

6
3
2

.

0
7
8

.

7
7
8

.

6
6
8

.

4
4
7

.

5
8
5

.

3
4
4

.

5
5
3

.

6
8
1

.

7
2
6

.

2
9
2

.

9
7
5

.

4
0
8

.

3
7
8

.

4
7
8

.

1
6
8

.

4
5
7

.

9
8
5

.

0
6
4

.

8
5
3

.

0
0
2

.

9
2
6

7
.
8

7
.
7

7
.
7

8
.
8

5
.
9

3
.
9

7
.
8

9
.
2

3
.
8

1
.
7

0
.
7

8
.
7

4
.
7

2
.
6

1
.
4

2
.
1

4
.
1
1

0
.
0
1

2
.
9
1

7
.
0
2

1
.
3
1

4
.
8

9
.
7

9
.
7

5
.
8

4
.
0
1

3
.
0
1

6
.
7

7
.
2

3
.
1
1

1
.
7
1

0
.
9
1

4
.
2
1

9
.
7

3
.
7

2
.
7

4
.
7

2
.
8

6
.
6

8
.
3

0
.
1

9
.
9

8
.
4
9

4
.
4
9

1
.
3
9

7
.
0
8

1
.
3
6

2
.
7
4

0
.
7
3

9
.
8
1

8
.
9
6

2
.
5
3

5
.
1
7

8
.
1
9

8
.
4
9

2
.
4
9

8
.
2
9

4
.
1
8

1
.
4
6

2
.
9
4

2
.
7
3

2
.
0
2

9
.
9
6

4
.
7
5

0
.
8
5

8
.
6
5

3
.
8
4

7
.
8
3

7
.
9
2

6
.
3
2

4
.
1
1

5
.
1
4

0
.
2
2

5
.
9
3

7
.
3
5

1
.
7
5

0
.
8
5

5
.
6
5

8
.
8
4

1
.
9
3

8
.
0
3

6
.
3
2

9
.
1
1

5
.
1
4

7
.
9

5
.
8

0
.
8

8
.
8

1
.
9

3
.
9

4
.
8

7
.
2

7
.
8

4
.
7

8
.
6

0
.
7

2
.
6

0
.
5

2
.
3

8
.
0

6
.
2
1

3
.
0
1

5
.
1
2

1
.
3
2

3
.
4
1

7
.
9

6
.
8

3
.
8

5
.
8

0
.
0
1

1
.
0
1

2
.
7

7
.
2

7
.
2
1

4
.
7
1

1
.
0
2

9
.
2
1

6
.
8

4
.
7

9
.
6

6
.
6

8
.
6

3
.
5

8
.
2

8
.
0

2
.
0
1

8
.
2
6

6
.
2
6

9
.
0
6

0
.
2
5

2
.
1
4

3
.
1
3

4
.
4
2

5
.
1
1

2
.
6
4

6
.
6
2

5
.
9
4

7
.
1
6

5
.
2
6

6
.
2
6

7
.
0
6

3
.
2
5

0
.
2
4

5
.
2
3

2
.
4
2

0
.
2
1

3
.
6
4

4
3
-
0
3

9
3
-
5
3

4
4
-
0
4

9
4
-
5
4

4
5
-
0
5

9
5
-
5
5

4
6
-
0
6

+
5
6

l
a
t
o
T

6
0
0
2

9
1
-
5
1

4
2
-
0
2

9
2
-
5
2

4
3
-
0
3

9
3
-
5
3

4
4
-
0
4

9
4
-
5
4

4
5
-
0
5

9
5
-
5
5

4
6
-
0
6

+
5
6

l
a
t
o
T

e
s
a
b
a
t
a
D
s
c
i
t
s
i
t
a
t
S
e
c
r
o
F
r
u
o
b
a
L
,
t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T
:
e
c
r
u
o
S

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 65

TABLE 3.6 ACTIVITY AND EMPLOYMENT RATES (15+) – TOTAL AND FEMALE (%)

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total activity rate

Female activity rate

Total employment rate

Female employment rate

46.3

23.6

41.5

21.0

46.2

23.6

41.5

21.0

46.9

24.5

41.7

21.6

47.9

26.0

41.2

22.3

Source: TurkStat, Labour Force Statistics Database

TABLE 3.7 UNEMPLOYMENT RATES (15+) – TOTAL, FEMALE AND YOUTH (%)

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total unemployment rate

Total non-agricultural

unemployment rate

Female unemployment rate

Total female non-agricultural
unemployment rate

Youth (15-24) unemployment rate

Source: TurkStat, Labour Force Statistics Data

10.2

12.2

11.1

17.9

19.1

10.3

12.6

11.0

17.3

20.0

11.0

13.6

11.6

18.1

20.5

14.0

17.4

14.3

21.9

25.3

48.8

27.6

43.0

24.0

11.9

14.8

13.0

20.2

21.7

66

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

.

0
4
2

.

8
9
1

.

9
8
2

.

0
7
2

.

0
3
2

.

9
2
2

.

8
7
2

.

7
9
1

.

7
2
3

.

4
3
4

.

1
0
3

.

2
9
1

.

5
1
1

.

3
2
2

.

1
8
1

.

4
7
2

.

9
3
2

.

8
1
2

.

0
2
2

.

0
3
1

.

4
7
1

.

8
0
1

.

8
4
1

.

9
3
1

.

9
3
1

.

3
5
1

.

3
4
1

2
8

.

4
4

.

3
3

.

.

3
2
1

6
7

.

.

3
4
1

.

9
9
1

.

9
3
1

.

0
6
1

.

0
7
1

.

5
4
1

.

6
7
2

.

0
4
2

.

4
2
3

.

7
1
3

.

7
6
2

.

6
6
2

.

9
2
3

.

0
3
2

.

6
5
3

.

4
5
4

.

2
1
3

.

9
1
2

.

4
2
1

.

0
6
2

.

6
2
2

.

8
1
3

.

4
8
2

.

2
6
2

.

7
5
2

.

7
2
6

.

4
2
6

.

0
5
6

.

4
3
6

.

2
3
6

.

8
3
6

.

4
4
6

.

5
0
6

.

5
3
6

.

1
6
6

.

2
6
6

.

2
0
6

.

0
6
5

.

7
0
6

.

7
9
5

.

4
4
6

.

3
0
6

.

1
2
6

.

8
1
6

4
.
1
1

2
.
3
1

9
.
7

7
.
0
1

6
.
0
1

7
.
9

3
.
3
1

5
.
1
1

3
.
8

3
.
7

3
.
0
1

0
.
5
1

4
.
3
1

9
.
3
1

8
.
5
1

3
.
9

3
.
3
1

5
.
3
1

6
.
1
1

8
.
0
7

9
.
1
7

6
.
0
7

0
.
1
7

7
.
0
7

6
.
0
7

3
.
4
7

3
.
8
6

3
.
9
6

3
.
1
7

8
.
3
7

8
.
0
7

7
.
4
6

5
.
0
7

9
.
0
7

0
.
1
7

5
.
9
6

8
.
1
7

9
.
9
6

0
.
3
4

0
.
1
4

9
.
6
4

7
.
4
4

0
.
3
4

0
.
3
4

8
.
5
4

5
.
9
3

5
.
7
4

6
.
4
5

7
.
7
4

1
.
9
3

2
.
3
3

2
.
1
4

8
.
8
3

6
.
5
4

6
.
1
4

7
.
1
4

5
.
1
4

9
.
1
1

3
.
4
1

8
.
8

0
.
2
1

5
.
1
1

8
.
0
1

9
.
3
1

2
.
2
1

3
.
8

1
.
6

2
.
8

3
.
4
1

4
.
2
1

0
.
4
1

8
.
6
1

8
.
0
1

1
.
4
1

4
.
4
1

4
.
2
1

8
.
8
4

8
.
7
4

4
.
1
5

9
.
0
5

6
.
8
4

2
.
8
4

2
.
3
5

0
.
5
4

8
.
1
5

2
.
8
5

9
.
1
5

7
.
5
4

9
.
7
3

9
.
7
4

7
.
6
4

1
.
1
5

4
.
8
4

8
.
8
4

4
.
7
4

e
t
a
r

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
n
U

l

e
c
r
o
f

r
u
o
b
a
L

e
t
a
r

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
n
U

l

e
c
r
o
f

r
u
o
b
a
L

e
t
a
r

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
n
U

l

e
c
r
o
f

r
u
o
b
a
L

e
t
a
r

e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p

e
t
a
r

e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p

e
t
a
r

e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p

l

e
a
m
e
F

e
l
a
M

l
a
t
o
T

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
e
W

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
a
E

n
a
e
g
e
A

0
1
0
2

l
a
t
o
T

l

u
b
n
a
t
s
I

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
e
W

n
a
e
n
a
r
r
e
t
i
d
e
M

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

l

a
r
t
n
e
C

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
e
W

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
a
E

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
E
e
d
d
M

i

l

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
u
o
S

9
0
0
2

l
a
t
o
T

l

u
b
n
a
t
s
I

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
e
W

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
a
E

n
a
e
g
e
A

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
e
W

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
r
o
N

)

%

(

R
E
D
N
E
G
D
N
A
N
O
G
E
R
Y
B

I

)
+
5
1
(

S
E
T
A
R
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E
D
N
A
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E
N
U

,

I

I

Y
T
V
T
C
A
8
.
3
E
L
B
A
T

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 67

.

5
3
2

.

7
5
1

.

0
7
3

.

7
5
4

.

3
0
3

.

2
6
1

7
8

.

.

6
1
2

.

0
9
1

.

5
6
2

.

7
1
2

.

5
1
2

.

5
0
2

.

9
2
2

.

5
2
1

.

2
6
3

.

7
5
4

.

9
1
3

.

6
3
1

0
9

.

.

0
1
2

.

1
8
1

.

6
8
2

.

9
8
1

.

8
1
1

6
6

.

7
4

.

0
3

.

.

3
2
1

.

5
0
1

.

6
1
1

.

7
3
1

.

4
2
1

.

3
2
1

.

2
3
1

.

6
5
1

.

6
5
1

.

2
0
1

8
5

.

2
5

.

9
1

.

.

1
3
1

6
6

.

.

0
1
1

.

5
3
1

2
9

.

.

0
9
2

.

7
7
1

.

6
9
3

.

0
8
4

.

3
1
3

.

5
8
1

7
9

.

.

5
4
2

.

0
2
2

.

3
0
3

.

7
4
2

.

8
4
2

.

3
4
2

.

1
7
2

.

9
3
1

.

4
8
3

.

2
8
4

.

5
2
3

.

6
5
1

6
9

.

.

6
3
2

.

9
0
2

.

5
1
3

.

7
1
6

.

7
7
5

.

6
5
6

.

9
8
6

.

3
5
6

.

8
7
5

.

3
2
5

.

6
2
6

.

3
3
6

.

4
4
6

.

8
1
6

.

4
5
6

.

7
3
6

.

3
3
6

.

7
8
5

.

5
6
6

.

9
9
6

.

8
6
6

.

0
8
5

.

8
2
5

.

7
2
6

.

7
3
6

.

0
8
6

0
.
7
1

5
.
4
1

9
.
7

9
.
6

0
.
1
1

8
.
7
1

4
.
8
1

7
.
0
1

4
.
0
1

1
.
8

8
.
9

6
.
9

7
.
9

3
.
3
1

1
.
1
1

0
.
8

2
.
6

9
.
7

7
.
4
1

3
.
7
1

0
.
0
1

5
.
9

5
.
5

3
.
4
7

5
.
7
6

2
.
1
7

0
.
4
7

4
.
3
7

3
.
0
7

2
.
4
6

1
.
0
7

6
.
0
7

1
.
0
7

5
.
8
6

4
.
2
7

6
.
0
7

0
.
3
7

0
.
6
6

3
.
2
7

5
.
4
7

6
.
2
7

0
.
8
6

8
.
3
6

8
.
9
6

3
.
0
7

0
.
2
7

3
.
2
4

2
.
6
3

7
.
0
5

0
.
7
5

3
.
7
4

6
.
6
3

0
.
0
3

7
.
1
4

3
.
1
4

3
.
5
4

3
.
1
4

3
.
3
4

7
.
1
4

6
.
2
4

7
.
4
3

8
.
0
5

6
.
7
5

6
.
8
4

9
.
4
3

1
.
0
3

5
.
1
4

9
.
0
4

1
.
8
4

5
.
7
1

9
.
3
1

4
.
7

0
.
6

5
.
8

6
.
6
1

4
.
7
1

0
.
1
1

2
.
1
1

4
.
9

5
.
0
1

5
.
0
1

2
.
1
1

9
.
3
1

9
.
0
1

2
.
7

8
.
5

9
.
5

4
.
4
1

8
.
5
1

3
.
0
1

4
.
0
1

6
.
6

3
.
1
5

0
.
2
4

8
.
4
5

7
.
0
6

7
.
1
5

9
.
3
4

3
.
6
3

9
.
6
4

5
.
6
4

1
.
0
5

2
.
6
4

4
.
8
4

0
.
7
4

5
.
9
4

0
.
9
3

7
.
4
5

1
.
1
6

6
.
1
5

7
.
0
4

7
.
5
3

2
.
6
4

7
.
5
4

5
.
1
5

n
a
e
n
a
r
r
e
t
i
d
e
M

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

l

a
r
t
n
e
C

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
e
W

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
a
E

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
E
e
d
d
M

i

l

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
u
o
S

8
0
0
2

l
a
t
o
T

l

u
b
n
a
t
s
I

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
e
W

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
a
E

n
a
e
g
e
A

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
e
W

n
a
e
n
a
r
r
e
t
i
d
e
M

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

l

a
r
t
n
e
C

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
e
W

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
a
E

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
r
o
N

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
r
o
N

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
E
e
d
d
M

i

l

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
u
o
S

7
0
0
2

l
a
t
o
T

l

u
b
n
a
t
s
I

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
e
W

68

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

.

6
2
2

.

1
1
2

.

5
7
1

.

0
3
2

.

0
5
1

.

5
2
3

.

2
5
4

.

1
6
2

.

0
7
1

1
6

.

.

0
1
2

.

3
8
1

.

1
7
2

.

3
2
2

.

1
1
2

.

5
6
1

.

5
2
2

.

5
5
1

.

8
1
3

.

6
6
4

.

2
8
2

.

5
8
1

7
5

.

.

7
0
1

.

0
1
1

.

8
6
1

.

2
3
1

.

0
2
1

1
7

.

0
5

.

7
2

.

.

5
0
1

.

5
0
1

.

1
1
1

.

0
4
1

4
9

.

.

4
0
1

.

4
2
1

.

4
8
1

.

9
3
1

.

1
3
1

7
5

.

9
4

.

3
2

.

4
8

.

8
8

.

.

3
5
2

.

7
3
2

.

1
1
2

.

5
6
2

.

1
7
1

.

0
5
3

.

5
7
4

.

9
6
2

.

0
9
1

8
6

.

.

6
3
2

.

3
1
2

.

9
9
2

.

9
4
2

.

1
4
2

.

2
0
2

.

1
6
2

.

9
7
1

.

7
3
3

.

0
9
4

.

9
8
2

.

2
0
2

3
6

.

.

6
2
6

.

8
4
6

.

1
3
6

.

9
3
6

.

8
0
6

.

6
5
6

.

9
5
6

.

5
5
6

.

0
8
5

.

2
2
5

.

9
2
6

.

0
4
6

.

8
8
6

.

1
3
6

.

6
4
6

.

0
1
6

.

9
2
6

.

1
0
6

.

5
6
6

.

2
9
6

.

3
8
6

.

4
8
5

.

7
3
5

9
.
8

2
.
9

5
.
9

5
.
1
1

4
.
0
1

4
.
8

7
.
7

2
.
7

6
.
3
1

6
.
7
1

9
.
9

6
.
0
1

3
.
6

8
.
8

7
.
8

4
.
0
1

0
.
2
1

4
.
0
1

9
.
6

1
.
6

2
.
6

1
.
2
1

7
.
4
1

7
.
8
6

4
.
1
7

7
.
9
6

2
.
2
7

9
.
7
6

7
.
1
7

4
.
1
7

6
.
0
7

1
.
7
6

3
.
3
6

9
.
9
6

6
.
1
7

4
.
3
7

2
.
9
6

8
.
0
7

1
.
8
6

5
.
1
7

1
.
7
6

4
.
1
7

7
.
3
7

8
.
2
7

5
.
6
6

0
.
3
6

3
.
2
4

9
.
2
4

9
.
9
3

0
.
3
4

1
.
7
3

5
.
8
4

3
.
5
5

4
.
4
4

3
.
6
3

3
.
8
2

5
.
1
4

3
.
1
4

6
.
7
4

4
.
2
4

9
.
2
4

3
.
8
3

2
.
2
4

0
.
7
3

3
.
8
4

5
.
7
5

1
.
7
4

1
.
7
3

9
.
8
2

4
.
9

7
.
9

2
.
1
1

0
.
2
1

8
.
0
1

9
.
7

6
.
6

8
.
5

9
.
2
1

9
.
6
1

2
.
0
1

4
.
1
1

2
.
7

3
.
9

7
.
9

3
.
2
1

5
.
2
1

0
.
1
1

5
.
6

6
.
5

0
.
5

2
.
1
1

2
.
4
1

7
.
6
4

6
.
7
4

0
.
5
4

8
.
8
4

6
.
1
4

7
.
2
5

2
.
9
5

2
.
7
4

6
.
1
4

0
.
4
3

3
.
6
4

6
.
6
4

3
.
1
5

8
.
6
4

5
.
7
4

7
.
3
4

3
.
8
4

5
.
1
4

6
.
1
5

0
.
1
6

6
.
9
4

8
.
1
4

7
.
3
3

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
a
E

n
a
e
g
e
A

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
e
W

n
a
e
n
a
r
r
e
t
i
d
e
M

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

l

a
r
t
n
e
C

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
e
W

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
a
E

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
E
e
d
d
M

i

l

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
u
o
S

6
0
0
2

l
a
t
o
T

l

u
b
n
a
t
s
I

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
e
W

a
r
a
m
r
a
M

t
s
a
E

n
a
e
g
e
A

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
e
W

n
a
e
n
a
r
r
e
t
i
d
e
M

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

l

a
r
t
n
e
C

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
e
W

a
e
S
k
c
a
B

l

t
s
a
E

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
r
o
N

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
E
e
d
d
M

i

l

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
u
o
S

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
r
o
N

.
s
r
e
b
m
u
n
e
h
t

i

f
o
g
n
d
n
u
o
r
e
h
t
o
t
e
u
d
t
c
a
x
e
e
b
t
o
n
y
a
m
s
e
r
u
g
i
f

l

a
t
o
T

j

i

l

.
s
n
o
i
t
c
e
o
r
p
n
o
i
t
a
u
p
o
p
w
e
n
o
t
g
n
d
r
o
c
c
a
d
e
s
v
e
r
e
r
e
w
6
0
0
2
f
o
s
t
l
u
s
e
r
e
h
T
:
e
t
o
N

i

y
e
v
r
u
S
e
c
r
o
F
r
u
o
b
a
L
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

f
o
s
t
l
u
s
e
R

,
t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T
:
e
c
r
u
o
S

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 69

.

5
3
1

.

4
9
1

.

3
4
2

.

3
6
1

.

1
0
3

.

4
8
1

.

9
2
3

.

7
1
2

.

2
1
2

.

5
5
2

.

1
6
2

.

2
4
1

.

8
4
3

.

7
9
2

5
9

.

.

2
0
1

.

0
1
1

.

5
6
1

.

2
0
1

.

8
1
3

.

9
7
2

.

9
4
1

.

6
1
2

.

3
7
2

.

5
9
1

.

6
3
3

.

9
6
2

.

6
5
4

.

5
1
3

.

3
0
5

.

7
6
7

.

0
8
3

.

8
3
8

.

2
9
2

.

1
2
5

0
.
9
2

4
.
7
2

7
.
0
2

1
.
2
2

0
.
2
1

0
.
7
2

2
.
2
2

4
.
4
2

1
.
4
2

8
.
7
1

2
.
9
1

0
.
1
1

1
.
4
2

6
.
0
2

7
.
1
4

3
.
6
6

2
.
3
9

0
.
7
4

1
.
4
9

5
.
8
3

6
.
5
6

7
.
7
1

4
.
9
2

5
.
9
3

8
.
7
2

2
.
3
6

9
.
3
2

8
.
3
4

9
.
6
2

7
.
5
2

9
.
1
2

9
.
2
2

3
.
2
1

2
.
0
3

9
.
4
2

4
.
6
1

4
.
8
1

9
.
4
1

4
.
8
1

9
.
0
1

2
.
7
2

1
.
3
2

1
.
1
2

1
.
6
3

5
.
6
4

1
.
4
3

0
.
1
7

8
.
2
3

0
.
7
5

.

6
4
4

.

2
7
3

.

5
6
3

.

3
0
7

.

6
3
5

8
.
8
2

5
.
7
2

0
.
4
7

6
.
8
4

4
.
3
3

5
.
2
3

9
.
1
7

.

3
0
2

.

7
0
3

.

0
3
2

.

3
6
2

.

2
0
4

7
.
3
2

0
.
1
2

9
.
0
5

0
.
0
3

9
.
5
2

7
.
1
2

3
.
8
3

.

1
3
1

.

9
6
1

.

4
1
2

.

6
4
1

.

4
2
2

.

3
7
2

.

0
1
2

.

5
9
2

3
8

.

.

6
5
1

.

9
0
1

.

9
7
1

.

3
4
1

.

1
0
2

.

0
4
2

.

8
7
1

.

0
5
2

.

0
6
4

.

7
2
7

.

5
3
3

1
.
5
3

9
.
1
3

7
.
4
2

7
.
7
2

7
.
2
3

7
.
7
2

5
.
1
2

0
.
4
2

2
.
7
3

6
.
3
6

6
.
2
9

0
.
4
4

0
.
6
1

5
.
6
2

8
.
8
3

6
.
4
2

3
.
1
3

5
.
0
3

9
.
3
2

1
.
8
2

5
.
9
1

0
.
3
2

9
.
7
1

4
.
2
2

9
.
9
1

4
.
4
3

2
.
7
4

7
.
1
3

l

e
a
m
e
F

e
l
a
M

l
a
t
o
T

.
l

p
m
E

e
t
a
r

l
a
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
a

e
t
a
r

.
l

p
m
e
n
u

e
t
a
r

n
o
i
t
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p

e
t
a
r

-
n
o
N

.
l

p
m
e
n
U

e
c
r
o
f

r
u
o
b
a
L

.
l

p
m
E

e
t
a
r

l
a
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
a

e
t
a
r

.
l

p
m
e
n
u

e
t
a
r

n
o
i
t
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p

e
t
a
r

-
n
o
N

.
l

p
m
e
n
U

e
c
r
o
f

r
u
o
b
a
L

.
l

p
m
E

e
t
a
r

l
a
r
u
t
l
u
c
i
r
g
a

e
t
a
r

.
l

p
m
e
n
u

e
t
a
r

n
o
i
t
a
p
i
c
i
t
r
a
p

e
t
a
r

-
n
o
N

.
l

p
m
e
n
U

e
c
r
o
f

r
u
o
b
a
L

)

%

(

I

R
E
D
N
E
G
D
N
A
S
U
T
A
T
S
L
A
N
O
T
A
C
U
D
E
Y
B
S
E
T
A
R
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E
D
N
A
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E
N
U

,

I

Y
T
V
T
C
A

I

)
4
2
-
5
1
(

H
T
U
O
Y
9
.
3
E
L
B
A
T

l

o
o
h
c
s
o
n
t
u
b
e
t
a
r
e
t
i
L

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
P

e
t
a
r
e
t
i
l
l
I

0
1
0
2

r
o

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
r
o
n
u
J

i

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

l

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

i

h
g
h
t
a

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
H

i

l

e
v
e

l

l

o
o
h
c
s

i

r
e
h
g
h
r
e
h
t
o
r
o
y
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
U

i

n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

l

o
o
h
c
s
o
n
t
u
b
e
t
a
r
e
t
i
L

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l
a
t
o
T

9
0
0
2

e
t
a
r
e
t
i
l
l
I

70

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

.

5
2
2

.

4
0
3

.

7
4
2

.

9
9
2

.

8
4
7

6
.
2
2

1
.
1
2

7
.
4
9

3
.
6
5

6
.
3
2

6
.
1
2

8
.
1
7

r
o

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
r
o
n
u
J

i

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

l

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

.

8
8
1

.

4
2
3

.

2
6
3

.

7
3
3

.

5
3
3

.

0
2
3

.

2
8
2

.

6
7
4

.

9
0
3

.

4
0
5

2
.
1
3

3
.
7
2

8
.
8
2

3
.
5
2

4
.
3
4

5
.
7
6

0
.
5
2

9
.
2
4

1
.
3
3

5
.
9
2

6
.
0
3

6
.
7
2

0
.
6
3

2
.
9
5

.

9
6
4

.

3
7
3

.

8
6
3

.

2
4
7

.

7
5
5

1
.
0
3

0
.
9
2

4
.
8
7

8
.
0
5

0
.
4
3

2
.
3
3

1
.
6
7

.

3
9
1

.

9
2
3

.

0
5
2

.

8
5
2

.

0
9
3

4
.
8
2

4
.
5
2

2
.
2
5

9
.
8
2

8
.
9
2

3
.
5
2

7
.
8
3

.

1
4
1

.

9
7
1

.

2
0
2

.

5
4
1

.

8
1
2

.

4
8
1

.

5
3
3

1
9

.

.

0
0
2

.

0
0
2

.

0
4
2

.

8
9
2

.

5
0
3

.

1
9
2

3
5

.

.

0
0
1

.

2
0
1

.

8
3
1

.

0
6
2

.

1
8
2

.

7
7
2

.

9
4
1

.

9
9
1

.

5
2
2

.

8
6
1

.

5
9
2

.

6
5
2

.

3
6
4

.

4
2
2

.

5
2
4

.

0
6
7

.

0
4
3

.

2
6
7

.

8
9
2

.

5
4
5

9
.
6
2

0
.
1
3

4
.
8
1

1
.
2
2

7
.
8
1

3
.
5
2

8
.
8
1

1
.
2
2

7
.
6
2

3
.
6
1

3
.
9
1

4
.
7
1

2
.
3
2

6
.
7
1

7
.
8
2

9
.
7
5

8
.
0
9

2
.
2
4

3
.
2
9

8
.
8
3

2
.
6
6

9
.
5
1

1
.
6
2

3
.
9
3

8
.
4
2

5
.
6
5

5
.
4
2

1
.
6
4

6
.
9
1

9
.
7
2

7
.
8
1

5
.
2
2

4
.
0
2

2
.
7
2

2
.
2
2

0
.
1
1

8
.
9
1

3
.
4
1

9
.
7
1

7
.
8
1

0
.
5
2

8
.
0
2

8
.
7
1

5
.
2
3

9
.
5
4

2
.
0
3

5
.
9
6

6
.
2
3

2
.
8
5

.

4
8
4

.

4
5
3

.

0
5
3

.

5
4
7

.

2
9
5

0
.
5
2

0
.
4
2

9
.
7
7

4
.
3
5

5
.
0
3

8
.
9
2

0
.
6
7

.

8
9
1

.

5
8
2

.

2
1
2

.

1
5
2

.

3
1
4

3
.
2
2

1
.
0
2

7
.
1
5

3
.
0
3

2
.
4
2

5
.
0
2

1
.
8
3

.

9
1
1

.

7
5
1

.

6
4
1

.

0
3
1

6
8

.

1
9

.

.

0
3
1

.

3
7
1

.

2
6
2

.

0
2
4

6
.
2
3

7
.
4
2

9
.
8
2

6
.
2
2

8
.
6
3

2
.
4
5

6
.
4
1

5
.
4
2

9
.
5
2

3
.
1
2

7
.
6
1

3
.
7
1

5
.
7
1

6
.
9
2

i

h
g
h
t
a

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
H

i

l

e
v
e

l

l

o
o
h
c
s

i

r
e
h
g
h
r
e
h
t
o
r
o
y
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
U

i

n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

l

o
o
h
c
s
o
n
t
u
b
e
t
a
r
e
t
i
L

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l
a
t
o
T

8
0
0
2

e
t
a
r
e
t
i
l
l
I

r
o

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
r
o
n
u
J

i

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

l

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

i

h
g
h
t
a

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
H

i

l

e
v
e

l

l

o
o
h
c
s

i

r
e
h
g
h
r
e
h
t
o
r
o
y
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
U

i

n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

l

o
o
h
c
s
o
n
t
u
b
e
t
a
r
e
t
i
L

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

l
a
t
o
T

7
0
0
2

e
t
a
r
e
t
i
l
l
I

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 71

.

9
9
1

.

7
3
1

.

3
3
2

.

7
7
1

.

8
1
3

.

2
0
2

.

8
3
2

.

6
7
2

.

6
1
3

.

9
9
2

4
9

.

.

1
4
1

.

2
3
2

.

5
8
2

.

5
8
2

.

0
2
2

.

9
5
1

.

3
0
3

.

8
4
2

.

6
4
4

.

7
4
7

.

5
0
3

.

1
4
7

.

4
9
2

.

3
4
5

9
.
8
1

4
.
0
2

2
.
0
2

5
.
2
2

2
.
1
2

0
.
7
1

8
.
7
1

5
.
8
1

5
.
0
2

9
.
9
1

0
.
0
9

2
.
7
3

9
.
0
9

0
.
7
3

8
.
7
6

3
.
9
3

7
.
2
2

8
.
4
5

9
.
3
2

2
.
5
4

2
.
9
1

1
.
1
2

4
.
1
2

9
.
5
2

0
.
4
2

7
.
4
1

8
.
6
1

3
.
9
1

5
.
3
2

6
.
2
2

1
.
6
4

3
.
7
2

9
.
7
6

2
.
1
3

4
.
8
5

.

4
2
5

.

8
0
3

.

3
0
3

.

2
5
7

.

2
7
5

0
.
7
2

4
.
6
2

7
.
7
7

6
.
4
5

0
.
9
2

5
.
8
2

3
.
6
7

.

3
9
1

.

4
7
2

.

8
0
2

.

4
4
2

.

5
1
4

5
.
1
2

6
.
9
1

6
.
1
5

2
.
0
3

3
.
3
2

0
.
0
2

7
.
7
3

.

3
2
1

.

2
6
1

.

7
1
2

.

6
1
1

.

3
2
2

.

6
6
1

.

8
9
2

.

4
1
1

.

1
5
1

.

8
3
2

.

7
3
2

.

0
7
2

.

9
3
3

.

7
0
3

1
4

.

6
8

.

.

7
1
1

.

9
3
1

.

6
0
2

.

3
0
3

.

4
9
2

.

9
2
1

.

7
7
1

.

5
4
2

.

5
3
1

.

0
8
2

.

9
3
2

.

3
2
4

.

7
0
3

.

7
9
3

.

4
1
7

.

6
5
2

.

6
8
6

.

2
9
2

.

3
4
5

3
.
5
2

5
.
2
2

2
.
8
1

9
.
7
1

1
.
9
1

5
.
4
2

4
.
8
1

9
.
2
2

6
.
9
1

3
.
6
1

6
.
5
1

2
.
7
1

3
.
2
2

2
.
7
1

8
.
9
3

3
.
9
4

3
.
5
8

3
.
0
3

9
.
2
8

6
.
7
3

6
.
5
6

1
.
6
1

7
.
4
2

7
.
8
3

4
.
9
1

2
.
9
4

3
.
3
2

1
.
4
4

4
.
0
2

3
.
0
2

5
.
9
1

0
.
9
1

5
.
0
2

9
.
7
2

4
.
2
2

5
.
2
1

3
.
5
1

7
.
4
1

2
.
5
1

9
.
7
1

2
.
5
2

1
.
1
2

4
.
8
1

1
.
9
2

3
.
5
4

8
.
2
2

9
.
9
5

2
.
1
3

8
.
5
5

.

5
2
5

.

6
9
2

.

2
9
2

.

2
4
7

.

6
7
5

7
.
5
2

0
.
5
2

8
.
6
7

9
.
4
5

7
.
7
2

2
.
7
2

4
.
5
7

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
P

r
o

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
r
o
n
u
J

i

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

l

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
H

i

i

h
g
h
t
a

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

e
v
e

l

l

o
o
h
c
s

i

r
e
h
g
h
r
e
h
t
o
r
o
y
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
U

i

n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

l

o
o
h
c
s
o
n
t
u
b
e
t
a
r
e
t
i
L

l

d
e
t
e
p
m
o
c

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
P

l
a
t
o
T

6
0
0
2

e
t
a
r
e
t
i
l
l
I

r
o

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
h
r
o
n
u
J

i

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

l

t
n
e
a
v
u
q
e

i

l

o
o
h
c
s

i

h
g
h
t
a

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
V

l

o
o
h
c
s
h
g
H

i

l

e
v
e

l

l

o
o
h
c
s

i

r
e
h
g
h
r
e
h
t
o
r
o
y
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
U

i

.

3
9
1

.

1
8
2

.

6
0
2

.

4
4
2

.

8
1
4

2
.
0
2

3
.
8
1

1
.
1
5

3
.
0
3

5
.
2
2

1
.
9
1

4
.
7
3

l
a
t
o
T

n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

e
s
a
b
a
t
a
D
s
c
i
t
s
i
t
a
t
S
e
c
r
o
F
r
u
o
b
a
L
,
t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T
:
e
c
r
u
o
S

72

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 3.10 EMPLOYMENT STATUS (15+) BY GENDER (MILLION)

Total

Regular and
casual
employees

Employer

Self-employed Unpaid family

worker

2010

2009

2008

2007*

2006*

2005*

2004*

2010

2009

2008

2007*

2006*

2005*

2004*

2010

2009

2008

2007*

2006*

2005*

2004*

22.594

21.277

21.194

20.738

20.423

20.066

19.631

16.170

15.406

15.598

15.382

15.165

14.958

14.585

6.425

5.871

5.595

5.356

5.258

5.108

5.047

Total

Male

1.202

1.209

1.249

1.189

1.162

1.101

0.999

1.120

1.132

1.172

1.114

1.093

1.051

0.950

Female

0.83

0.77

0.77

0.75

0.69

0.50

0.49

13.762

12.770

12.937

12.534

12.028

11.435

10.693

10.502

9.771

9.962

9.725

9.358

8.967

8.430

3.260

2.999

2.975

2.809

2.670

2.468

2.263

4.548

4.429

4.324

4.386

4.555

4.689

4.571

3.725

3.680

3.707

3.769

3.895

4.022

4.081

0.822

0.749

0.616

0.617

0.659

0.667

0.490

3.083

2.870

2.684

2.628

2.678

2.841

3.367

0.823

0.825

0.757

0.773

0.819

0.918

1.123

2.260

2.045

1.927

1.855

1.859

1.923

2.244

Note: (*) Revised according to new population projections. Total figures may not be exact due to the rounding of the numbers.
Source: TurkStat, Results of Household Labour Force Survey

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 73

TABLE 3.11 EMPLOYMENT STATUS (15+) OF PEOPLE NOT REGISTERED TO ANY SOCIAL SECURITY
INSTITUTION BY GENDER (MILLION)

Total

Regular and
casual
employees

Employer

Self-employed Unpaid family

worker

2010

2009

2008

2007*

2006*

2005*

2004*

2010

2009

2008

2007*

2006*

2005*

2004*

2010

2009

2008

2007*

2006*

2005*

2004*

9.772

9.328

9.220

9.423

9.593

9.666

9.843

6.015

5.902

5.950

6.170

6.283

6.348

6.455

3.758

3.426

3.269

3.253

3.310

3.318

3.388

Total

Male

0.301

0.325

0.349

0.330

0.310

0.282

0.231

0.280

0.300

0.324

0.309

0.286

0.264

0.217

Female

0.22

0.24

0.26

0.21

0.23

0.18

0.14

3.535

3.349

3.414

3.681

3.786

3.658

3.433

2.678

2.551

2.622

2.839

2.912

2.837

2.691

0.857

0.798

0.792

0.842

0.875

0.821

0.742

3.095

3.031

2.893

2.892

2.954

3.031

2.942

2.348

2.348

2.335

2.329

2.364

2.421

2.499

0.746

0.683

0.559

0.563

0.590

0.610

0.443

2.841

2.624

2.563

2.519

2.543

2.695

3.237

0.709

0.703

0.670

0.692

0.721

0.826

1.048

2.133

1.922

1.893

1.826

1.822

1.869

2.189

Note: (*) Revised according to new population projections. Total figures may not be exact due to the rounding of the numbers.
Source: TurkStat, Results of Household Labour Force Survey

74

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 3.12 WORKERS’ STATUS AND SOCIAL SECURITY COVERAGE, 2010 (%)

Male share
per status

Thereof without
social security

Female share
per status

Thereof without
social security

Regular and casual employees

Employers

Self-employed

Unpaid family workers

Total

60.9

5.3

20.1

13.6

100

25.7

25.0

68.1

92.2

50.7

1.3

12.8

35.2

100

26.3

26.5

90.8

94.4

Source: TurkStat, Results of Household Labour Force Survey

TABLE 3.13 EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRIAL SECTOR (% OF TOTAL EMPLOYMENT) AND SHARE OF GDP

Civil employment

2007

2008

2009

Sector shares in
GDP
2009

Agriculture

Industry

Construction

Services

Total

23.5

20.8

5.9

49.8

100.0

23.7

21

5.9

49.5

100.1

24.7

19.4

5.9

50.0

100.0

8.2

18.8

3.8

69.2

100.0

Sources: TurkStat, Results of Household Labour Force Survey; for shares in GDP: TOBB 2009 Economic Report

TABLE 3.14 EMPLOYMENT BY ECONOMIC SECTOR (%)

2004*

2005*

2006*

2007*

2008

2009

2010

Total

Total

Agriculture

Industry

Construction

Services

Male

Total

Agriculture

Industry

Construction

Services

Female

Total

Agriculture

Industry

Construction

Services

100

29.1

20.0

4.9

46.0

100

21.6

21.5

6.5

50.5

100

50.8

15.6

0.5

33.1

100

25.7

20.8

5.5

48.0

100

18.6

22.4

7.2

51.7

100

46.3

16.1

0.5

37.0

100

24.0

20.9

5.9

49.2

100

17.2

22.7

7.6

52.4

100

43.6

15.7

0.7

40.0

100

23.5

20.8

5.9

49.8

100

16.8

22.7

7.8

52.8

100

42.7

15.4

0.7

41.2

100

23.7

21.0

5.9

49.5

100

17.1

23.1

7.7

52.1

100

42.1

15.0

0.8

42.2

100

24.7

19.4

5.9

50.0

100

18.2

21.2

7.9

52.7

100

41.7

14.7

0.7

43.0

100

25.2

19.9

6.3

48.6

100

18.3

21.8

8.5

51.4

100

42.4

15.0

0.9

41.7

Source: TurkStat, Results of Household Labour Force Survey; (*) Revised according to the new population projections

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 75

FIGURE 3.3 EMPLOYMENT BY ECONOMIC SECTOR AND GENDER, 2009 (1 000s)

Services

Construction

Industry

Agriculture

Agriculture

Industry

Construction

Services

Women

Men

2 446

2 808

862

3 269

39

1 210

2 524

8 119

Source: TurkStat, Results of Household Labour Force Survey

TABLE 3.15 ANNUAL AVERAGE GROSS EARNINGS BY GENDER AND EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT, 2006

Educational attainment
(ISCED, 1997)

Annual
average
gross
earnings
(TRY)

Payments comprising the earnings (%)

Basic wage
payments

Regular
payments

Irregular
payments

In-kind
payments

Total

Total

Primary school and below

Primary education and secondary school

High school

Vocational high school

Higher education

Male

Total

Primary school and below

Primary education and secondary school

High school

Vocational high school

Higher education

14 252

9 676

9 640

11 802

16 334

27 310

14 316

9 952

9 999

12 042

17 312

29 258

82.0

84.9

85.3

83.9

72.2

81.8

81.0

84.1

84.6

83.2

70.2

80.9

8.9

8.6

8.1

8.2

16.1

7.2

9.8

9.0

8.6

9.0

17.4

7.9

6.7

4.2

4.1

5.2

8.0

9.1

6.8

4.5

4.5

5.2

8.5

9.4

2.4

2.3

2.4

2.7

3.8

1.8

2.4

2.3

2.3

2.6

3.9

1.7

76

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

Educational attainment
(ISCED, 1997)

Annual
average
gross
earnings
(TRY)

Payments comprising the earnings (%)

Basic wage
payments

Regular
payments

Irregular
payments

In-kind
payments

Female

Total

Primary school and below

Primary education and secondary school

High school

Vocational high school

Higher education

Source: TurkStat, Results of Structure of Earnings Survey, 2006

14 036

8 159

8 064

11 182

11 990

23 899

85.4

89.8

89.3

85.9

84.9

83.7

5.8

5.4

5.6

5.9

7.3

5.7

6.4

2.4

2.4

5.3

5.0

8.5

2.4

2.4

2.7

2.9

2.8

2.0

TABLE 3.16 MONTHLY AVERAGE GROSS WAGE BY GENDER, EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT AND
GENDER PAY GAP, 2006

Distribution of
employees

Monthly average
basic gross wage
(TRY)

Monthly average
gross wage
(TRY)

Gender
pay
gap

Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female

(%)

Total

100

100

100

Primary school and below

30.9

34.0

20.6

Primary education and
secondary school

16.4

17.3

13.2

994

692

694

986

1 021

1 103

1 107

1 091

1.4

707

714

614

603

764

760

784

788

650

17.1

640

18.7

High school

22.4

21.0

27.2

840

850

814

922

943

870

7.7

Vocational high school

11.3

12.0

9.0

1 004

1 035

864

1 233

1 298

944

27.2

Higher education

19.0

15.7

30.0

1 920

2 035

1 719

2 088

2 231

1 837

17.7

Source: TurkStat, Results of Structure of Earnings Survey, 2006

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 77

TABLE 3.17 NUMBER OF REGISTERED UNEMPLOYED BY AGE AND GENDER

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total

Total

Total

Male

Female

Total

Male

Female

Total

Total

15–19

26 230

29 790

32 290

19 770

12 520

43 740

27 090

16 650

71 910

28 720

20-24

168 830 178 050 156 320 108 330

47 990 212 530 143 020

69 500 339 020 248 500

25-29

231 390 269 070 190 790 144 690

46 110 262 660 194 950

67 710 435 720 373 020

30-39

295 450 364 010 216 440 169 260

47 180 313 680 241 270

72 410 563 500 516 960

40-44

91 880 122 890

59 240

47 500

11 740

86 720

68 330

18 400 153 590 134 180

45–64

66 700

96 510

40 820

30 140

10 670

66 880

48 710

18 180 122 980 111 490

65+

780

1 540

640

440

200

1 630

970

660

2 630

1 690

Total

881 260 1 061 850 696 540 520 140 176 400 987 840 724 340 263 500 1 689 350 1 414 540

Sources: 2005-06 and 2009-10: (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6); 2007: CPESSEC, Statistical Bulletin No 1, July 2008; 2008: CPESSEC, Statistical Bulletin No 2, July 2009

78

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

l

e
a
m
e
F

0
1
0
2

l

e
a
M

l

a
t
o
T

l

e
a
m
e
F

9
0
0
2

e
l
a
M

l
a
t
o
T

e
l
a
m
e
F

8
0
0
2

e
l
a
M

l
a
t
o
T

l

e
a
m
e
F

7
0
0
2

e
l
a
M

l
a
t
o
T

0
7
9
4
1
4

0
7
5
9
9
9

0
4
5
4
1
4
1

0
3
1
3
0
5

0
2
2
6
8
1
1

0
5
3
9
8
6
1

0
0
5
3
6
2

0
4
3
4
2
7

0
4
8
7
8
9

0
0
4
6
7
1

0
4
1
0
2
5

0
4
5
6
9
6

l
a
t
o
T

S
F
L

0
0
0
5
0
6

0
0
0
0
7
5
1

0
0
0
5
7
1
2

0
0
0
5
6
6

0
0
0
9
2
9
1

0
0
0
4
9
5
2

0
0
0
3
8
4

0
0
0
7
2
4
1

0
0
0
2
1
9
1

0
0
0
4
0
4

0
0
0
2
5
2
1

0
0
0
6
5
6
1

r
a
e
y
1
o
t
p
U

0
0
0
3
5
3

0
0
0
8
1
5

0
0
0
1
7
8

0
0
0
5
1
3

0
0
0
2
6
5

0
0
0
7
7
8

0
0
0
1
5
2

0
0
0
9
4
4

0
0
0
9
9
6

0
0
0
5
5
2

0
0
0
4
6
4

0
0
0
0
2
7

0
0
0
8
5
9

0
0
0
8
8
0
2

0
0
0
6
4
0
3

0
0
0
0
8
9

0
0
0
1
9
4
2

0
0
0
1
7
4
3

0
0
0
4
3
7

0
0
0
6
7
8
1

0
0
0
1
1
6
2

0
0
0
9
5
6

0
0
0
6
1
7
1

0
0
0
6
7
3
2

+
r
a
e
y
1

l
a
t
o
T

0
8
8
0
1
2

0
8
0
6
1
5

0
6
9
6
2
7

0
8
6
3
5
1

0
6
1
6
1
4

0
4
8
9
6
5

r
a
e
y
1
o
t
p
U

0
3
6
2
5

0
6
2
8
0
2

0
8
8
0
6
2

0
2
7
2
2

0
7
9
3
0
1

0
0
7
6
2
1

+
r
a
e
y
1

l

d
e
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
d
e
r
e
t
s
i
g
e
R

I

R
E
D
N
E
G
D
N
A
N
O
T
A
R
U
D
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E
N
U
Y
B
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E
N
U
S
F
L
D
N
A
T
N
E
M
Y
O
L
P
M
E
N
U
D
E
R
E
T
S
G
E
R
8
1
.
3
E
L
B
A
T

I

t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T
:

S
F
L
;
a
t
a
d
(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

:
0
1
–
9
0
0
2

;

9
0
0
2
y
u
J

l

,

2
o
N
n
i
t
e

l
l

u
B

l

a
c
i
t
s
i
t
a
t
S

,

C
E
S
S
E
P
C

:

8
0
0
2

;

8
0
0
2
y
u
J

l

,

1
o
N
n
i
t
e

l
l

u
B

l

a
c
i
t
s
i
t
a
t
S

,

C
E
S
S
E
P
C

l

:
7
0
0
2
:
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
d
e
r
e
t
s
g
e
R

i

:
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 79

FIGURE 3.4 COMPARISON OF UNEMPLOYMENT DATA – LFS AND ADMINISTRATIVE DATA (100s)

4.000

3.500

3.000

2.500

2.000

1.500

1.000

500

0

2.328

2.377

1.062

200

2006

697

221

2007

3.471

1.689

472

2.611

988

331

2008

2009

3.046

1.415

329

2010

Unemployed in LFS

Registered unemployed

Receiving unemployment cash benefits

Sources: Administrative data: (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) (2011a); Data for 2010: (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6); LFS: TurkStat, Labour Force Statistics Database

TABLE 3.19 PARTICIPANTS IN ACTIVE LABOUR MARKET MEASURES BY GENDER

2009

2010

2011 (Jan–Aug)

Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total

Labour market training

86 477 81 075 167 552 76 847 85 493 162 340 28 058 33 150 61 208

Specialised occupation training

Apprenticeship programme

Training of employees

Entrepreneurship training

727

387

21 346

6 676 28 022

558

1 285

2 643

2 028

4 671

2 181

2 291

4 472

387

2 134

416

2 550

5 280

315

5 595

10 263

7 790 18 053

Public works

32 508 12 120 44 628 32 697

9 369 42 066 16 376

3 001 19 377

Total

120 099 93 753 213 852 114 321 97 306 211 627 83 504 53 223 136 727

Share of women (%)

43.8

46.0

38.9

Source: (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) data, received September 2011

80

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 3.20 TURKISH EMPLOYMENT AGENCY STATISTICS

Number of registered unemployed by gender

Women

Men

Total

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

279 201

176 403

263 502

503 130

414 972

782 652

520 135

724 338

1 186 219

999 569

1 061 853

696 538

987 840

1 689 349

1 414 541

Number of registered unemployed by age group

15–19

20–24

25–29

30–34

35–39

40–44

45–64

65+

72 576

32 292

43 739

71 913

28 715

178 051

156 316

212 528

339 024

248 495

269 066

190 793

262 663

435 718

373 019

213 575

130 382

181 407

317 613

297 963

150 438

86 058

132 270

245 882

218 996

122 891

59 241

86 723

153 587

134 177

96 511

40 816

66 884

122 981

111 491

1 535

640

1 626

2 631

1 685

Number of registered unemployed by education level

Illiterate

Literate

Primary education

High school

4 942

8 210

10 475

21 985

32 016

20 920

16 877

24 472

32 123

23 993

267 618

568 510

445 480

769 783

636 628

201 397

255 350

340 045

591 384

509 468

Two-year higher education

38 672

56 939

82 774

140 572

124 390

Bachelor’s degree

Master’s degree

Number of unemployed receiving cash
benefits (unemployment insurance)

42 790

42 652

70 078

118 058

95 209

759

1 085

3 006

5 413

3 933

199 560

221 356

331 219

472 284

329 348

Number of unemployed participating in active measures

14 513

14 978

23 423

159 576

146 888

Vocational training

Public works

Apprenticeship programmes

45 467

42 066

1 285

6 674

450

387

4 671

8 306

1 903

2 550

Entrepreneurship programmes

648

1 175

4 202

Cazibe merkezler project (business incubator)

Workers’ vocational training

Privatisation social support project

1 945

5 537

4 581

Number of vacancies

151 794

186 922

178 620

165 890

368 636

Active employment policy measures
expenditure (thousand TRY)

Source: (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)

27 974

29 672

35 511

306 366

392 644

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 81

TABLE 3.21 ACTIVATION RATE

ALMP participants

17 106

21 690

32 206

222 985

223 846

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Activation rate (% of
registered unemployed
participating in ALMPs)

Activation rate as % of
unemployed population in LFS

1.6

0.7

3.1

0.9

3.3

1.2

13.2

15.8

6.4

7.3

Source: ETF calculation based on data provided by (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) and TurkStat LFS

TABLE 3.22 TURKEY AND EU BENCHMARKS – LABOUR MARKET

Total activity rate (15–64)

Female activity rate (15–64)

Total employment rate (15–64)

Female employment rate (15–64)

Employment in agriculture1 (% of total)

Total unemployment rate (15+)

Female unemployment rate (15+)

Youth unemployment rate (15–24)

Turkey

EU-27

2009

2010

2009

2010

50.8

27.8

44.3

24.2

24.7

14.0

14.3

25.3

71.1

64.3

64.6

58.2

4.6

8.9

8.8

19.6

46.3

26.2

22.4

11.9

13.0

21.7

64.2

58.2

4.7

9.6

9.6

20.8

(1) Includes agriculture, forestry and fishing.
Sources: European Commission, 2010c; TurkStat, Labour Force Survey 2009

82

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 3.23 IPA COUNTRIES AND EU BENCHMARKS – LABOUR MARKET

EU-27
2010

EU
2020
obj.

AL
2009

BA
2010

IS
2010

XK
2009

ME
2010

RS
2010

HR
2010

MK
2010

TR
2010

69.1

75.0

80.4

51.2

58.7

48.1

50.0

64.2

58.2

46.3

4.7

9.6

9.6

53.4

39.0

78.2

26.1

47.6

47.2

54.0

43.5

46.3

43.6

28.6

76.2

12.5

41.0

40.1

48.8

34.0

26.2

44.0
(2008)

33.0
(50–64)

79.8

27.9

46.2
(50–64)

32.8

37.6

34.2

29.6

44.1

19.7

5.4

6.2

12.9

18.5

12.5 19.8(c)

22.4

13.8

27.2

7.6

15.9

29.9

6.7

45.4
(15–64)

56.4
(15–64)

19.7

19.2

11.8

32.0

11.9

20.6

20.2

12.3

32.3

13.0

20.8

27.2

57.5

16.2

73.0

47.1

46.2

32.5

53.7

21.7

6.9

3.8

8.2
(2008)

17.8
(50–64)

4.4

25.9

9.4
(50–64)

11.9

7.7(u)

27.8

5.9

9.1(a)

9.8

36.8(b)

7.1

13.9

6.7(u)

26.6

2.8

Employment rate
(20–64)

Employment rate
(15–64)

Female
employment rate
(15–64)

Employment rate
of older workers
(55–64)

Employment in
agriculture1
(% of total)

Unemployment
rate (15+)

Female
unemployment
rate (15+)

Youth
unemployment
rate (15–24)

Unemployment
rate of the elder
workforce (55–64)

Total long-term
unemployment
rate2

(1) Includes agriculture, forestry and fishing. (2) Long-term unemployed ( 12 months) as a percentage of the total active population.
(u) Unreliable figures.
Sources: EU-27, IS, HR, MK and TR: Eurostat databases; XK: ETF input to EC progress report; AL, BA, ME and RS: national statistical offices,
LFS publications; Turkey unemployment rates (except long-term unemployment): TurkStat; KS estimated on LFS data; (a) As reported in LFS
official publication (no information available on the calculation method); (b) Estimated on LFS data; (c) National Statistical Office, LFS 2010

3. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN EMPLOYMENT 83

FIGURE 3.5 ANNUAL AVERAGE EQUIVALISED DISPOSABLE INCOMES*, 2009

(*) The equivalised disposable income is the gross household income minus taxes ‘scaled’ by the size of the household.
Source: TurkStat, Income and Living Conditions Survey

FIGURE 3.6 NUTS 2 REGIONS IN TURKEY

Source: www.ikg.gov.tr/en.html

85

4. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES
AND CHALLENGES IN SOCIAL
INCLUSION

Chapter 4 will focus on the key policy issues and
challenges related to equity, access and participation for
‘marginalised groups’ in education, employment and
society. In order to assess Turkey’s performance in terms
of education, employment and social inclusion, we will
examine and process both input and output indicators.

Economic growth coupled with the selective adoption of
economic liberalisation policies has increased levels of
polarisation, segregation and exclusion in the big cities
and less developed regions of Turkey in a way that has
impacted negatively on various disadvantaged social
groups by exposing some already underprivileged
segments of the society to stricter market discipline.

The term social inclusion can be defined in a variety of
ways, but for the purposes of this report we will use the
2004 European Commission definition of the term10
(European Commission and Council, 2004, p. 8). The
superficially equivalent term sosyal içerme is also used in
Turkish, but this covers a restricted group of elements
relating only to aspects of social protection and social
welfare. Similarly, while poverty (yoksulluk) has always
existed in Turkey as a social fact, public and academic
debate of the issue was uncommon until the aftermath of
the devastating 1999 earthquake in the Marmara Region
and the economic crises of 1994 and 2001. The joint
issues of poverty and social exclusion in Turkey have been
key issues in the Joint Inclusion Memorandum (JIM)
process initiated in 2005, although to date the issue of the
‘inclusion’ of disadvantaged persons has been examined
solely in terms of their inclusion in the labour market.

4.1 GENERAL POLICY
INITIATIVES AND
PROGRAMMES FOR
VULNERABLE GROUPS

The principle of equal treatment and rights for vulnerable
groups is guaranteed in Turkey by Article 10 of the
constitution, and this, in combination with the Penal Code
and key applicable laws, forms the basis of a regulatory
framework aiming to provide adequate and efficient
protection and services for the nationally identified
disadvantaged groups.

The Turkish constitution and legal framework have been
repeatedly revised and adapted to respond to the needs

of these groups in line with political, economic and social
developments in Turkey and the EU. Since the
constitutional referendum of September 2010 and the
elections of June 2011, consensus has emerged on the
need for a new constitution to replace the document
adopted in the wake of the 1980 military coup (European
Commission, 2011a). New anti-discrimination legislation
and the establishment of a specialist body to promote
equality in Turkey are expected to enhance the legal
framework for protection against discrimination.

Turkey is party to a number, but by no means all, of the
fundamental international agreements on the elimination
of discrimination. Moreover, Turkey has not yet signed the
Council of Europe Framework Convention for the
protection of national minorities.

Institutional setting

Yükseker (2009) stated the widely recognised view that
‘Turkey is for the first time institutionalising the fight
against poverty through cash support programmes,
projects for universal basic education, expansion of
healthcare coverage and unemployment insurance [...]. in
very important stepping stones to increase social
integration’, and additional building blocks have been
provided by World Bank-supported cash programmes,
EU-funded projects for universal basic education, the
expansion of health care coverage through Green Cards,
and the Unemployment Insurance System established
since the late 1990s. However, no poverty alleviation,
social inclusion or national employment strategies as such
are in place in Turkey, although a draft document on
employment strategy is awaiting endorsement. In early
2005, Turkey initiated efforts toward joining the European
Combating Social Exclusion Strategy with the JIM
process, but the draft JIM document is still in the revision
stage.

The key strategic document incorporating the main
objectives for the sector is the Ninth Development Plan
(2007-13). This plan is put into operation through the
Medium Term Programme (2010-12) that includes the
following four components under the heading of
Strengthening Human Resources and Social Solidarity:
(i) strengthening the education system; (ii) strengthening
the health care system; (iii) improving income distribution,
social inclusion and combating poverty; and (iv) increasing
the effectiveness of the social security system. The
government’s operational plan identifies indicators to

10

Social inclusion is defined here as: ‘a process which ensures that those at risk of poverty and social exclusion gain the opportunities and resources necessary to
participate fully in economic, social and cultural life and to enjoy a standard of living and well-being that is considered normal in the society in which they live. It ensures
that they have a greater participation in decision making which affects their lives and access to their fundamental rights. ’

86

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

measure access to education, health, housing, social
services and employment services for disadvantaged
groups. These development programmes, coupled with
public, private and other EU and international cooperation
programmes, aim to avoid reproduction of the culture of
poverty. These programmes pay particular attention to
human development, human rights, gender equality and
capacity development. However, the real challenge lies in
coupling implementation of those programmes with
underpinning laws and strategies that will ensure real
changes take place as verified by objective indicators.

Effectiveness of government policies

Any assessment of the effectiveness of government
social policy must be aware of the pre-existing institutional
framework, as, in the words of Bu(cid:16)ra and Candas (2011)
‘the inherited system of social security continues to shape
both the impact and the response to the global reach of
the market economy’. The social security regime that
emerged after the Second World War has sometimes
been presented as a prime example of the ‘Southern
European welfare regime’ defined by Ferrera (1996) as a
minimalist welfare regime in the context of a large
informal sector. Significant changes were introduced in
the 1980s and 1990s including: the creation of the
means-tested Fund for the Encouragement of Social
Cooperation and Solidarity, or Social Solidarity Fund, and;
the introduction of the Green Card scheme for people
living in poverty and excluded from the state subsidised
health services.

Bu(cid:16)ra and Candas (ibid.) conclude that ‘the need for a
systematic approach to poverty alleviation through
redistributive channels was acknowledged and the steps
taken in this direction were mainly shaped by Turkey’s
relations with the EU’, but other critics (Arts and Gelissen,
2002; Grütjen, 2008) have argued that the Turkish welfare
system still falls short of the standards usually seen in the
Southern European welfare regime in some crucial
aspects. In reality, the Turkish system is a mixture
between the minimalist Southern European approach and
the pattern common in many Middle Eastern countries
where high levels of informality combine with low
employment rates, low female participation, low
population coverage by the social protection system and
low educational levels.

Furthermore, some serious institutional challenges and
specific concerns in the management and implementation
of inclusive social policies hinder the successful
implementation of the government policies and
programmes mentioned above. The first and most
important of these is that Turkey inherited a segmented
organisational structure for combating social exclusion and
poverty that has rendered coordination among the
institutions less effective. The primary consequence of
this complication is the duplication of certain services
combined with a total lack of provision of some other
services for those in need.

This overcrowded institutional infrastructure is coupled
with many other negative elements including: an apparent
lack of a framework for achieving policy coherence; a lack

of integrated mechanisms (national versus regional) for
establishing and updating strategic priorities; poor
communication, coordination and cooperation among
relevant responsible institutions; excessively weighty
administrative procedures; constrained public human and
financial resources for social policy, and; a perceived lack
of any culture of evaluation and responsiveness to users
in the delivery of social services to in-need groups.

The politicised nature of these policies, the role of
hierarchy and patronage, and the prevalence of
‘institutional turfs’ (where institutions are loyal to their
own restricted view on issues to the detriment of the
bigger picture) are widely recognised and criticised by civil
society and researchers in the field. Commentators have
recognised that ‘the emphasis placed on the role of NGOs
in dealing with poverty and the blurring of the boundaries
between the activities of voluntary associations, central
government agencies, municipalities and the [ruling] party
seem […] to be in conformity not only with the traditions
of Islamic charity but also with the global social policy
environment’ and that assistance is distributed in a
non-transparent manner by both municipalities and local
branches of the central welfare administration. In fact,
according to official statistics, in 2009 ‘the amount of
social assistance distributed by the General Directorate of
Social Assistance and Solidarity increased threefold in the
pre-election period’ (Bu(cid:16)ra and Candas, 2011).

The studies that are available indicate that outcome
indicators and intermediate indicators linking public
spending to outcomes are missing. Many high-level
indicators (such as the incidence of absolute poverty)
involve more than one sector and are difficult to analyse
because of the attribution of responsibilities between the
various agencies and actors. On top of this, reliable
base-line data are often not available or comprehensive
enough, hindering effective assessments of programme
outcomes. Information that could feed into policy making
is also based on poverty monitoring tools that measure
input indicators which only assess physical outcomes.
Most of these are not linked to budget information on
financial execution, so it is difficult to link disbursement to
actual service outcomes. A key weakness lies in the
monitoring of outcomes and impact assessment that is
not always linked to the decision-making process; an
element that has resulted in limited progress toward
completion of the social inclusion agenda in Turkey.

In response to these challenges, a new Ministry of Family
and Social Policies (MoFSP) was established after the
June 2011 elections, merging a number of institutions
responsible for issues such as social protection, social
assistance, women, children, the disabled and family
issues, in an effort to overcome institutional
fragmentation in this field.

Groups with high levels of poverty and social
exclusion

Turkish government data show a serious challenge with
relative poverty, where ‘relative poverty’ is defined as any
individual living below the average welfare level of a
society. The absolute poverty rate is relatively low in

4. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN SOCIAL INCLUSION 87

Turkey, with estimates of only 0.22% living below the
income threshold of USD 2.15 per day in 2009, but
according to official Turkish data, complete poverty
including both food and non-food consumption affected
18.08% of the population or approximately 13 million
people in the same year (see TABLE 4.1 for further
details). This does, however, represent an improvement
on 2003 figures, when complete poverty affected 28.12%
of the population or approximately 20 million people.

Turkey has highly unequal income distribution with the
Gini index of 0.42 in 2009 although levels vary from region
to region within the country (see TABLE 4.4 for more
details). This index is above levels for the rest of the IPA
region (World Bank, 2011a), however, and the country
ranked 83rd in the HDI (UNDP, 2010b); up one position
since 2009, but still far behind the EU, Eastern Europe and
the Western Balkan countries. The Gender Gap Index also
presents a bleak picture, with Turkey in 126th position in
2010, well behind all of the western countries and several
Asian, African and Arab states (Hausmann et al., 2010).
The human development rankings, particularly on
education, health and labour market indicators, reflect the
deficiencies in human development and uneven economic
growth in the country. Women and minorities, including
non-Muslims and the disabled, are underrepresented in
the Turkish Parliament, public administration and political
life in a way that mirrors the degree of marginalisation of a
very large part of Turkish society itself.

Socially excluded groups

Vulnerable groups in Turkey, defined as those at highest
risk of poverty and social exclusion, can be classified in the
following ways: (i) general social groups; (ii) hidden
marginalised groups; and (iii) spatially or regionally defined
groups. These group classifications often in fact overlap,
and all of them are negatively affected in terms of access
to information, entitlements and any rights-based demands
in general (as distinct from benefits derived from charities
operating on the basis of religious conviction).

General social groups include groups with generally low
educational attainment where various dimensions of
deprivation culminate, and also more specific social groups
defined in terms of gender (women with restricted access
to benefits in general and education and employment in
particular and representation in politics, as well as senior
positions in public administration, the government, political
parties and trade unions), age (vulnerable children and older
people left behind in migration areas) or disability. There is
also the wider category of the unemployed and those
excluded from participation in the labour force.
Furthermore, there are the less visible excluded groups,
which include people with disabilities, people migrating in
from rural areas, seasonal workers (mostly agricultural
workers), internally displaced persons (IDPs), working
children, street children, elderly people left behind by
moving families, women exposed to domestic and street
violence, young people, former convicts, former prisoners
and former drug users.

‘Hidden’ marginalised groups are a more contentious
issue as these groups are given no official recognition and
the category could include a range of groups affected by
overall social disadvantage and exclusion (Minority Rights
Group International, 2011).

Finally, spatially or regionally defined groups include a
broad spectrum of populations defined within the process
of internal migration, most especially those affected by
rapid rates of urbanisation in the big cities of Turkey. They
also include populations affected by more general regional
and spatial inequalities, unequal regional growth and the
creation of ‘zones of exclusion’ in urban areas and
elsewhere. Other such groups are created by
conflict-induced forced migration and the ensuing return –
a situation that affects substantial numbers of people in
the South-Eastern provinces and elsewhere, and those
with IDP status in particular.

4.2 SOCIAL INCLUSION IN
EDUCATION

MoNE has recognised social exclusion as a crucial issue in
education, taking impressive steps to extend the school
infrastructure network, increase enrolment rates, provide
more teachers – especially in the less developed regions –
supply better books and teaching materials and organise
transport, scholarships and grants for pupils and students
from poor and socially marginalised backgrounds. A
campaign has been initiated to get more girls into school,
with the implementation supported by NGOs. Strong
measures have been taken to reduce dropouts from
primary education although the number of early school
leavers after eight years of schooling is still very high,
particularly for girls11. Adult and women-only literacy
programmes have been conducted. A number of changes
have been introduced to legislation and educational policies
as part of efforts to ensure equity and inclusion regardless
of cultural background, socio-economic status and ability.

Recent policies and initiatives under the MoNE
Directorate General for Primary Education12 have included
the establishment of an information management system
to register absenteeism and a catch-up education
programme for primary-age children excluded from the
system. Other important steps towards a more inclusive
education system are being taken through ongoing
research and joint work on policy by Unicef, MoNE and
the Education Reform Initiative to improve (i) electronic
systems for better monitoring and prevention of
absenteeism and dropouts; (ii) transition rates of from
primary to secondary education; and (iii) the financial
management of schools.

MoNE programmes and projects specifically target those
marginalised groups identified by the government, such
as: people with disabilities, girls and the children of rural
and seasonal migrant workers. Other groups including the
Roma have only recently received recognition in

11

Eurostat gives the rate of early school leavers in Turkey as 43.1% in 2010, a figure that represents a percentage of 18-24 year-olds with at most lower secondary
education and not in further education or training.

12 Amalgamated with the Directorate General of Pre-Primary Education under the newly established Directorate General for Basic Education

88

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

government policy papers. In December 2010, MoNE
launched initiatives to improve access to education among
Roma children through awareness-raising campaigns
delivered in a series of national workshops involving Roma
NGOs and key national and local stakeholders.

MoNE issued a circular on the Education of Seasonal
Migrant Agricultural Workers in April 2011 following
publication of a document from the Prime Minister on
Improving the Work and Social Lives of Seasonal Migrant
Agriculture Workers, in a move that is viewed as an
important step towards catering for the needs of children
who face multiple disadvantages. The two circulars
encourage provincial authorities to organise coordinated
efforts and implement flexible methods to improve access
to education, through consideration of new concepts such
as mobile teachers and education provision.

The EU and other international donors including the World
Bank, Unicef and the UNDP have played a key role in
helping the Ministry to strengthen cooperation with public
and private funders. MoNE has the support of NGOs,
employers, universities and think-tanks in the
implementation of these policies. Civil society involvement
has been enhanced through the process of encouraging
institutional dialogue with marginalised groups in a way that
has boosted their participation and acceptance of
responsibility for policy formulation, implementation and
monitoring on national and regional level.

Unequal access to education: the poor, women,
unregistered children, minorities

Two broad issues stand out in the discussion of social
inclusion in education in Turkey: inequality in access to
education and the social marginalisation of some
disadvantaged communities.

The issue of unequal access is reflected in a variety of
general trends in areas including, in order of importance,
poverty, gender discrimination, regional conditions and
urban/rural differences13. In 2007/08, 442,625 children
aged 6 to 13 were not registered for education in Turkey –
amounting to 4 in every 100 children. Almost 60% of
these were girls and around half were from central and
south-eastern Anatolia. There are also large numbers of
children whose births were not registered at all in the civil
registry, and who are therefore uncounted in any statistics
(Majcher-Teleon and Bardak, 2011). Child labour
represents another barrier to education. Data from 2006
show around one million children working in Turkey, with
girls aged 5-14 working around 30 hours a week and boys
of the same age working over 25 hours, placing the
country third after Mali and Senegal in ILO ratings on the
issue. The TurkStat child labour report states that 6% of 6
to 17 year-olds are in work and that 66% of these are
boys. Some 41% of this group work in agriculture, 28% in
industry, 23% in trade and 9% in the service industries.
Many of these vulnerable children belong to marginalised
groups such as the Roma, children of families emigrating
from rural areas, seasonal agricultural workers, IDPs, girls,
and people from the Eastern regions of Turkey.

Recent projects initiated by MoNE with EU support, aim
to address the challenges presented by the current
exclusive approach of the Turkish education system.
However, many teachers are not well enough prepared to
provide good quality integrated or inclusive education, and
the shortage of teachers with appropriate counselling and
special education training sits at the heart of the problems
encountered (ERI, 2011b).

The position of disadvantaged communities is another
important concern and Kaya (2009) succinctly states that
‘Turkey’s most disadvantaged communities, such as [the]
internally displaced population and Roma, remain
extremely marginalised, including in education.’ The EU
accession process has had a positive influence on this
policy agenda, raising awareness of the importance of
education for all children, and especially for the children of
disadvantaged groups, by providing evidence of lessons
learned in EU-countries over the last five years.

Education of Roma children

The most frequently encountered problems of social
exclusion for Roma are institutional constraints and
restrictions in terms of resources. Although there are a
number of local initiatives, mainly started by NGOs in
cooperation with government, there are no
comprehensive policies regarding access to education. On
the other hand, some general policies targeting poor and
socially excluded groups in general, have achieved a
degree of success. For example the Green Card health
insurance for the underprivileged appears to have
provided good coverage among the Roma.

Education for the Roma in Turkey remains at an alarmingly
poor level. Low school attendance and attainment levels,
early school leaving and discriminatory practices are the
key concerns. Although there is no concept of segregated
school classes in Turkey, Roma children tend to attend
schools where they constitute a significant proportion of
the school population or sometimes the absolute majority.
This is related to the fact that children in Turkey attend the
nearest neighborhood school and that the Roma live in
clearly circumscribed areas. Key policy challenges for the
education of Roma children include issues such as:
unregistered Roma children in the school system; early
childhood development; early school dropouts; school
attainment, and; transition to secondary education with a
particular emphasis on Roma girls. Poverty is reported to
be the main barrier to schooling at all levels for Roma
children (Fundación Secretariado Gitano, 2010).

In the last two years there has been some progress
towards finalisation of the JIM process working toward a
more comprehensive definition of social inclusion and
clearer identification of marginalised groups including the
Roma. This work reflects recent political developments
such as the ‘Roma opening’ process launched by the
Turkish government in 2009 with an apology for past
discrimination and the promise of new policies and plans.
Since then, a number of workshops have been organised
jointly by the Turkish government and the European

13

For a case study on the quality of education in rural schools, see Taneri and Engin-Demir (2011).

4. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN SOCIAL INCLUSION 89

Commission with the participation of high level officials,
Roma communities, civil society organisations, academics
and representatives of the EU and international
organisations. (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) has also organised various forms of
consultation process.

The Turkish government approach to the Roma population
is couched within context of the Milli Birlik ve Karde(cid:2)lik
Projesi (National Unity and Brotherhood Project) that aims
to address social exclusion at all levels.

The Roma civil society movement is perceived as rather
inexperienced and fragmented, with only a limited number
of Roma organisations considered really active and
effective. However, a large number of new Roma
organisations have been established in the two years
since the government announcement of new measures.
Many stakeholders stress that strengthening the capacity
of these organisations as a matter of urgency and calls
have been issued for the creation of an umbrella structure
for Roma groups that could act as an effective counterpart
to the government.

Although the present constitution of the Republic of
Turkey dates from 1982 and makes no reference at all to
minorities, some articles are currently under review by the
government.

Turkey has been invited to cooperate within the EU Roma
platforms (2010-15) that provide systematic monitoring of
inclusion and propose related actions. The Commission has
held a series of seminars on Roma issues in Turkey to
encourage the country in efforts for a national action plan to
fight discrimination and improve Roma integration,
particularly in terms of education, employment, housing,
health and civil registration. No official response to the
initiative has yet been received from the Turkish authorities.

4.3 SOCIAL INCLUSION IN
EMPLOYMENT

The growth of the Turkish economy over the past decade
has undoubtedly provided general benefits in the field of
employment. In particular, the introduction of the
Unemployment Insurance System from the end of the
1990s has been beneficial in terms of social inclusion, but
only for a small number of unemployed people who have
lost jobs in the formal sector. However, as has been
pointed out in remarks on general policy initiatives, the
welfare system still partly or entirely excludes vast
sectors of Turkish society.

Turkish welfare and employment systems

In assessing the effectiveness and impact of Turkish
social inclusion policies in employment, two general
issues should be kept in mind.

The first is the sheer size of the informal sector in the
Turkish economy, especially in terms of employment,
which heavily affects all aspects of social policy. In the
words of Bu(cid:16)ra (2007), the Republic of Turkey is also

affected by ‘the continuing significance of peasant
agriculture, [making] Turkey an exceptional case among
most medium-income countries at the same level of
economic development.’ In 2005, agriculture employed
34% of the labour force, although it accounted for only
11% of GDP (Altu(cid:16) et al., 2008).

The second related point is that the Turkish welfare
system is a hybrid system that is not simply a variation of
the Southern European model (Grütjen, 2008). This
mitigates against progress ‘in important policy areas, most
notably the labour market trends and gender divisions in
employment, [where] the country has yet to match the
performance of other south European states’ (Aybars and
Tsarouhas, 2010). As was pointed out earlier, the
piecemeal introduction of elements of market-oriented
social policy has in fact contributed to an increase in social
exclusion as is confirmed by recent data shown in
TABLE 3.14.

Labour market programmes and their effectiveness

(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) is responsible for many programmes and projects.
These projects focus on employment, social inclusion and
culture, art and sport as part of efforts to increase
employability, develop a more qualified labour force,
reduce poverty, facilitate access to employment for
disadvantaged segments of the society and improve living
standards. In addition, TRY 139.3 million was allocated to
(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) in the 2008-12 period for implementation of the
social development component of the Güneydo(cid:7)u
Anadolu Projesi (South-eastern Anatolia Project, GAP)
which aims to support social development in the region.
The additional resources allocated to GAP provinces are
expected to produce a significant increase in employment
rates in the region and allocation of this fund to (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) as
part of the ‘employment services’ approach represents an
important step toward implementing inclusive
employment policies and services in a region with high
unemployment and a concentration of recognised
disadvantaged groups. (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) is expanding operations and
has created many additional posts, although staffing levels
are still below the required numbers, particularly in local
posts. Demand for (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) services from employers are
increasing, as are placement rates.

Additional projects receive funding from the national
budget, EU coffers and other sources with a social
inclusion perspective. Turkey is involved in several
activities relating to EU community programmes and a
memorandum of understanding was signed between the
Republic of Turkey and the European Commission in 2007
for participation in the programme for employment and
social solidarity progress (PROGRESS). The EU
Coordination Department within MoLSS is the body
responsible for the implementation and coordination of all
activities and projects under PROGRESS.

Notwithstanding these advances, the institutional
capacities of both the Ministry and (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) need further
strengthening to better address the challenges presented
by social inclusion in relation to the labour market
involvement of disadvantaged groups.

90

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

ALMPs are the main instrument available to the
government to increase the labour market participation of
disadvantaged groups, but Turkish (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) appears
under-sized and under-funded in relation to the expected
scope of their actions when compared with equivalent EU
agencies in this field. In fact, Majcher-Teleon and Bardak
(2011) conclude that ‘ALMPs currently play a limited role
in facilitating labour market transitions and improving
employability although they provide a remedy to a limited
extent. There is still a large problem in catering for those
job seekers most disadvantaged in the labour market such
as the low-skilled job seekers in the informal sector who
form a large part of the working population and females’.

disparities. Moreover, the Strategic Coherence
Framework identifies the 15 cities of Kars, Van, Batman,
Erzurum, Diyarbak(cid:2)r, (cid:3)anl(cid:2)urfa, Gaziantep, Kayseri, Sivas,
Trabzon, Elaz(cid:2)(cid:16), Malatya, Kastamonu, Samsun, and
Kahramanmara(cid:17) as potential ‘growth centres,’ and these
have been allocated the majority of the funds available
under the HRD OP. The areas surrounding the growth
centres within the 12 NUTS 2 regions are referred to as
the ‘hinterlands’.

Major regional development policies implemented
in Turkey

4.4 TERRITORIAL (REGIONAL)
COHESION

Regional disparities

The nation-state of the Republic of Turkey was created on
the basis of a centralist model and territorial and regional
cohesion has always been an extremely sensitive issue
(Ertugal and Dobre, 2011). The eastern regions, in
particular, have always remained less advanced both
economically and socially, and at the end of the first
decade of the 21st century Wolleb and Daraio (2009)
concluded that ‘Turkey [still] suffers large regional
development disparities […] significantly larger than in
EU15 countries, and at the high end of disparities
prevailing in new EU members’. They further stated that
the disparities in regional economic development were
reflected in disparities in household income, particularly in
the East, to such an extent that the lack of opportunities
in the region could prompt further migration to the larger
urban centres of western Turkey.

Economic and social indicators reveal that there are
considerable disparities between national average
incomes in Turkey and indicators for the provinces in
underdeveloped regions such as Eastern and
South-Eastern Anatolia, the Black Sea and Central Anatolia
regions in particular.

The data show imbalances between territories of different
scales in terms of income, demographic structure,
physical and social infrastructure, entrepreneurship,
human resources, education level, access to health
services, environmental quality, employment and the role
of women. Poverty is closely correlated to place of
residence, educational level and employment status. The
poverty rate is higher among the illiterate and low-skilled,
people employed in agriculture in the rural and eastern
areas, informal and casual workers and largely female
unpaid family workers (Ercan, 2010c). The majority of the
Roma live in western Anatolia and Thrace while the
proto-Roma Dom and Lom groups mostly live in
southeastern and eastern Turkey (Marsh, 2008).

The EU-funded HRD OP is being implemented in the 12
NUTS 2 regions of Turkey with per capita GDP of less
than 75% of the national average, concentrating efforts to
ensure sufficient coverage and eliminate regional

In 2002, Turkish territorial distribution was reorganised in
accordance with the Nomenclature of territorial units for
statistics (NUTS) classification of regions, sub-regions and
provinces in alignment with EU regulations. Under the
new classification system, 81 level 3 provinces were
grouped into 26 level 2 clusters and 12 new adjacent
province groups were labelled as level 1. A key element in
this restructuring process was the creation of NUTS 2
regions equipped with regional development agencies
(RDAs) (Emini, 2010).

Central regional development policy governance has
shown continuity as the State Planning Organisation is still
the main central unit responsible for national regional
planning. According to Law No 5449 (Official Gazette,
2006) on the establishment of RDAs, the organisation is
the central coordinating entity responsible for providing
orientation for general regional policy at the national level.
Legislation passed by the Turkish Parliament in 2006
provided an opportunity for transition toward regionalised
economic development through the establishment of a
national system of semi-private RDAs. The State Planning
Organisation is responsible for ensuring coordination
among the regional programmes prepared by the RDAs as
well as evaluation of their performance (Official Gazette,
2006).

In July 2011, the State Planning Organisation became the
Ministry of Development under the 61st Turkish
government, and it then established a High Council of
Regional Development and the Regional Development
Committee to ensure the coordination of regional
development policies among central institutions and local
authorities. Further progress has also been made towards
the accreditation of the Operating Structures in place to
manage IPA components III and IV in the line ministries
(European Commission, 2011a).

Various development instruments such as integrated
regional development plans, investment incentives, priority
development area policies, organised industrial estates,
small industry sites and rural development projects have
been used as basic tools to speed up regional development
and eliminate the imbalance between regions (Özaslan et
al., 2004). However, the actual impact of these newly
formed RDAs remains to be seen.

One of the main problems encountered in regional
development in Turkey is the difficulty in obtaining access
to qualified data, as is also the case in other OECD

4. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN SOCIAL INCLUSION 91

countries. The Turkish government has therefore placed
heavy emphasis on improving information gathering and
evaluation systems in Turkey. The UNDP HDI supported
Turkey to improve the transparency of its data in order to
reveal national and regional disparities even more clearly.

The provision of up-to-date and accurate information has
provided a great support in the planning of public services
and efficient use of public resources. Information from the
Social and Economic Development Index rankings
process has also contributed to development and planning
initiatives conducted on various territorial scales in Turkey,
from districts and provinces, to geographical zones and
NUTS 1, 2 and 3 regions.

Nonetheless, this regional reform strategy is complicated
by the highly centralised state tradition in the country and
by the unequal levels of economic development across
the territory, both of which form significant obstacles to
vibrant regional economies even though the new Turkish
regional development agencies have unique potential to
encourage regional economic growth (Young-Hyman,
2008).

Large-scale regional programmes

Güneydo(cid:7)u Anadolu Projesi (the South-eastern Anatolia
Project or GAP) is a massive regional development project
for the Southeast of Turkey. GAP was initially handled as
an infrastructure project consisting purely of energy and
irrigation initiatives, but it has moved on now to a new
status as an integrated regional development programme
that promotes local initiatives by benefiting the common
cooperation platforms of development agencies.

The rise of a Central Anatolian business class (ESI, 2005)
has certainly altered the picture in terms of regional
disparities and the Black Sea regions have also experienced
significant progress over recent decades. In the last ten
years in particular, significant progress has even been
seen in the South-East following the relative stabilisation
of the region. There has been a massive expansion of
educational facilities, including universities, all over
Turkey, even in the Black Sea and South-Eastern regions.

Although many of these measures have been very
impressive, they have been of mixed effectiveness, with
some projects, like the irrigation scheme in the
South-East, falling short of the intended impact.

Regional development projects and employment
pacts

The regional development projects in Turkey are based on
employment pacts as indicated in the Ninth Development
Plan. Under Law No 5490 on the Establishment,
Coordination and Tasks of Regional Development
Agencies of 25 January 2006, the social pact for regional
development (that forms the basis for employment pacts)
is embedded in the Regional Development Agency (RDA).
Membership of the RDA is diverse and inclusive, based
on agreements involving local government, regional
government, employers associations and trade unions,

with the additional support of various political groups.
Community-based organisations and NGOs also play an
important role in these formalised pacts.

The central institutions responsible for combating social
exclusion are involved in the decision-making processes in
the form of boards, councils and platforms at national and
regional levels along with public organisations and
institutions. Even though public service policies are
created on the basis of equal opportunities and
non-discrimination, discrepancies often occur between
the policy-making and implementation stages, leading to
unequal opportunities that can unintentionally lead to the
reinforcement of certain inequalities on occasion.

From an institutional point of view, Turkey offers a rich
variety of central and local government organisations and
boards that are highly active in designing ways of
implementing central policies at the local level. It is clear
though that the most successful current regional level
implementation of policies and Local Equality Action Plans
occur in the relatively rich regions of Turkey. The recent
active implementation of Local Equality Action Plans in
(cid:3)anl(cid:18)urfa, Kahramanmara(cid:17) and to some extent Gaziantep
can be seen as reflections of the entrepreneurial capacity
of the local mayors who make considerable contributions
to the mobilisation of local potential and partnerships in
these regions. There is still much to be done to enhance
the consultation processes, especially in relation to the
most at-risk disadvantaged groups.

The Turkish government supported 1,660 projects within
the Social Support Programme (SODES) in 2011 and
allocated TRY 200 million (approximately USD 109 million)
to the Programme that provides assistance to 30 Turkish
provinces. SODES projects operate under the
coordination of governors to increase employment, deal
with poverty and support social, cultural and artistic
activities at the local level. SODES supports projects in
Adiyaman, Gaziantep, Diyarbakir, Mardin, Siirt, Sanliurfa,
Batman, Sirnak, Kilis, Agri, Bingol, Bitlis, Elazig, Erzincan,
Erzurum, Hakkari, Kars, Malatya, Mus, Tunceli, Van,
Bayburt, Ardahan, Igdir, Gumushane, Adana, Mersin,
Hatay, Osmaniye, and Kahramanmara(cid:17) where the
large-scale programme aims to mobilise local potential
and partnerships. Involved actor are the local-level
provincial employment and vocational training boards
coordinated under the chairmanship of the governor with
other members consisting of: local mayors and the
general secretary of the special provincial administration;
the provincial directors of education, industry and trade,
and (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6); the head of the provincial chamber of
commerce and industry; representatives from each trade
union confederation, the employer union confederations
and the confederation of disabled people; NGOs
representing disadvantaged groups; the head of the
provincial tradesmen and artisans union, and; academics
or researchers in the related area. All of these
stakeholders are involved in the design and
implementation of these projects, and there remains
much to be learned on this score. The impact of their
policy and practice must be assessed with the aim of
main-streaming the outcomes.

92

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

The Skills’10 programme, discussed in Section 3.3, has
introduced a new governance system due to its
requirement for the participation of all stakeholders at the
local level. Local labour market information is retrieved to
provide a basis for local course design and management.
This project makes MoNE, MoLSS and the Chambers of
Industry and Commerce work together, thereby
developing a culture of institutional collaboration that can
form the backbone of integrated inclusive policies at
regional and local level.

Central policy alone will be insufficient to reduce regional
disparities in Turkey without the support of visionary
mayors and governors capable of operating as ‘brokers’
for social and employment pacts at the local and regional
levels. The key role of the mayors and governors is to
operate as interlocutors for their city or region,
representing the various needs of the diverse sectors of
their population and mobilising their support through the
fair distribution of resources for the provision of
community-based social services. Access to social
services should be an unquestionable entitlement for
every citizen.

4. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN SOCIAL INCLUSION 93

TABLES

TABLE 4.1 POVERTY RATES OF INDIVIDUALS ACCORDING TO POVERTY LINE METHODS (%)

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007*

2008

2009

Food poverty

1.4

1.3

1.3

0.9

0.7

0.5

0.5

0.5

Complete poverty (food + non-food)

27.0

28.1

25.6

20.5

17.8

17.8

17.1

18.1

Below USD 1 per capita per day1

Below USD 2.15 per capita per day1

0.2

3.0

0.0

2.4

0.0

2.5

0.0

1.6

1.4

Below USD 4.3 per capita per day1

30.3

23.8

20.9

16.4

13.3

0.5

8.4

0.5

6.8

0.2

4.4

Relative poverty based on expenditure2

14.7

15.5

14.2

16.2

14.5

14.7

15.1

15.1

(1) Worth TL 618 281, TL 732 480, TL 780 121, TRY 0.830, TRY 0.921, TRY 0.926, TRY 0.983 and TRY 0.917 for 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006,
2007, 2008 and 2009 respectively as the equivalent of USD 1 PPP. (2) Based on 50% of equivalised median consumption expenditure.
(*) Figures revised according to new population projections.

Source: TurkStat, Results of 2009 Poverty Study

TABLE 4.2 POVERTY RATES BY GENDER AND EDUCATIONAL STATUS OF HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS (%)

2002

2003

2004

2005

Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female

Total

27.0

26.7

27.2

28.1

27.9

28.3

25.6

25.2

26.0

20.5

20.0

21.0

Children under 6
years of age

Illiterate or literate
without a diploma

33.2

32.9

33.4

37.8

38.2

37.2

34.2

34.2

34.2

27.7

27.9

27.6

37.0

37.7

36.5

38.0

38.4

37.8

37.5

36.9

37.9

31.5

30.9

31.9

Primary school

26.1

28.1

24.3

27.6

29.8

25.5

24.4

27.5

21.5

17.1

19.9

14.5

Elementary school

26.4

28.4

24.1

29.6

29.1

30.0

25.5

25.4

25.6

22.4

21.8

23.0

Secondary school
and equivalent
vocational school

High school and
equivalent
vocational school

University, faculty,
masters, doctorate

18.8

19.5

17.4

18.3

19.7

16.0

13.0

15.0

9.4

8.4

9.7

5.6

9.8

11.0

8.2

11.2

12.3

9.7

8.3

9.7

6.4

6.8

8.0

5.1

1.6

1.2

2.1

2.7

3.0

2.1

1.3

1.6

0.9

0.8

0.8

0.7

94

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

2006

2007*

2008

2009

Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female

Total

17.8

17.3

18.3

17.8

17.3

18.3

17.1

16.7

17.5

18.1

17.1

19.0

Children under 6
years of age

Illiterate or literate
without a diploma

24.8

25.1

24.4

24.5

24.9

24.1

22.5

22.9

22.2

24.0

22.9

25.3

28.1

27.7

28.3

29.0

29.1

28.9

30.5

30.8

30.3

29.8

30.3

29.5

Primary school

14.2

16.5

12.1

14.2

15.9

12.7

13.4

15.9

11.2

15.3

16.9

13.8

Elementary school

18.1

16.5

19.7

19.2

19.8

18.6

17.2

18.7

15.7

17.8

17.2

18.4

Secondary school
and equivalent
vocational school

High school and
equivalent
vocational school

University, faculty,
masters, doctorate

8.1

9.7

4.9

9.2

11.1

5.6

8.3

9.9

5.8

9.8

10.9

7.8

5.2

6.1

4.0

5.9

7.1

4.1

5.6

6.0

5.1

5.3

5.7

4.8

1.0

1.3

0.6

0.8

1.0

0.5

0.7

0.9

0.4

0.7

0.9

0.4

(*) Figures revised according to new population projections.

Source: TurkStat, Results of 2009 Poverty Study

TABLE 4.3 DISTRIBUTION OF ANNUAL EQUIVALISED HOUSEHOLD DISPOSABLE INCOMES BY
QUINTILES ORDERED BY EQUIVALISED HOUSEHOLD DISPOSABLE INCOME

Total

2006

Quintiles

Total

2007

Quintiles

First*

Second

Third

Fourth

Last*

First*

Second

Third

Fourth

Last*

(%)

Average
(TRY)

Median
(TRY)

100

5.1

9.9

14.8

21.9

48.4

100

5.8

10.6

15.2

21.5

46.9

6 395

1 615

3 157

4 727

6 989

4 702

1 666

3 146

4 702

6 899

15 487

12 264

8 050

2 340

4 251

6 121

8 675

6 082

2 440

4 242

6 084

8 604

18 870

14 544

4. KEY POLICY ISSUES, STRATEGIES AND CHALLENGES IN SOCIAL INCLUSION 95

Total

2008

Quintiles

Total

2009

Quintiles

Total

2010

Quintiles

First*

Second

Third

Fourth

Last*

First*

Second

Third

Fourth

Last*

First*

Second

Third

Fourth

Last*

(%)

Average
(TRY)

Median
(TRY)

100

5.8

10.4

15.2

21.9

46.7

100

5.6

10.3

15.1

21.5

47.6

100

5.8

10.6

15.3

21.9

46.4

8 372

2 427

4 342

6 347

9 185

6 328

2 523

4 354

6 329

9 059

19 560

15 637

9 396

2 617

4 832

7 083

10 085

22 368

9 735

2 841

5 151

7 457

10 658

22 573

7 044

2 730

4 815

7 044

9 939

17 690

7 429

2 924

5 131

7 429

10 511

17 927

Note: Reference period for income information is the previous calendar year.
(*) When the individuals are listed from the least amount to the most amount by equivalised household disposable income and divided in five
parts, the bottom income group is defined as ‘the first quintile’ and the top income group is defined as ‘the last quintile’.

Source: TurkStat, Income and Living Conditions Survey, 2006-09

96

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 4.4 GINI COEFFICIENT BY REGION

Turkey

Istanbul

West Marmara

Aegean

East Marmara

West Anatolia

Mediterranean

Central Anatolia

West Black Sea

East Black Sea

North East Anatolia

Central East Anatolia

South East Anatolia

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

0.428

0.375

0.350

0.426

0.392

0.413

0.421

0.342

0.372

0.378

0.381

0.404

0.396

0.406

0.346

0.321

0.376

0.393

0.379

0.418

0.328

0.360

0.346

0.405

0.397

0.366

0.405

0.362

0.331

0.387

0.335

0.402

0.387

0.339

0.366

0.365

0.436

0.405

0.395

0.415

0.363

0.361

0.381

0.368

0.408

0.403

0.395

0.382

0.359

0.407

0.415

0.411

0.402

0.373

0.360

0.387

0.341

0.367

0.397

0.362

0.348

0.327

0.404

0.417

0.404

Note: Reference period for income information is the previous calendar year.

Source: TurkStat, Income and Living Conditions Survey, 2006-09

97

5. EU AND INTERNATIONAL DONOR
INTERVENTIONS

5.1 IPA PROGRAMMING:
OVERVIEW OF IPA
COMPONENT IV

The HRD OP is consistent and in line with national policy
papers as well as with IPA, ESF and EES standards.
However, the way the indicators have been defined is a
critical issue as those included in the HRD OP are mainly
output indicators that give little information on the
expected impact and results, making meaningful
evaluation difficult if not impossible. An interim evaluation
of the HRD programme by IBF International Consulting
(2011) comes to a similar conclusion, even recommending
the redefinition of indicators.

A total of EUR 353 million (including national co-financing)
will be spent on IPA component IV, with 55-60% of this
earmarked for the 12 disadvantaged eastern NUTS 2
regions (see FIGURE 3.6 for a map of these areas),
20-25% for support activities in the other 14 NUTS 2
regions, and the remaining 20% for programmes with
national scope. According to the HRD OP ex ante
evaluation, the critical issue lies in mainstreaming,
specifically in terms of the transfer of experiences and
results to other regions of the country.

The regional development component of the IPA
programme is closely related to the HRD component as
implementation of self-employment and SME support is
planned exclusively under the regional development
component. Synergy and coordination between the
regional development and the HRD components may be a

challenge under this structure (see TABLE 5.1 for
component I and TABLE 5.2 for component III).

The budget allocations planned for component IV in the
forthcoming years are: EUR 77.6 million for 2011,
EUR 89.93 million for 2012, and EUR 96 million for 2013
on the basis of information provided by MoLSS from the
Multi-annual Indicative Planning Document 2011-13.

PRIORITY AXIS 1: EMPLOYMENT

Out of the total budget for IPA component IV, 44% of the
funds budgeted for the period 2007-11 (EUR 155 million)
are dedicated to Priority axis 1 on employment.

The objective of Priority axis 1 is to ‘attract and retain
more people in employment, particularly be increasing
labour force participation of women, and decrease
unemployment rate, especially for young people‘.

Relevance

The measures planned under Priority axis 1 are generally
in line with IPA, ESF and EES standards. However, their
relevance concerning the achievement of national
employment targets cannot be assessed as the National
Employment Strategy and the JAP are not finalised and
available for consultation. Another critical issue lies in the
gaps in addressing the main objectives of the
employment guidelines. The measures are relevant for
employment Guideline 7 (aiming to increase labour market
participation and improve quality of jobs by promoting
registered employment) but do not explicitly address

BUDGET OF IPA COMPONENT IV (INCLUDING NATIONAL CO-FINANCING)

2007-09

2010-11

Total 2007-11

Priority axis

Budget
(EUR million)

Budget
(EUR million)

Budget
(EUR million)

% allocation
to axes

1. Employment

2. Education

3. Lifelong learning

4. Social inclusion

Technical assistance

82.150

36.012

20.000

37.342

11.202

72.988

23.082

30.000

29.859

9.953

155.138

59.094

50.000

67.201

21.155

44.00

16.76

14.18

19.06

6.00

Total

186.706

165.882

352.588

100.00

Source: HRD OP 2007-09

98

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

structural unemployment. The measures planned under
Priority axis 3 partly address Guideline 8 (developing a
skilled workforce responding to labour market needs and
promoting lifelong learning), but a coherent approach
linking education and training with labour market needs is
missing. Priority axis 4 for social inclusion relates to
Guideline 10 (promoting social inclusion and combating
poverty) and may bring together the main actors in social
and employment policy at a systems level, as they are the
final beneficiaries.

The measures under Priority axis 1 are to:

1.1 promote women's participation in the labour market,

increase female employment, including those
formerly employed in agriculture;

1.2 increase the employment of young people;
1.3 promote registered employment;
1.4 improve the quality of public employment services.

Measures 1.1 and 1.2 are implemented only in the 12
disadvantaged NUTS 2 regions, whereas measures 1.3
and 1.4 are applied at the national level. The Priority axis 1
summary table shows how the measures for the 2010-11
period are a continuation of the phase 1 measure of
2007-09 (see also TABLE 5.3 for data on both periods).
Some of the projects of the 2007-09 period are still in the
implementation phase, as not all of the funding awarded
for this period was used up.

Indicators

Overall, a clear distinction is missing between process,
output and results indicators, as is any definition of the
qualitative and quantitative results to be achieved. It is

therefore to be expected that monitoring and evaluation
will be difficult if not impossible beyond any simple
measurement of input indicators.

The Priority axis 1 summary table shows output indicators
for measures 1.1 and 1.2 (training and counselling) that
specify the number of participants, but the result
indicators are relatively vague as they describe an
immediate outcome not any concrete labour market
results. The result indicators are not very ambitious (at
around 30% of job placement rates after labour market
training). Ideally, these indicators should also include
tracing and monitoring of results after the participants
have finished the training.

The output and the results indicators defined for measure
1.3 (promoting registered employment) are performance
indicators rather than results indicators and the expected
labour market outcome remains to be defined.

For measure 1.4 (improving the quality of public
employment services), the indicators are poorly
connected with the project outline and fail to include any
qualitative dimensions.

Operation beneficiaries, final beneficiaries and
partnership approach

The operation beneficiaries for Priority axis 1 on
employment 2007-09 have mainly been (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) and, to a
lesser extent, the Social Security Institution on the
promotion of registered employment. For the 2010-11
period, the operation beneficiary for phase 2 of the
employment measures for women and young people
remains to be defined, whereas MoLSS was defined as

PRIORITY AXIS 1, PERIOD 2010-11: MEASURES, BUDGETS AND TARGETS

Measure
(and operation beneficiary)

Target groups

Output indicators
(number of
participants)

1.1 Women's participation in
the labour market II

Long-term unemployed
and inactive women

2009: 35,200

2011: 54,660

1.2

Increase youth
employment II

Young unemployed, early
school leavers, students

2009: 25,500

2011: 36,500

1.3 Promote registered

employment II (SSK)

Unregistered workers,
staff of institutions, social
partners

Staff training in relevant
institution

Total budget
(incl. national
co-financing)
EUR million

30.000
(Service and grant
component)

33.000
(Service and grant
component)

7.000
(Service and grant
component)

1.4

Improve quality of public
employment services II
(MoLSS)

Staff of MoLSS, (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6),
provincial employment
committees, social partners

Staff training and more
effective services

2.988
(Service and supplies)

Subtotal

72.988

Source: MoLSS, HRD OP, second version

5. EU AND INTERNATIONAL DONOR INTERVENTIONS 99

the operation beneficiary for phase 2 on the measure to
improve the quality of public employment services.

A wider range of organisations, including social partner
organisations and NGOs, are eligible to participate in the
grant schemes. This provides options for an improved
partnership approach at national and local levels, however,
the capacities of beneficiaries to make best use of the IPA
funds varies in different provinces. According to the interim
evaluation, the active involvement of (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6), regional
development agencies and other local actors should be
enhanced in regional programming. Gender equality and
the participation of target group representatives in advisory
boards should be ensured (IBF International Consulting,
2011). Overall, the chief remaining challenges lie in
encouraging partnership and mainstreaming good practices
into more sustainable approaches.

As (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) is the main operation beneficiary for Priority
axis 1 on employment and MoNE the main beneficiary for
Priority axes 2 and 3 on education, adaptability and lifelong
learning, horizontal cooperation is essential in ensuring
closer contact between the labour market and education
and training systems.

documents in line with broader EU policies relating to
educational reform. The Priority axis 2 summary table
provides an overview of the measures.

Indicators

The indicators used to measure progress made in relation
to the educational reform under Priority axis 2 do not
provide a sound basis for measuring the impact of these
efforts as the definitions of most of the indicators are too
broad or a clear distinction is missing between inputs,
outputs and outcomes.

Operation beneficiaries, final beneficiaries and
partnership approach

MoNE is the operation beneficiary for Priority axis 2 along
with the MoNE Provincial Directorate. In some areas the
Council of Higher Education has a pivotal role in
implementation of Priority axis 2 in the 12 NUTS 2
regions. The wide range of final beneficiaries includes
schools, students, parents and employers. Close
cooperation between (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) and MoNE is essential for
effective implementation of the fine-tuning needed
between the education sector and the labour market.

PRIORITY AXES 2 AND 3: EDUCATION AND
LIFELONG LEARNING

PRIORITY AXIS 3: LIFELONG LEARNING

For the 2007-11 period, 16.76% of the funds available for
the IPA component IV (EUR 59 million) were allocated to
Priority axis 2 on education.

The stated objective of this axis is ‘to invest in human
capital by increasing the quality of education, improving
the linkage between education and the labour market, and
raising enrolment rates at all levels of education,
especially girls’.

Relevance

The measures given under Priority axis 2 address the
strategic priorities identified in government strategic

For 2007-11, 14.18% of the funds available for the IPA
component IV (EUR 50 million) were allocated to Priority
axis 3 on lifelong learning. The objective of this axis is to
increase the adaptability of workers, enterprises and
entrepreneurs, in particular promoting lifelong learning and
encouraging investment in human resources. The Priority
axis 3 summary table provides an overview of this
situation.

PRIORITY AXIS 2, PERIOD 2007-11: MEASURES, BUDGETS AND TARGETS

Measure
(and operation beneficiary)

Target groups

Output indicators

2.1

Increase enrolment rates
especially for girls

Girls in secondary
education

2.2

Improve the quality of
education especially in
VET

Students, teachers and
entrepreneurs

2009: 77%

2011: 85%
(enrolment)

2009: 50%

2011: 70%
(level of satisfaction
with VET)

Subtotal

Source: MoLSS, HRD OP, second version

Total budget
(incl. national
co-financing)
EUR million

25.647

33.447

59.094

100

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

PRIORITY AXIS 3, PERIOD 2007-11: MEASURES, BUDGETS AND TARGETS

Measure
(and operation beneficiary)

Target groups

Output indicators
(number of participants)

3.1 Develop and implement

coherent strategies for
lifelong learning

Unskilled workers and
women, workers and
women in need of
additional training and
skills

418 primary and
secondary education
graduates to be certified

3.2

Increase the adaptability
of employees

Workers and women in
need of increased skills
for promotion or new job
in another sector,
employers, private sector

15%

15%

Subtotal

Source: MoLSS, HRD OP, second version

Total budget
(incl. national
co-financing)
EUR million

30.000

20.000

50.000

Relevance

PRIORITY AXIS 4: SOCIAL INCLUSION

The importance of setting up a system to promote lifelong
learning is stressed in government policies, independent
research on the topic and broader European policies and
practices. Priority axis 3 provides the support needed to
create a basis for an environment conducive to lifelong
learning.

Indicators

The indicators used to measure progress toward the
education reforms listed under Priority axis 3 do not
provide a sound basis for measuring the impact of the
efforts made as most of the indicators are either too
broadly defined or they fail to make a clear distinction
between inputs, outputs and outcomes. These indicators
and are therefore not fit for purpose as in the early stages
of development lifelong learning requires coordinated
efforts from all the partners involved on the basis of
strategic project design with clearly established baseline
data.

Operation beneficiaries, final beneficiaries and
partnership approach

MoNE and the MoNE Provincial Directorate are the
operational beneficiaries for Priority axis 3. In some areas,
the Council of Higher Education has a pivotal role to play
in the implementation of Priority axis 3 in the 12 NUTS 2
regions. There is a wide group of final beneficiaries
including: MoNE, education institutions, universities, the
Vocational Qualifications Authority (VQA), YOK, KOSGEB,
social partners, relevant NGOs and local authorities.

Out of the total budget for IPA component IV, 19.06% of
funds for the 2007-11 period (EUR 67.201 million) were
earmarked for Priority axis 4 on social inclusion.

The stated objective of Priority axis 4 is to ‘promote an
inclusive labour market with opportunities for
disadvantaged people, with a view to their sustainable
integration into the labour market force and combat all
forms of discrimination in the labour market‘.

Relevance

The measures planned under Priority Axis 4 are generally
in line with IPA, ESF and EES standards. However, their
relevance concerning the achievement of national social
inclusion targets cannot be assessed as there is no
national strategy and operational plan for poverty
reduction and social inclusion in Turkey. The draft JIM
document has still not been finalised and is consequently
not available for consultation. Another critical issue raised
in the interim HRD programme evaluation was that
HRD OP makes no specific mention of poverty reduction
as a main focus area, whereas the Europe 2020 Strategy
does. Turkey is facing a larger number of more basic and
extensive problems than the EU and the country does not
have the same means available for the pursuit of greater
income equality between regions. However, the poverty
reduction issue is definitely considered in selecting the
participant regions for the HRD OP and in a deeper and
more or less explicit sense in the definitions used for the
rationale of each of the priority axes (IBF International
Consulting, 2011).

5. EU AND INTERNATIONAL DONOR INTERVENTIONS 101

The measures planned under Priority axis 4 address
Guideline 10 (promoting social inclusion and combating
poverty) and more support is needed to improve
coordination between institutions and mechanisms and
enhance integrated measures aimed at all four priority
axes, uniting the main players in education, employment
and social policy at a systems level.

The measures established under Priority axis 4 are:

4.1 increase the employment of disadvantaged persons,
facilitate their access to the labour market and
eliminate barriers to entering the labour market;

4.2 better functioning and coordination among

institutions and mechanisms in the field of labour
market and social protection, particularly in order to
facilitate the integration of disadvantaged persons
into the labour market.

Measure 4.1 is implemented only in the 12 disadvantaged
NUTS 2 regions, whereas measure 4.2 is applied across
the nation. The Priority axis 4 summary table shows that
the measures for the 2010-11 period are a continuation of
phase 1 in the 2007-09 period (see also TABLE 5.3 for
data on both periods). Some of the projects from the
2007-09 period are still being implemented.

Indicators

As indicated in the interim evaluation of the HRD
programme, there are no impact indicators as such, only
input, output and result indicators. The distinction
between process, output and results indicators is
sometimes blurred and a clear distinction among them is
missing, as is any definition of the qualitative and
quantitative results to be achieved. The difficulties
encountered in the identification of output indicators on
social inclusion are intrinsically connected with the
politically and socially sensitive issues raised earlier in this

report. This complicates the process of defining
marginalised groups as target groups and makes it difficult
to obtain reliable data and statistics as these are often not
available. This raises obstacles to monitoring and
evaluation that limits efforts to the simple measuring of
input indicators, as is shown in the interim evaluation.

The output indicators for measures 4.1 and 4.2 given in
the Priority axis 4 summary table specify the number of
participants, begging the question of why there is an
apparent tendency to favour male recipients in the target
numbers of male and female recipients. It is clear that the
implementation of the measures under 4.2 have worked
on the basis of old baseline surveys (2006) which might
throw some doubt on the impact indicators for this
measure. All marginalised groups can be defined as
‘disadvantaged persons’ in a way that leaves the degree
of targeting of these measures and the kind of impact
they can have on the most needy as per their definition
open to criticism. The data collected from the
Management Information System during the interim
HRD OP evaluation revealed that there was only limited
participation of individuals from the identified marginalised
groups – people with disabilities, terror victims, Roma in
need special care, former convicts, the poor or those at
risk of poverty, other people in need of special care such
as those with substance addiction, female victims of
domestic violence, the family and parents of working
children, immigrants – with percentages that ranged from
1% to 9%.

Operation beneficiaries, final beneficiaries and
partnership approach

(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) has been the operation beneficiary of Priority axis 4
on social inclusion 2007-09, especially in terms of the
measure to promote active inclusion in Turkey, and
MoLSS, (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) and the Social Security Institution have
been the operation beneficiaries for 2010-11. Although the

PRIORITY AXIS 4, PERIOD 2010-11: MEASURES, BUDGETS AND TARGETS

Measure
(and operation
beneficiary)

Target groups

Output indicators
(number of participants)

To increase employability
of disadvantaged persons

People with disabilities, at
risk of poverty, ex-convicts,
IDPs, Roma, other
disadvantaged persons

2009: 11,545
(100,000 reached by
awareness-raising
activities)

2011: 20,585 (170,000)

Better coordination among
institutions to facilitate
integration of disadvantaged
people in the labour market

Staff of relevant institutions
and NGOs, people with
disabilities, at risk of poverty,
ex-convicts, IDPs, Roma,
other disadvantaged persons

2009: 7,000 (staff trained),
1,250,000 (registered), 1
monitoring system
established
2011: N.A.

Subtotal

Source: MoLSS, HRD OP

Total budget
(incl. national
co-financing)
EUR million

29.859
(Service and grant
component)

0.000

29.859

102

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

operational and management structure of the HRD OP are
considered professionally and technically well-equipped,
concerns still exist on their understanding of how to
connect with the expertise of technical staff within the
line ministries and the associated institutions at central
and regional level. The number of indicators tends to
create tension between education and employment
institutions. Solid technical cooperation is required in
relations between MoNE and (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) (as the main
operation beneficiary of 4.1) but this is lacking at present.

Cooperation becomes even more difficult when the time
comes to turn the results of demand surveys into a
workable proposal for the education sector as (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) still
lacks the basic tools and techniques required for the job
while the education institutions cannot be bound into
cooperation as they operate with a relatively high degree
of autonomy, notably in the VET/TVET sector where most
are founded on the basis of a university-type approach
(IBF International Consulting, 2011).

IPA I and IV funding has had an impressive impact on the
number of partnerships among several of the line
ministries, associated institutions, public private
institutions, social partner organisations and NGOs and
community-based organisations representing the
neediest groups. The fact that the whole wide range of
organisations is eligible for the grant schemes means
they have been able to boost their technical and
negotiating capacities in a way that works favourably
with the improved partnership approach at national and
local levels. However, as indicated previously in this
document, there is still a big need for improved
beneficiary capacities to make best use of the IPA funds
at central and regional level with some variation across
the different provinces.

According to the interim evaluation, the active
involvement of (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6), the Chamber of Commerce,
regional development agencies and other local actors
should be enhanced in regional programming with efforts
made to strengthen involvement and cooperation through
appropriate legislation. Gender equality and the
participation of target group representatives in advisory
boards should be ensured, but the importance of these
issues should not be overestimated and made to
outweigh competence, experience and will-power in
terms of quality of work underway (IBF International
Consulting, 2011).

Overall, partnership and the mainstreaming of innovative
and good practices into more sustainable approaches
continue to present a challenge.

As (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) is the main operational beneficiary for Priority
axis 1 on employment and Priority axis 4 on social
inclusion and MoNE is the main operational beneficiary
for Priority axis 2 on education and Priority axis 3 on
adaptability and lifelong learning, there is a need for
enhanced vertical and horizontal cooperation between
these operation beneficiaries. This would place them in
a better position to implement inclusive education and
employment for disadvantaged and marginalised

groups; an issue that needs to be revisited and
redefined.

5.2 INTERNATIONAL DONOR
INITIATIVES

Turkey is also participating in a range of EU Community
Programmes including the Seventh Research Framework
Programme, the Lifelong Learning Programme
(Comenius, Erasmus, Leonardo da Vinci, Grundtvig, Jean
Monnet), Youth in Action, the Culture Programme, the
Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme
and PROGRESS.

In addition to financial support from the EU, Turkey
receives significant financial assistance from the World
Bank. Other important donors and partners include the
ILO (for employment and social dialogue in particular),
UNDP (social inclusion) and the International Organisation
for Migration (IOM), supporting policy development and
implementing specific initiatives, mainly at provincial level
(see TABLE 5.5 for an overview of international support).

The core mandate of the ILO Ankara Office is to promote
international labour standards in Turkey. ILO Ankara also
develops implements and monitors technical cooperation
programmes and projects in the fields of child labour,
women’s employment, youth employment, and social
dialogue in the context of industrial restructuring. The
youth project (National Youth Employment Programme
and Pilot Implementation in Antalya) is still ongoing.
Primary beneficiaries include the Labour Inspection Board
(for child labour) and (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) for the other programmes (see
also TABLE 5.6 for a list of ILO projects).

The World Bank has been an important donor to (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6),
providing loans to develop occupational standards,
vocational guidance and institution building. The two major
projects in the field of employment are presented below.

(cid:2) Restoring Equitable Growth and Employment

Programmatic Development Policy Loan, phase 1
and 2 in 2010 and 2011: The project defines specific
goals for the labour market, some of which have been
achieved (an unemployment rate of below 12% in
2011 and increased job placement rate for (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6), for
instance) while others have not (female labour force
participation of 27% by 2011, 400,000 (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) training
participants by 2011).

(cid:2) Competitiveness and Employment Development
Policy Loan, phase 1 and 2 in 2007 and 2008: This
project included measures for the restructuring and
privatisation of state-owned enterprise (World Bank
Turkey, 2011).

The World Bank has also supported the Secondary
Education Project (2005-11) aiming to modernise curricula
and provide assistance to teacher re-training and career
guidance systems A number of policy papers have been
published by the World Bank and the OECD related to
challenges and opportunities for the education and reform
options.

5. EU AND INTERNATIONAL DONOR INTERVENTIONS 103

Cooperation and coordination should be further
strengthened to create greater synergy and sustainable
results. Pehlívan (2009) cites strategic coordination at
government level; transparent and more widely accessible
information; standards and quality of related research,
and; local absorption capacities as the main challenges
facing the country, but the same elements also constitute
levers for improving coordination and maximising
synergies. Effective donor coordination mechanisms at
sector level need to become a regular practice as does
horizontal cooperation.

Some of the IPA measures such as the employment of
women and young people address the same core issues
as the ILO projects. There is also potential synergy
between IPA projects and national and local labour market
programmes in elements such as ALMPs and lifelong
learning. The lessons learned and the outcome of these
projects can only be translated into sustainable results if
there is functioning coordination between the measures.
An enhanced partnership approach including social
partners and NGOs would support mainstreaming of pilot
projects and good practices in other provinces or even
across the country. Finally, evaluation capacities and
practices need to be further developed to inform mutual
learning from successes and failures and a continuous
improvement of approaches.

Unicef has a long standing engagement in Turkey with
firm goals in the five priority areas of immunisation, early
childhood development, girls’ education, HIV/AIDS
prevention and protecting children from violence,
exploitation, abuse and discrimination.

The IOM is engaged in migration issues and supporting
Turkey to establish a national coordination mechanism in
line with the EU accession process. IOM is working to
promote national debate and create a platform for
dialogue at inter-institutional levels to enhance
understanding of the complex relationship between
migration, human security and community development,
and this entity funded the project entitled ‘Supporting the
Capacities of Local Municipalities on Migration
Management in Turkey’. This project was designed to
enhance the capacities of Turkish municipalities and
strengthen their ability to deal with the humanitarian and
social needs of migrants in line with the Turkish
framework and international best practices through
training and meetings.

In recent years, Turkey has increasingly engaged in
development cooperation in the role of an active donor,
and the country has expanded its traditional engagement
from Central Asia to Africa. Despite the emergent role of
Turkey as a donor, Turkey is a net aid recipient (Deniz,
2011).

Coordination among donors

The increasing support of multilateral and bilateral
development agencies has provided important financial
contributions to the huge investment needed for urban
infrastructure, transport, energy and environment, and
human resources.

104

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLES

TABLE 5.1 IPA COMPONENT I – TRANSITION ASSISTANCE AND INSTITUTION BUILDING*
(HRD PROJECTS)

Project number

Project title

Budget (EUR million)

Priority axis 1 – Progress towards fully meeting the Copenhagen political criteria

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

3.800

6.150

13.900

3.040

7.650

9.135

3.215

TR 07 01 04

Empowerment of women and women NGOs in
the least developed regions of Turkey

5.000

TR 08 01 04

Promoting services for people with disabilities

TR 08 01 05

Strengthening special education

TR 08 01 06

Strengthening preschool education

TR 08 01 08

Civil society development for active participation

TR2009/0136.01 Democratic citizenship and human rights

education

TR2009/0136.02 Women's shelters for combating domestic

violence

TR2009/0135.01

Improved integration of disabled persons into
society

TR2010/0136.02 Support to the Local Human Rights Board and
women's rights awareness

TR2010/0136.03 Prevention of domestic violence against women

TR2010/0136.04 Promoting gender equality in education

TR2010/0136.05

Increasing primary school attendance rate of
children

TR2010/0136.06 Supporting social inclusion through sports

education

TR2010/0136.07

Fight against violence towards children

TR2011/0136.03 Economic and social integration of IDPs in Van

Province

TR2011/0136.06 Students learning about EU

Priority axis 2 – Adoption and implementation of the acquis communautaire

TR 07 02 13

TR 07 02 20

TR 07 02 21

Strengthening the Vocational Qualifications
Authority and national qualifications system
in Turkey

Improving occupational health and safety at
workplaces

Development of regional laboratories of the
Occupational Health and Safety Centre ((cid:2)SGÜM)

10.900

4.075

1.800

TR 07 02 22

Capacity building of Social Security Institution

1.110

2.250

2.790

3.240

2.880

2.070

2.700

3.420

3.210

5. EU AND INTERNATIONAL DONOR INTERVENTIONS 105

Project number

Project title

Budget (EUR million)

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

TR 07 02 23

Strengthening the statistical capacity of MoNE

2.000

TR 07 02 24

Strengthening the statistical capacity of MoLSS

1.000

TR 07 02 25

Strengthening the statistical capacity of ARAE

1.150

TR 08 02 18

Promoting gender equality in the work place

0.950

TR2009/0322.01 Capacity improvement in the Economic and

Social Cohesion Policy Phase II

TR2009/0326.01 Aligning higher education with the European

Higher Education Area

1.800

4.250

TR2010/0314.01

Improve maritime education and training

1.235

Priority axis 3 – Promotion of EU-Turkey civil society dialogue

TR 07 03 03

Continuation of the Jean Monnet Scholarship
Programme

6.980

TR2009/0135.02 Continuation of the Jean Monnet Scholarship

6.882

Programme

TR2011/0465.09

Turkey's participation in EU programmes and
agencies (Lifelong Learning Programme, Youth
in Action, etc.)

125.736 56.970 88.216 67.607 56.270

(*) Including national co-financing.

Sources: National Programme for Turkey under the IPA Transition Assistance and Institution Building Component for the years 2007, 2008,
2009, 2010 and 2011

106

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

)

%

(

s
e
x
a
o
t

n
o
i
t
a
c
o

l
l

A

)
n
o

i
l
l
i

m
R
U
E
(

)
n
o

i
l
l
i

m
R
U
E
(

)
n
o

i
l
l
i

m
R
U
E
(

t
e
g
d
u
b

l
a
t
o
T

1
1
-
7
0
0
2

t
e
g
d
u
B

1
1
-
0
1
0
2

t
e
g
d
u
B

9
0
-
7
0
0
2

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
i
f
e
n
e
B

e
r
u
s
a
e
M

*
T
N
E
M
P
O
L
E
V
E
D
L
A
N
O
G
E
R
–

I

I
I
I

T
N
E
N
O
P
M
O
C
A
P

I
2
.
5
E
L
B
A
T

.

0
5
8

8
9
6
0
0
3

.

7
6
3
2
6
1

.

.

1
3
3
8
3
1

t
n
e
m
n
o
r
i
v
n
e
s
s
e
n
i
s
u
b
f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

–
1
s
i
x
a
y
t
i
r
o
i
r
P

.
a
.
n

3
8
5
4
3

.

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
e
s
i
r
p
r
e
t
n
e
,
s
e
c
n
e
g
a
/
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

i

c

i
l

b
u
P

,
e
c
r
e
m
m
o
c
d
n
a

y
r
t
s
u
d
n

i

f
o
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
c

I

,
s
E
S
S
d
n
a

s
Z
I
O

f
o
s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

i

s
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
s
s
a
d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
f

,
s
n
o
n
u

i

l

a
i
r
t
s
u
d
n

i

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

f
o
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

1
.
1

.
a
.
n

.
a
.
n

.
a
.
n

9
4
7
0
2

.

f
o
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
c

i

,
s
e
c
n
e
g
a
/
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

c

i
l

b
u
p
,
e
r
u
t
l
u
C
d
n
a
m
s
i
r
u
o
T
f
o
y
r
t
s
n
M

i

i

.

0
1
1

8
8
4
7
3

.

.
a
.
n

1
0
1
0

.

7
8
3
7
3

.

2
3
4
2
2

.

0
4

.

4
4
3
4
1

.

.
a
.
n

5
5
9
4
1

.

.
a
.
n

8
2
1
3

.

6
1
2
1
1

.

6
3
3
9

.

i

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o
t
i
f
o
r
p
-
n
o
n
,
s
e
i
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
u
,
s
e
r
t
n
e
c
h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r

i

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

c

i
l

b
u
P

n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

i

c
s
a
b
g
n
d
v
o
r
P

i

i

1
.
2

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
f

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
s
s
a

i

i

,
s
n
o
n
u
,
e
c
r
e
m
m
o
c
d
n
a

y
r
t
s
u
d
n

i

f
o
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
c

r
o
f

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

y
c
n
a
t
l
u
s
n
o
c
d
n
a

s
E
M
S

s
e
s
i
r
p
r
e
t
n
e

r
o
t
c
e
s
e
t
a
r
o
p
r
o
c

y
r
t
s
u
d
n

i

n

i

n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
o
c

i

f
o
g
n
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
S

2
.
2

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a
l
a
c
i
n
h
c
e
T

,
n
o
i
t
a
r
a
p
e
r
p
P
O
e
h
t
o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
S

1
.
3

,
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

,
t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

d
n
a

l

o
r
t
n
o
c

,
g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
f

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
s
s
a

i

r
o
t
c
e
s

,
e
c
r
e
m
m
o
c
d
n
a

y
r
t
s
u
d
n

i

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

i

p
h
s
r
u
e
n
e
r
p
e
r
t
n
e
r
e
t
s
o
f
d
n
a
y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c
e
s
i
r
p
r
e
t
n
e
f
o
g
n
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
S
–
2
s
i
x
a
y
t
i
r
o
i
r
P

i

.

0
0
0
1

0
3
5
2
5
3

.

6
9
5
5
6
1

.

4
3
9
6
8
1

.

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
P
O
e
h
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
o
m
o
r
p

.
a
.
n

0
5
8
1

.

d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

,
y
t
i
c

i
l

b
u
P

2
.
3

l
a
t
o
T

-

9
0
7
0
0
2
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O
s
s
e
n
e
v
i
t
i
t
e
p
m
o
C

l

i

a
n
o
g
e
R

,
e
d
a
r
T
d
n
a

y
r
t
s
u
d
n
I

f
o
y
r
t
s
n
M

i

i

,
y
e
k
r
u
T
f
o
c

i
l

b
u
p
e
R

:
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

l

.
e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

t
o
N

)
.
a
.
n
(

i

.
g
n
c
n
a
n
i
f
-
o
c

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
g
n
d
u
c
n
I

i

l

)
*
(

3
8
5
4
3

.

d
n
a

s
e
r
t
n
e
C

l

l

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D
y
g
o
o
n
h
c
e
T
,
s
e
c
n
e
g
a
/
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

i

c

i
l

b
u
P

s
r
e
b
m
a
h
c

,
s
e
r
t
n
e
c
h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r

i

,
s
e
i
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
u
,
s
e
n
o
Z
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D
y
g
o
o
n
h
c
e
T

l

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
f

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
s
s
a

i

r
o
t
c
e
s

,
e
c
r
e
m
m
o
c
d
n
a

y
r
t
s
u
d
n

i

f
o

s
T
C

I

l

,
y
g
o
o
n
h
c
e
t

,
n
o
i
t
a
v
o
n
n

i

,

D
&
R

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

3
.
1

m
s
i
r
u
o
t

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

4
.
1

6
1
4
8
4

.

,
l
a
t
i
p
a
c
d
e
e
s

,
e
c
n
a
n
i
f

y
t
i
u
q
e
,
n
a
o
l
-
o
r
c
m

i

,
e
e
t
n
a
r
a
u
g
t
i
d
e
r
c
(

s
d
n
u
f

l

a
t
i
p
a
C

i

g
n
c
n
a
n
i
f

f
o
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

2
.
1

)
p
u
-
t
r
a
t
s

s
t
n
e
m
u
r
t
s
n

i

5. EU AND INTERNATIONAL DONOR INTERVENTIONS 107

4
9
0
9
5

.

2
8
0
3
2

.

5
3
6
9

.

2
1
0
6
3

.

2
1
0
6
1

.

,
s
O
G
N

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
e
e
t
t
i

m
m
o
c

,

E
N
o
M

,
s
l
r
i
g
f
o
s
t
n
e
r
a
p
,
s
t
n
e
d
u
t
S

s
e
t
a
r

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

i

s
e
c
v
r
e
s

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E
–
2
s
i
x
a
y
t
i
r
o
i
r
P

l

t
n
e
m
o
r
n
e
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

o
T

1
.
2

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

l

a
c
o

l

s
r
e
h
c
a
e
t

s
l
r
i
g
r
o
f

l

y
l
r
a
u
c
i
t
r
a
p

7
4
4
3
1

.

0
0
0
0
2

.

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

,

B
E
G
S
O
K

,

K
O
Y

,

E
N
o
M

T
E
V

,
s
r
e
h
c
a
e
t

,
s
t
n
e
d
u
t
S

d
n
a

t
n
e
t
n
o
c
e
h
t
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

o
T

2
.
2

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

l

a
c
o

l

,
s
O
G
N

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e
,
s
e
t
a
u
d
a
r
g

T
E
V
n

i

y
t
i
l

a
u
q

0
0
0
0
5

.

0
0
0
0
3

.

0
0
0
5
1

.

0
0
0
0
2

.

0
0
0
5
1

.

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
e
i
t
i
s
r
e
v
n
u
,

i

B
E
G
S
O
K

,

A
Q
V

,

E
N
o
M

,
s
r
e
h
c
a
e
t
d
n
a

s
t
n
e
d
u
t
s
T
E
V

i

e
v
s
n
e
h
e
r
p
m
o
c
e
t
o
m
o
r
p
o
T

1
.
3

i

g
n
n
r
a
e
l

g
n
o
l
e
f
i
l
-
y
t
i
l
i

b
a
t
p
a
d
A
–
3
s
i
x
a
y
t
i
r
o
i
r
P

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

l

a
c
o

l

,
s
O
G
N

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

-

A
Q
V
E
N
o
M

,
s
t
l
u
d
a
e
t
a
r
e
t
i
l
l
i

g
n
o
e
f
i
l

l

r
o
f

i

s
e
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

0
0
0
5
1

.

0
0
0
5

.

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
,

A
Q
V

,

M
P
M

,

B
E
G
S
O
K

l

,
s
e
e
y
o
p
m
e
s
E
M
S

l

d
e
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
,
f
f
a
t
s

s
E
M
S

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
t
p
a
d
a
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

o
T

2
.
3

i

g
n
n
r
a
e

l

8
8
9
2

.

0
0
0
7
1

.

s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T
,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

S
S
L
o
M

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

S
S
L
o
M

f
o
f
f
a
t
S

c

i
l

b
u
p
f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

4
.
1

0
0
0
3
3

.

0
0
0
3
2

.

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

l

a
c
o

l

,
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
c

,
s
O
G
N

n
e
m
o
w
e
v
i
t
c
a
n

i

t
e
k
r
a
m

r
u
o
b
a

l

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

E
N
o
M

,

S
S
L
o
M

l

y
l
r
a
e
,
d
e
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
g
n
u
o
Y

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
h
t
u
o
y
e
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

2
.
1

0
0
0
7

.

0
0
0
5
1

.

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

l

i

a
c
o
s

i

,
e
c
n
a
n
F
f
o
y
r
t
s
n
M

i

i

,

S
S
L
o
M

f
f
a
t
s

,
s
r
e
k
r
o
w
d
e
r
e
t
s
g
e
r
n
U

i

i

d
e
r
e
t
s
g
e
r
e
t
o
m
o
r
P

3
.
1

s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

c

i
l

b
u
p

l

a
n
o
g
e
r

i

,
s
O
G
N

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

s
t
n
e
d
u
t
s

,
s
r
e
v
a
e

l

l

o
o
h
c
s

s
O
G
N

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

f
o

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

8
3
1
5
5
1

.

l
a
t
o
T

1
1
-
7
0
0
2

8
8
9
2
7

.

0
0
0
0
3

.

0
5
1
2
8

.

0
5
1
7
2

.

1
1
-
0
1
0
2

9
0
-
7
0
0
2

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

S
S
L
o
M

l

d
n
a
d
e
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
m
r
e
t
-
g
n
o
L
e
h
t
n

i

i

n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
s
'
n
e
m
o
W

1
.
1

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E
–
1
s
i
x
a
y
t
i
r
o
i
r
P

)
n
o

i
l
l
i

m
R
U
E
(

t
e
g
d
u
B

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
i
f
e
n
e
B

s
p
u
o
r
g
t
e
g
r
a
T

e
r
u
s
a
e
M

*
T
N
E
M
P
O
L
E
V
E
D
S
E
C
R
U
O
S
E
R
N
A
M
U
H
–
V

I

T
N
E
N
O
P
M
O
C
A
P

I
3
.
5
E
L
B
A
T

108

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

1
0
2
7
6

.

l
a
t
o
T

1
1
-
7
0
0
2

1
1
-
0
1
0
2

9
0
-
7
0
0
2

9
5
8
9
2

.

9
5
8
9
2

.

2
4
3
7
3

.

2
4
3
0
3

.

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

l

i

a
c
o
s

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,
I
o
M

,
J
o
M

,

E
N
o
M

,

S
S
L
o
M

n
i
/
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

i

b
a
s
d
h
t
i

l

w
e
p
o
e
P
y
t
i
l
i

l

b
a
y
o
p
m
e
e
h
t
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

o
T

1
.
4

n
o
i
s
u
l
c
n

i

l
a
i
c
o
S
–
4
s
i
x
a
y
t
i
r
o
i
r
P

0
0
0
0

.

0
0
0
7

.

,

K
E
C
H
S

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

l

i

a
c
o
s

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

S
S
L
o
M

c

i
l

b
u
p
/
s
O
G
N

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
O
G
N

,
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

b
a
s
d

i

a
m
o
R

f
o
f
f
a
t
S

g
n
o
m
a
n
o
i
t
a
n
d
r
o
o
c

i

r
e
t
t
e
B

2
.
4

h
t
i

l

w
e
p
o
e
p
r
o
f

.

m
d
A

,

M
G
D
Y
S

,

K
E
C
H
S

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

,
s
P
D

I

i

,
s
t
c
v
n
o
c
-
x
e
,
y
t
r
e
v
o
p

s
n
o
s
r
e
p
d
e
g
a
t
n
a
v
d
a
s
d
f
o

i

)
n
o

i
l
l
i

m
R
U
E
(

t
e
g
d
u
B

s
e
i
r
a
i
c
i
f
e
n
e
B

s
p
u
o
r
g
t
e
g
r
a
T

e
r
u
s
a
e
M

5
5
1
1
2

.

3
5
9
9

.

0
0
0
7

.

2
0
2
1
1

.

2
0
2
6

.

8
8
5
2
5
3

.

2
8
8
5
6
1

.

6
0
7
6
8
1

.

0
0
5
1

.

0
0
0
3

.

3
5
4
1

.

0
0
0
2

.

1
0
0
O
P
I
5
0
R
T
7
0
0
2
o
N

I

C
C

l

a
c
o

l

,
s
O
G
N

l

,
d
e
b
a
s
d
e
h
t

i

r
o
f

.

m
d
A

,

M
G
D
Y
S

s
r
o
t
a
r
t
s
n
m
d
a

i

i

h
t
i

l

w
e
p
o
e
p
,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

r
u
o
b
a

l

l

f
o
d
e
i
f
e
h
t
n

i

,
y
t
r
e
v
o
p
n
i
/
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

b
a
s
d

i

n
o
i
t
c
e
t
o
r
p

l

i

a
c
o
s
d
n
a

s
e
i
t
i
t
n
e

t
e
k
r
a
m

a
m
o
R

,
s
P
D

I

i

,
s
t
c
v
n
o
c
-
x
e

i

,
g
n
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
r
o
f

t
r
o
p
p
u
S

1
.
5

,
t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

e
c
n
a
t
s
i
s
s
a
l
a
c
i
n
h
c
e
T

,
g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m

,
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

l

d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
,
l
o
r
t
n
o
c

i

n
o
i
t
a
n
m
e
s
s
d

i

n
o
i
t
p
r
o
s
b
a

r
o
f

t
r
o
p
p
u
S

2
.
5

y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

y
t
i
c

i
l

b
u
p
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n
I

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

3
.
5

l
a
t
o
T

i

.
g
n
c
n
a
n
i
f
-
o
c

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
g
n
d
u
c
n
I

l

i

)
*
(

,

-

9
0
7
0
0
2
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O

l

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D
s
e
c
r
u
o
s
e
R
n
a
m
u
H

,
y
t
i
r
u
c
e
S

l

i

a
c
o
S
d
n
a

r
u
o
b
a
L
f
o
y
r
t
s
n
M

i

i

,
y
e
k
r
u
T
f
o
c

i
l

b
u
p
e
R

:
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

5. EU AND INTERNATIONAL DONOR INTERVENTIONS 109

7
2
5

.

0
4
5
1

.

0
3
2
5

.

0
0
0
9

.

5
8
1

.

0
1
9

.

0
0
7

.

0
0
6
1

.

0
0
5
1

.

7
2
6
1

.

0
0
5
1

.

0
6
9

.

0
0
3

.

0
6
3

.

0
0
9

.

0
0
4
2

.

0
2
3

.

0
1
2

.

0
0
5

.

0
6
3

.

s
h
t
n
o
m
2
1

-

0
1
8
0
0
2

-

8
0
6
0
0
2

-

8
0
6
0
0
2

s
h
t
n
o
m
0
2

s
h
t
n
o
m
6
3

i

g
n
o
g
n
o
0
1
0
2

-

E
N
o
M

E
N
o
M

O
P
S

O
P
S

E
N
o
M

E
N
o
M

E
N
o
M

)

A
T
+
t
n
a
r
g
(

I
I
I

A
P

I
-

U
E

i

s
n
o
g
e
r
2
S
T
U
N
m
u
r
u
z
r
E
d
n
a
u
n
o
m
a
t
s
a
K

,
n
u
s
m
a
S
n

i

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

l

i

a
n
o
g
e
R

)

A
T
+
t
n
a
r
g
(

I
I
I

A
P

I

-

U
E

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

l

i

a
n
o
g
e
r
2
S
T
U
N

i
r
e
s
y
a
K

,
a
y
n
o
K

,
a
y
t
a
a
M

l

,
i
r
(cid:3)
A

)
t
n
a
r
g
(

I

A
P

I
-

U
E

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

l

o
o
h
c
s
-
e
r
p
f
o
y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c
e
h
t
g
n
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

I

l

)
y
p
p
u
s
+
A
T
(

U
E

i

i

g
n
n
a
r
t
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v
h
g
u
o
r
h
t

D
R
H
o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
S

l

)
y
p
p
u
s
+
A
T
(

I

)
t
n
a
r
g
(

I

)

A
T
(

I

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

i

f
o
y
r
t
s
n
M
e
h
t

i

f
o
y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

i

c
i
t
s
i
t
a
t
s
g
n
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
S

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
s
t
h
g
i
r
n
a
m
u
h
d
n
a
p
h
s
n
e
z
i
t
i
c

i

c
i
t
a
r
c
o
m
e
D

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

l

i

i

a
c
e
p
s
g
n
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
S

i

g
n
o
g
n
o
1
1
0
2

-

E
N
o
M

l

)
y
p
p
u
s
+
t
n
a
r
g
+
A
T
(

V

I

s
h
t
n
o
m
4
2

E
N
o
M

l

)
y
p
p
u
s
+
t
n
a
r
g
+
A
T
(

V

I

i

g
n
o
g
n
o
1
1
0
2

-

E
N
o
M

l

)
y
p
p
u
s
+
t
n
a
r
g
+
A
T
(

I

2
1
0
2

s
h
t
n
o
m
4
2

s
h
t
n
o
m
0
3

,

2
1
0
2

E
N
o
M

E
N
o
M

E
N
o
M

l

)
y
p
p
u
s
+
A
T
(

V

I

i

)
e
c
v
r
e
s
(

I

)

A
T
(

I

s
h
t
n
o
m
4
2

E
N
o
M

l

)
y
p
p
u
s
+
t
n
a
r
g
+
A
T
(

I

s
h
t
n
o
m
4
2

s
h
t
n
o
m
4
2

s
h
t
n
o
m
4
2

2
1
0
2

2
1
0
2

3
1
0
2

r
e
h
g
H

i

f
o

l
i

c
n
u
o
C

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E

E
N
o
M

E
N
o
M

)
t
n
a
r
g
+
A
T
(

V

I

)

A
T
(

I

)

A
T
(

I

)

A
T
(

I

E
N
o
M

l

)
y
p
p
u
s
+
t
n
a
r
g
+
A
T
(

V

I

E
N
o
M

l

)
y
p
p
u
s
+
A
T
(

I

A
P

I
-

U
E

j

1
t
c
e
o
r
P
–
g
n
n
r
a
e

i

l

I
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O
–

s
l
r
i
g
r
o
f

y

l
l

i

a
c
e
p
s
e
s
e
t
a
r

l

t
n
e
m
o
r
n
e
g
n
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

i

g
n
o
e
f
i
l

l

f
o
n
o
i
t
o
m
o
r
P

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

A
P

I
-

U
E

I
I

–

y
e
k
r
u
T
n

i

i

i

g
n
n
a
r
t
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q
e
h
t
g
n
v
o
r
p
m

i

I

I
I
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
O
–

s
l
r
i
g
r
o
f

y

l
l

i

a
c
e
p
s
e
s
e
t
a
r

l

t
n
e
m
o
r
n
e
g
n
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

i

j

2
t
c
e
o
r
P
–
g
n
n
r
a
e

i

l

g
n
o
e
f
i
l

l

f
o
n
o
i
t
o
m
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

l

o
o
h
c
s
-
e
r
p
g
n
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
S

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t
d
n
a

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q
e
h
t
g
n
i
t
o
m
o
r
P

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
n

i

y
t
i
l

a
u
q
e
r
e
d
n
e
g
f
o
n
o
i
t
o
m
o
r
P

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

s
d
r
a
w
o
t
e
c
n
e
o
v

i

l

i

t
s
n
a
g
a

t
h
g
F

i

n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

f
o
e
t
a
r
e
c
n
a
d
n
e
t
t
a

l

o
o
h
c
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
p
e
h
t
g
n
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

i

a
e
r
A
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E
r
e
h
g
H
n
a
e
p
o
r
u
E
e
h
t
h
t
i

i

w
y
e
k
r
u
T
n

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
r
e
h
g
h
g
n
n
g

i

i

i
l

A

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
s
t
r
o
p
s
h
g
u
o
r
h
t
n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

i

l

i

a
c
o
s
g
n
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
S

s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p
d
n
a

s
t
h
g
i
r

l

a
t
n
e
m
a
d
n
u
f

l

,
s
e
u
a
v
n
o
m
m
o
c
U
E
e
h
t

t
u
o
b
a
g
n
n
r
a
e

i

l

s
t
n
e
d
u
t
S

)
l

m
t
h
.
l
a
t
r
o
P
n
o
y
s
a
g
e
e
D

l

/
r
t
.
o
f
n

i
.
a
p
u
r
v
a
.
w
w
w

(

y
e
k
r
u
T
n

i

n
o
i
t
a
g
e
e
D
U
E

l

,
)

l

n
e
=
g
n
a
?
p
h
p
.
x
e
d
n

i
/
r
t

m
k
p
/
r
t
.
v
o
g
.
b
e
m

j

l

.
r
e
e
o
r
p
/
/
:
p
t
t
h
(

i

t
i
n
U
n
o
i
t
a
n
d
r
o
o
C
s
t
c
e
o
r
P

j

,

E
N
o
M

:
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

.
e
c
n
a
t
s
s
s
a

i

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
T
)

A
T
(

t
e
g
d
u
B

)
n
o

i
l
l
i

m
R
U
E
(

d
o
i
r
e
P

y
r
a

i
c
i
f
e
n
e
B

e
p
y
T

t
c
e
j
o
r
p
/
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

1
1
-
6
0
0
2
,

I

W
E
V
R
E
V
O
–
N
O
T
A
C
U
D
E
N

I

I

T
R
O
P
P
U
S
U
E
4
.
5
E
L
B
A
T

110

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

t
e
g
d
u
B

)

D
S
U

(

d
o
i
r
e
P

y
r
a

i
c
i
f
e
n
e
B

e
p
y
T

t
c
e
j
o
r
p
/
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

I

1
1
0
2
-
2
9
9
1
,
W
E
V
R
E
V
O
–
T
R
O
P
P
U
S

’

S
R
E
N
T
R
A
P
T
N
E
M
P
O
L
E
V
E
D
L
A
R
E
T
A
L
I
B
D
N
A
L
A
N
O
T
A
N
R
E
T
N

I

I
5
.
5
E
L
B
A
T

6
0
0
2
2
9
9
1

-

S
S
L
M

f
o
d
r
a
o
B
n
o
i
t
c
e
p
s
n
I

r
u
o
b
a
L

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
n
o
i
t
c
a
1
0
1

r
u
o
b
a
L
d

l
i

h
C

i

i
l

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
n
m
E
e
h
t
n
o
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
n
I

s
’
O
L

I

O
L

I

)

C
E
P

I
(

8
4
7
8
9
3

,

-

0
1
9
0
0
2

,
a
r
a
k
n
A
n

i

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s
d
n
a

f
f
a
t
s
(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

j

t
c
e
o
r
p
t
o

l
i

P

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

y
t
i
l

a
u
q
e
r
e
d
n
e
g
g
n
c
n
a
v
d
a

i

r
o
f

s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p
t
e
k
r
a
m

r
u
o
b
a

l

e
v
i
t
c
A

i

s
e
c
n
v
o
r
p
a
y
n
o
K
d
n
a
p
e
t
n
a
i
z
a
G

n
e
m
o
w

r
o
f

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
t
n
e
c
e
d

i
l

e
a
c
o
K
n

i

i

s
e
c
v
r
e
s

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E

l

j

t
c
e
o
r
p
t
o

l
i

P

g
n
i
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
e
r

r
o
f

s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p
t
e
k
r
a
m

r
u
o
b
a

l

e
v
i
t
c
A

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
9
3

.

-

2
1
9
0
0
2

i

y
t
e
c
o
s

l
i

v
c

i

,
s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

l

a
c
o

l

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

–
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
t
n
o

i

j

N
U

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
h
t
u
o
y

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

:
l
l

a

r
o
f

k
r
o
w

t
n
e
c
e
d
h
t
i

w
h
t
w
o
r
G

i

t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
A
G
D
M

d
n
u
F

l

a
y
a
t
n
A
n

i

n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

t
o

l
i

p
d
n
a
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
7
2

.

-

2
1
0
1
0
2

l

,
a
y
t
a
a
M
n

i

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

s
s
e
n
s
u
b

i

l

a
c
o
L

–
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
t
n
o

i

j

N
U

r
o
t
c
e
s
e

l
i
t
x
e
t

s
'
y
e
k
r
u
T
n

i

s
E
M
S
r
o
f

s
e
g
a
k
n

i
l

i

l

e
b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s
g
n
s
s
e
n
r
a
H

i

(cid:17)
a
r
a
m
n
a
m
a
r
h
a
K
d
n
a
p
e
t
n
a
i
z
a
G

,
n
a
m
a
y
ý
d
A

i

t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
A
G
D
M

d
n
u
F

P
D
N
U

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
5
1

.

-

9
0
6
0
0
2

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

l

a
c
o
L

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

y
e
k
r
u
T
n

i

l

s
a
o
G

l

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D
m
u
n
n
e

i

l
l
i

M
N
U
e
h
t
g
n
s

i

i
l

a
c
o
L

k
r
o
w
t
e
N
e
c
n
a
n
r
e
v
o
G
1
2
a
d
n
e
g
A

l

a
c
o
L
e
h
t

0
0
0
0
5
7

,

-

0
1
7
0
0
2

l

e
p
o
e
p
g
n
u
o
Y

e
h
t

r
o
f
h
t
u
o
y

f
o
t
n
e
m
r
e
w
o
p
m
E

:
e
d
v
d

i

i

l

i

a
t
i
g
d
e
h
t
g
n
g
d
i
r

i

B

0
0
0
3
0
4

,

-

0
1
8
0
0
2

r
o
i
r
e
t
n
I
e
h
t

f
o
y
r
t
s
n
M

i

i

e
c
n
a
t
s
s
s
a

i

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
T

l

e
p
o
e
p
d
e
c
a
p
s
d
y

l

i

l
l

a
n
r
e
t
n

i

n
a

l

f
o
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
e
h
t
o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
S

y
e
k
r
u
T
n

i

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

y
e
k
r
u
T
f
o
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t
-
e

0
0
5
2
5
7

,

-

1
1
7
0
0
2

l

a
c
o

l

,

i

n
o
g
e
r
h
u
r
o
C
n

i

s
d
r
a
o
B
m
s
i
r
u
o
T

l

a
c
o
L

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

l

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
m
s
i
r
u
o
t

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A
n
r
e
t
s
a
E

0
6
3
7
0
9

,

-

1
1
8
0
0
2

s
e
v
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
o
c
n
e
m
o
W

+

i

)
h
s
d
e
w
S

(

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
F

i

r
o
f

l

l

e
d
o
m
e
b
a
k
r
o
w
A

:
t
n
e
m
r
e
w
o
p
m
e
s
’
n
e
m
o
w

r
o
f

s
n
o
i
t
a
v
o
n
n

I

e
c
n
a
t
s
s
s
A

i

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
T

i

n
o
g
e
r

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A

t
s
a
e
h
t
u
o
S
s
’
y
e
k
r
u
T
n

i

n
e
m
o
w

t
e
g
d
u
B

)

D
S
U

(

d
o
i
r
e
P

y
r
a

i
c
i
f
e
n
e
B

e
p
y
T

t
c
e
j
o
r
p
/
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
0
0
5

-

8
0
7
0
0
2

y
r
u
s
a
e
r
T
f
o
t
a
i
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
s
r
e
d
n
U

y
c

i
l

o
P
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

n
a
o
L

+
0
0
3
1

-

1
1
0
1
0
2

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

y
c

i
l

o
P
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

)
I
I
d
n
a

I
(

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
d
n
a
h
t
w
o
r
g
e
b
a
t
i
u
q
e
g
n
i
r
o
t
s
e
R

l

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
d
n
a

s
s
e
n
e
v
i
t
i
t
e
p
m
o
C

k
n
a
B
d
l
r
o
W

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
0
0
7

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
4
0
1

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
3
1
5
7

.

n
o

i
l
l
i

m
0
8
1
2
4

.

-

1
1
5
0
0
2

-

3
1
9
0
0
2

-

5
1
1
1
0
2

n
a
o
L

S
S
L
o
M

,

H
o
M

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P
e
b
a
t
p
a
d
A

l

m
r
o
f
e
r

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
s
n
a
r
t
h
t
l
a
e
h
y
e
k
r
u
T

E
N
o
M

t
n
e
m
t
s
e
v
n
I

c
i
f
i
c
e
p
S

n
a
o
L

n
a
o
L

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
d
n
o
c
e
S

l

n
a
P
n
o
i
t
c
A
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P
y
r
t
n
u
o
C
5
1
-
1
1
0
2

f
e
c
i
n
U

-

0
1
3
0
0
2

e
d
a
r
t
d
n
a

’
s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

,
y
r
t
s
u
d
n

i

f
o
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
C

d
n
a

a
r
a
m
n
a
m
a
r
h
a
K
n

i

s
E
M
S

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
s
s
a

i

m

i
t
s
O
/
a
r
a
k
n
A

a

i
l

o
t
a
n
A
n

i

n
o
i
t
o
m
o
r
p
r
o
t
c
e
s
e
t
a
v
i
r
P

I

Z
G

5. EU AND INTERNATIONAL DONOR INTERVENTIONS 111

y
e
k
r
u
T
-
Z
I
G

;
)
r
t
.
g
r
o
.
f
e
c
n
u
.
w
w
w

i

(

y
e
k
r
u
T
f
e
c
n
U

i

;
)
r
t
.
g
r
o
.
k
n
a
b
d
l
r
o
w
w
w
w

.

(

y
e
k
r
u
T
n

i

k
n
a
B
d
l
r
o
W

.

;
)
r
t
.
g
r
o
p
d
n
u
w
w
w

.

(

y
e
k
r
u
T
n

i

P
D
N
U

;
)
/
a
r
a
k
n
a
/
o
r
p
r
u
e
/
n
o
g
e
r
/
h
s

i

i
l

g
n
e
/
c

i
l

b
u
p
/
g
r
o
.
o

l
i
.

w
w
w

(

a
r
a
k
n
A
O
L
I

-

:
s
e
c
r
u
o
S

7
0
0
2
r
e
b
m
e
t
p
e
S

,
a
r
a
k
n
A

,
t
r
o
p
e
R

l

i

-

a
n
F
9
0
7
0
0
2
P
O
D
R
H
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E
e
t
n
A
x
E

l

,

-

Z
T
G
T
P
D

;
)

i

l

m
t
h
.
3
6
6
/
n
e
s
a
a
r
t
n
e
z
-
s
u
s
a
k
u
a
k
-
a
p
o
r
u
e
/
t
i
e
w

t
l
e
w
/
n
e
/
e
d
.
z
t
g
.
w
w
w

(

112

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TABLE 5.6 MAIN ILO PROJECTS IN THE LABOUR MARKET FIELD

Title

Source of
funding

Implementation
partners

Duration

Goals and results

UN joint programme
‘Growth with decent
work for all: National
youth employment
programme and pilot
implementation in
Antalya’

MDG
Achievement
Fund
(Government of
Spain)

(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) (primary
beneficiary),
ILO, IOM, FAO,
UNDP

2009-12

Goals: reducing youth
unemployment and increasing the
labour market participation of young
women

Planned results at national level:
National Youth Employment Action
Plan

Target group for pilot
implementation: unemployed and
unskilled youth, including youth
from internally migrated families

Government of
Norway

(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)

2009-10

Implementation in provinces of
Ankara, Gaziantep and Konya

Pilot project on active
labour market policies
for advancing gender
equality through
decent employment
for women in Turkey

Programme to
combat child labour

ILO International
Programme on
the Elimination
of Child Labour
(IPEC)

Capacity development at province
level ((cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6), social partners),
development of gender sensitive
policies and programmes, enhance
the employability of unemployed
women

Labour
Inspection Board
of MLSS

1992-2006 Coherent approach including

studies, awareness-raising,
monitoring

Active labour market
policies for
restructuring

(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)

2003

Source: ILO Ankara Office. Last accessed 23 September 2011 at: www.ilo.org/public/english/region/eurpro/ankara/index.htm

50,000 children were reached, 60%
of them placed back in school;
counselling services were provided
to 25,000 families

Pilot implementation in Kocaeli
(Izmit), with coherent approaches in
the case of restructuring and
redundancies, to optimise
redeployment and matching

113

6. MAIN CHALLENGES, STRATEGIC
PRIORITIES AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 HORIZONTAL PRIORITIES
AND RECOMMENDATIONS

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS

Strengthening institutional capacities

Equity is the most important challenge in the three policy
reform agendas. Inequalities should be taken into
consideration when formulating and implementing
policies. Sufficient public funding is needed in
consideration of Turkey’s young population. Adequate
governance and management policies are indispensable
for an effective and equalising use of public funds.

Turkey has made tremendous efforts in education,
employment and social inclusion but lacks the institutional
set-up for monitoring and evaluation and tools robust
enough to measure the impact of these investments in
order to create an opportunity to draw lessons from these
experiences.

New governance models with greater autonomy and
clearer rules on accountability are needed for a difference
to be made at the regional and local levels and to thus
reduce regional disparities. Regional issues and
differences have shown themselves to be resistant to
centralised policies and systems. In all three policy reform
areas, decentralisation policies are considered a stepping
stone to visible impact at the beneficiary levels.

6.2 EDUCATION AND
TRAINING

The strategic framework for education and training is
presented in the government’s Ninth Development Plan.
The objectives of this framework are to enhance the
quality of life through an inclusive development process.
The strategic priorities include:

1. ensuring equitable human and social development;
2. reducing regional differences;
3. ensuring efficient provision of high quality education.

MoNE has initiated a number of structural reforms to
implement the Ninth Development Plan through reforms
in primary and secondary education but further
strengthening of institutional capacities is needed to
make good progress in each of these areas.
Furthermore, strategic coordination between national
programmes, EU and international support is critically
important alongside the involvement of provincial and
local partners in the design and implementation of
policies and programmes.

Further institutional capacity building is needed to
successfully implement a number of ongoing reform
efforts, achieve sustainable results in a timely manner and
take into account the lessons learned for future policies
and implementation.

Specific policy measures should focus on:

1. Strong capacity building of the VQA to develop and
implement all measures related to the NQF in a
timely manner and including the involvement of social
partners and sector representatives. Guidance is
needed to equip training providers and test centres
with sufficient support to successfully adjust their
training programmes to reflect the NQF-levels in an
appropriate manner and to carry out testing. It is
important that good progress be made toward the
VQA with the Turkish National Qualification
Framework so that students and companies can
benefit from these efforts in the foreseeable future.

2. A robust management information system so that the

education sector in Turkey can measure the impact of the
various reform efforts. In addition, greater emphasis on
learning outcomes and systematic measuring of learning
outcomes is needed on top of the more
investment-oriented approach. With the exception of the
three-yearly PISA studies, very little systematic information
is available in Turkey about achievements in terms of
learning outcomes. This lack of information makes it
difficult to assess the impact of reforms or the need for
additional measures either in specific areas of education or
with respect to regional or social disparities. In this context,
the recently initiated FATIH project provides an important
opportunity to monitor the impact of information and
communication technology (ICT) on teaching and learning.
3. The promotion of quality at all levels of the education
system to reach all children and students through a
balanced decentralisation strategy in line with the
recommendations made in the 2010 Green Paper.
Implementation of this policy requires an intensive
dialogue at all levels and large-scale support for
teachers and school managers to evolve toward a
modernised system of school management
implementing child-centred policies.

4. The leading role of school leaders and teachers. Any
type of education reform is unlikely to succeed if
school leaders and teachers do not support the
proposed changes. Policies and incentives are

114

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

needed to promote excellence in teaching and school
management. A revision of the policy framework
governing teacher selection and teacher career
development from pre-school education to the
faculties for teacher education may be required for
Turkey to successfully implement reforms to improve
learning outcomes. This revision should take into
account modern practices of school management
where school leaders have a clear mandate in teacher
selection and promotion within an established good
quality regulatory framework. Pre- and in-service
teacher education are to be revised to promote a
constructivist approach to learning and
student-centred approaches as opposed to the more
classical academic teaching styles.

5. The increasing number of universities and tertiary

education programmes calls for a systematic quality
assurance mechanism to provide students and
employers with the accurate information about the
various tertiary education offers. It is therefore
important to strengthen the capacity of Turkey’s
autonomous Quality Assurance and Accreditation
Agency to perform programme accreditation and
institutional accreditations in line with international
best practices and EU standards for universities and
post-secondary professional programmes.

Ensuring equitable human development

In view of the extensive gender disparities, it is
recommended that Turkey intensifies ongoing efforts to
design and implement gender-sensitive programmes at all
levels of education with special attention to the most
disadvantaged provinces. Conditional cash transfer
programmes could be considered to target parents and
schools in special cases to increase enrolment,
attendance and completion rates.

Reducing regional disparities

A better understanding of the important constraints in the
various parts of Turkey is needed to promote equal
education opportunities and an overall increase in learning
outcomes. A broad political platform must be created to
agree on instruments with which to address these
challenges, including increased public funding for
education with a special focus on the least advantaged
groups. Incremental changes may allow progress in
specific areas, but a broad increase in learning outcomes
for the entire population will require important reforms.

Specific policy measures include:

1. Implementation of the decentralisation policies

recommended in the 2010 Green Paper with ongoing
stakeholder dialogue with all provinces, districts and
schools to ensure a successful implementation of a
modernised education system at all levels. In this
context, it is important to mention that schools should
evolve towards greater autonomy in decision-making in
key areas affecting the quality of teaching and learning.
2. Policy research to understand if poor health conditions
and malnutrition interfere negatively with ongoing
efforts to increase enrolment in schools among the

most disadvantaged groups of the population and to
propose viable solutions should this be the case.
3. Extension of ongoing efforts to increase pre-school

education to cover the most disadvantaged provinces
of Turkey.

Ensuring efficient provision of high quality
education

Turkey has made important progress in enrolment with
huge investment in new schools and equipment, but the
focus on learning outcomes needs to be strengthened.

Specific policy recommendations include:

1. To shift attention from investment and input into
education to learning outcomes. Sample-based
national assessments at the end of grades 4 and 8
could provide very useful information on the impact
of reforms over time in all schools throughout Turkey.
The Trends in International Mathematics and Science
Study (TIMSS) or the Progress in International
Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) are international
comparative studies which could be considered
alternative options for the measurement of learning
outcomes in an international comparative context. As
learning outcomes in mathematics are pivotal for
many other purposes, the qualifications and skills of
future mathematics teachers are of strategic
importance. Participation in studies such as the
International Association for the Evaluation of
Educational Achievement (IEA) Teacher Education
Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M) could be an option
for Turkey, as this collaborative effort by worldwide
institutions to study the mathematics training of
future primary and secondary teachers could
complement insights resulting from PISA studies.
2. Policy research to better understand the high levels
of dropouts in education as part of efforts to devise
policies to increase completion rates and prevent
future dropouts.

3. To promote vocational education in a consistent
manner by depicting a vocational career as an
interesting option that gives young people the
opportunity to be gainfully employed and advance
their careers throughout their lives. Turkey would
benefit from a fully emancipated professional tertiary
education system with open access to tertiary
education at the appropriate levels in line with the
Bologna process and adequate systems are needed
to efficiently assess prior learning and promote
lifelong learning.

4. Policies to promote stronger business-education
partnerships and to strengthen the link between
education and the labour market.

5. Policies to engage the workforce in lifelong learning
activities, especially in the context of SMEs (as
in-company and professional training of the active
workforce is still in the early stages of development).

The following table provides an overview of the proposed
policy recommendations and gives some indication of
current support available for the identified priorities from
the IPA and other international donors.

6. MAIN CHALLENGES, STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 115

d
n
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
a
e
R

l

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

s
e

i
t
i
t
n
e
n
a
M

i

l

d
n
a
e
b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

e
m
o
c
t
u
o
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
E

s
n
o
i
t
c
a
n
i
a
m
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
R

y
e
k
f
o
s
e
c
i
v
r
e
s
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
e
h
t

f
o
t
n
e
m
p
o
l
e
v
e
d
r
e
h
t
r
u
F

s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

s
e
i
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

l
a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

i

g
n
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
S

e
t
o
m
o
r
p

(

.

5
3
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

,

E
N
o
M

,

S
S
L
o
M

,

A
Q
V

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

l

y
e
m

i
t
d
n
a

f
f
a
t
s

f
o
y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c
d
e
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

d
e
s
a
b
,
s
e
v
e

l

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o

i

l
l

a

t
a
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

f
f
a
t
s

l

r
a
u
g
e
R

)

i

F
Q
N
g
n
n
o
i
t
c
n
u
f

l
l

e
w

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p
e
h
t
h
t
i

w
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
o
c
e
s
o
c
n

l

i

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s
F
Q
N

o
t
n
o
i
t
a
e
r
n

l

i

l

A
Q
V
r
o
f
n
a
p
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
c
g
e
t
a
r
t
s
e
h
t
n
o

l

i

y
r
a
d
n
o
c
e
S
k
n
a
B
d
l
r
o
W

j

t
c
e
o
r
p
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E

,
s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v
d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

i

a
c
o
s

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
v
n

l

i

h
t
i

w
F
Q
N

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

e
h
t

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T

,

E
N
o
M

s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p
f
o
t
c
a
p
m

i

t
u
o
b
a
e
b
a

l

l
i

a
v
a
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

t
n
e
r
a
p
s
n
a
r
T

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m
d
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
n

i

l

f
o
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
r
e
h
t
r
u
F

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

n
o
i
t
a
r
t
s
n
m
d
a

i

i

l

a
c
o

l

d
n
a

i

g
n
n
r
a
e

l

i

d
n
a
g
n
h
c
a
e
t
n
o
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
n

i

l

s
e
v
e

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
d
n
a

l

a
c
o

l

t
a
m
e
t
s
y
s
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

g
n
d

i

l
i

u
B
y
t
i
c
a
p
a
C
E
N
o
M

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T

,

E
N
o
M

,
t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T

,

E
N
o
M

l

s
o
o
h
c
s
g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

i

r
o
f
e
b
a

l

l
i

a
v
a

l

s
o
o
h
c
s
n

i

T
C

I

f
o
e
s
u
e
h
t
n
o
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n
I

a

j

s
a
t
c
e
o
r
p
H
I
T
A
F
e
a
c
s
e
g
r
a

l

l

d
e
t
r
a
t
s
y
l
t
n
e
c
e
r
e
h
t
e
s
U

i

g
n
k
a
m
y
c

i
l

o
p
e
r
u
t
u
f

g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m

t
c
a
p
m

i

n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
s
o
t

m
r
o
f
t
a
p

l

l

e
c
n
a
a
b
e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a
d
n
a
g
n
k
a
m
-
n
o
s
c
e
d
r
e
t
t
e
B

i

i

i

l

o
o
h
c
s
d
n
a

l

a
c
o

l

i

i

,
l
a
c
n
v
o
r
p
e
h
t

t
a

f
f
a
t
s

f
o
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

r
e
h
t
r
u
F

)

P
E
G
B
E
M

(

j

t
c
e
o
r
p

n
o
i
t
a
r
t
s
n
m
d
a

i

i

l

a
c
o

l

d
n
a

l

s
e
v
e

l

l
l

a

t
a

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
t
n
u
o
c
c
a
d
n
a

y
m
o
n
o
t
u
a
n
e
e
w
t
e
b

e
t
o
m
o
r
p
o
t
s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p
n
o
i
t
a
s

i
l

a
r
t
n
e
c
e
d
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

o
t

l

s
e
v
e

l

l

s
o
o
h
c
s
g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

i

f
o
s
e
i
t
l
u
c
a
f

,

E
N
o
M

i

g
n
n
r
a
e

l

f
o
s
m
r
e
t
n

i

l

s
o
o
h
c
s

f
o
e
c
n
a
m
r
o
f
r
e
p
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

n

i

e
c
n
e

l
l

e
c
x
e
e
t
o
m
o
r
p
o
t

s
e
v
i
t
n
e
c
n

i

d
n
a

s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p
e
s
v
e
D

i

d
e
r
t
n
e
c
-
d

l
i

h
c
d
n
a
t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m
o
o
h
c
s
e
v
i
t
c
e
f
f
e

l

s
e
h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a

j

-

t
c
e
o
r
p
A
Q
g
n
o
g
n
O

i

l
i

c
n
u
o
C
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E
r
e
h
g
H

i

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
i
t
r
e
t
n

i

y
c
n
e
r
a
p
s
n
a
r
t
d
e
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

d
n
a
e
c
n
a
r
u
s
s
A
y
t
i
l

a
u
Q
e
h
t

f
o
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

r
e
h
t
r
u
F

l

o
o
h
c
s

l

,
s
o
o
h
c
s

,

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

s
e
c
n
e
r
e
f
f
i
d

s
d
r
a
o
b

l

i

a
n
o
g
e
r
d
e
c
u
d
e
r
h
t
i

w
n
e
r
d

l
i

h
c

f
o
s
e
m
o
c
t
u
o

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

l

o
o
h
c
s
d
n
a
g
n
h
c
a
e
t

i

A
Q

t
n
e
d
n
e
p
e
d
n

I

d
n
a

y
c
n
e
g
A

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

y
c

l

i
l

b
u
p
h
g
u
o
r
h
t

s
t
r
o
p
e
r
n
o
i
t
a
t
i
d
e
r
c
c
a

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
e
e
r
g
e
d
e
t
a
c
o
s
s
a

i

i

A
Q
c
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

a

t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

o
t

f
f
a
t
s

y
c
n
e
g
a
n
o
i
t
a
t
i
d
e
r
c
c
A

r
e
n
n
a
m
y
e
m

l

i
t

a
n

i

n
a
p

l

116

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

d
n
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
a
e
R

l

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

s
e

i
t
i
t
n
e
n
a
M

i

l

d
n
a
e
b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

e
m
o
c
t
u
o
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
E

s
n
o
i
t
c
a
n
i
a
m
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
R

l
a
i
c
e
p
s
h
t
i

w
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
f
o
s
l
e
v
e
l

l
l
a
t
a
d
e
t
n
e
m
e
l
p
m

i

s
e
c
n
i
v
o
r
p
d
e
g
a
t
n
a
v
d
a
s
i
d
t
s
o
m
e
h
t
o
t
n
o
i
t
n
e
t
t
a

d
n
a
d
e
n
g
i
s
e
d
s
e
h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a
e
v
i
t
i
s
n
e
s

r
e
d
n
e
G

t
n
e
m
p
o
l
e
v
e
d
n
a
m
u
h
e
l
b
a
t
i
u
q
e
g
n
i
r
u
s
n
E

.

1
2
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

.

2
2
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

l

a
c
o

l

d
n
a

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

,

E
N
o
M

n

i

s
l
r
i
g
r
o
f

s
e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t
e
p
m
o
c
d
n
a

l

l

t
n
e
m
o
r
n
e
r
e
h
g
H

i

i

s
n
g
s
e
d
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
d
n
a

y
c

i
l

o
p
e
v
i
t
i
s
n
e
s

r
e
d
n
e
G

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

n
o
i
t
a
r
t
s
n
m
d
a

i

i

s
O
G
N
d
n
a

l

s
o
o
h
c
s

T
E
V
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

d
n
a

l

s
o
o
h
c
s

r
o
f

s
r
e
f
s
n
a
r
t
h
s
a
c

l

a
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c
g
n
d
u
c
n

i

l

i

d
n
a
l

o
o
h
c
s
-
e
r
p
n

i

s
e
i
t
i
r
a
p
s
i
d

i

l
a
n
o
g
e
r
g
n
i
c
u
d
e
R

l

t
n
e
m
o
r
n
e
d
n
a
p
x
e
o
t
e
u
n
i
t
n
o
C

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

f
i

s
t
n
e
r
a
p

l

a
c
o

l

d
n
a

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

,

E
N
o
M

l

o
o
h
c
s
-
e
r
p
n

i

s
e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t
e
p
m
o
c
d
n
a

l

l

t
n
e
m
o
r
n
e
r
e
h
g
H

i

h
t
l
a
e
h
r
o
o
p
f
i

t
u
o
d
n
i
f
o
t
h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r

y
c

i
l

o
p
t
c
u
d
n
o
C

n
o
s
u
c
o
f

r
e
g
n
o
r
t
s
a
h
t
i

w

t
u
b
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
p

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

s
e
m
o
c
t
u
o
g
n
n
r
a
e
l

i

d
n
a
e
c
n
a
d
n
e
t
t
a

n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
l
p
m

i

d
n
a
n
g
i
s
e
d
t
c
e
j
o
r
p
e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

s
n
o
i
t
a
r
t
s
n
m
d
a

i

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
p
d
n
a

h
t
i

l

w
y
e
v
i
t
a
g
e
n
e
r
e
f
r
e
t
n

i

n
o
i
t
i
r
t
u
n
a
m
d
n
a

l

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

s
O
G
N
d
n
a

l

s
o
o
h
c
s

s
e
s
u
a
c

t
u
o
b
a

s
r
e
k
a
m
y
c

i
l

o
p
o
t
e
b
a

l

l
i

a
v
a
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n
I

l

s
e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t
e
p
m
o
c
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

o
t

l

s
n
o
i
t
c
a
e
b
s
s
o
p
d
n
a

i

e
s
o
p
o
r
p
d
n
a

s
e
m
o
c
t
u
o
g
n
n
r
a
e

i

l

d
n
a
e
c
n
a
d
n
e
t
t
a

l

o
o
h
c
s

d
e
d
e
e
n
f
i

i

s
e
g
e
t
a
r
t
s
n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

s
n
o
i
t
a
r
t
s
n
m
d
a

i

i

s
O
G
N
d
n
a

l

s
o
o
h
c
s

l

a
c
o

l

d
n
a

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

,

E
N
o
M

l

i

a
n
o
g
e
r
d
e
c
u
d
e
r
d
n
a

l

o
o
h
c
s
-
e
r
p
n

i

l

t
n
e
m
o
r
n
e
e
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

s
e
i
t
i
r
a
p
s
d

i

i

s
e
c
n
v
o
r
p
n

i

y

l
l

i

a
c
e
p
s
e
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

l

o
o
h
c
s
-
e
r
p
d
n
a
p
x
E

e
g
a
t
n
a
v
d
a
s
d
f
o

i

l

e
v
e

l

i

t
s
e
h
g
h
e
h
t
h
t
i

w

6. MAIN CHALLENGES, STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 117

d
n
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
a
e
R

l

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

s
e

i
t
i
t
n
e
n
a
M

i

l

d
n
a
e
b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

e
m
o
c
t
u
o
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
E

s
n
o
i
t
c
a
n
i
a
m
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
R

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
h
g
h
t
n
e
i
c
i
f
f
e
f
o
n
o
i
s
i
v
o
r
p
e
h
t
g
n
i
r
u
s
n
E

.

1
3
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

l

o
o
h
c
s
d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

l

o
o
h
c
s

,
s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

s
d
r
a
o
b

,
r
o
t
c
e
s
e
t
a
v
i
r
p

,

E
N
o
M

y
r
a
d
n
o
c
e
s
d
n
a

A
Q
V

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

y
r
a
m

i
r
p
n

i

l

s
e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t
e
p
m
o
c
d
e
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

f
o
e
c
n
a
v
e
e
r

l

t
e
k
r
a
m

r
u
o
b
a

l

d
n
a

y
t
i
l

a
u
q
e
h
t
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

T
E
V
g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

i

g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

s
n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a
h
g
u
o
r
h
t
T
E
V

i

g
n
n
r
a
e

l

r
o
i
r
p
f
o
n
o
i
t
i
n
g
o
c
e
r

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
T
E
V
o
t

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

n
o
i
t
n
e
t
t
a

l

i

a
c
e
p
s
h
t
i

w
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
d
n
o
c
e
s
d
n
a

y
r
a
m

i
r
p

.

3
2
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

,
r
o
t
c
e
s
e
t
a
v
i
r
p

,

E
N
o
M

d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
r
o
f
d
e
t
a
e
r
c

s
n
o
i
t
a
u
t
i
s
n
w
-
n
W

i

i

r
e
g
n
o
r
t
s
e
t
o
m
o
r
p
o
t

s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

d
n
a
e
s
v
e
D

i

A
Q
V

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

i

e
e
r
g
e
d
e
t
a
c
o
s
s
a
d
n
a
T
E
V
n

i

d
e
v
o
v
n

l

i

i

s
e
n
a
p
m
o
c

n
o
i
t
n
e
t
t
a

l

i

a
c
e
p
s
h
t
i

i

w
s
p
h
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
-
s
s
e
n
s
u
b

i

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

,

A
D
R

,

B
B
O
T

.

4
3
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

,

e
c
r
e
m
m
o
C

f
o
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
C

,

B
E
G
S
O
K

,

S
S
L
o
M

i

g
n
n
r
a
e

l

g
n
o
e
f
i
l

l

n

i

i

n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
e
c
r
o
f
k
r
o
w

r
e
t
a
e
r
G

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

f
o
g
n

i
l
l
i

k
s
-
p
u
e
t
o
m
o
r
p
o
t

s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

d
n
a
e
s
v
e
D

i

T
E
V
o
t

s
E
M
S
o
t
n
o
i
t
n
e
t
t
a

l

i

a
c
e
p
s
h
t
i

i

w
s
e
n
a
p
m
o
c
n

i

s
r
e
k
r
o
w

l

a
c
o

l

d
n
a

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

,

E
N
o
M

y
r
a
m

i
r
p
d
n
a

l

o
o
h
c
s
-
e
r
p
n

i

e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t
n
e
t
e
r
d
e
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

n

i

s
e
t
a
r

i

t
u
o
p
o
r
d
h
g
h
e
c
u
d
e
r
o
t

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
n
g
s
e
D

i

l

s
e
v
e

l

i

t
n
e
m
n
a
t
t
a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
n

i

s
e
c
n
e
r
e
f
f
i
d

l

a
n
o
g
e
r

i

f
o
s
e
v
e

l

l

s
u
o
i
r
a
v
e
h
t

t
a
n
o
i
t
n
e
t
e
r
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

o
t

s
e
v
i
t
n
e
c
n

i

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

d
n
a

s
n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a
n
g
s
e
d
d
n
a

i

t
u
o
p
o
r
d

t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T

,

E
N
o
M

t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T

,

E
N
o
M

y
c

i
l

o
p
o
t
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
i
r
o
r
e
h
t
r
u
f

r
o
f
e
b
a

l

l
i

a
v
a
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n
I

s
t
n
e
r
a
p
d
n
a

l

s
o
o
h
c
s

,
s
r
e
k
a
m

t
a
e
m
o
c
t
u
o
g
n
n
r
a
e

i

l

f
o
g
n
i
t
s
e
t
d
e
s
a
b
-
e
p
m
a
s
e
c
u
d
o
r
t
n
I

l

8
d
n
a
4
s
e
d
a
r
g

d
e
c
u
d
e
r
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
y
r
a
m

i
r
p
n

i

s
e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t
n
e
t
e
r

r
e
h
g
H

i

f
o
s
e
s
u
a
c
n
a
m
e
h
t

i

t
u
o
b
a
h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r

y
c

i
l

o
p
t
c
u
d
n
o
C

118

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

6.3 EMPLOYMENT

The strategic employment policy priorities are identified in
key policy papers such as the government’s Ninth
Development Plan and, in more operational terms, in the
(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) institutional strategic plan for 2011-15 ((cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6),
2011b). Finalisation of the National Employment Strategy
and JAP are pending. The ETF recommendations refer to
the same three priorities as highlighted in the key national
documents:

1. a substantial increase in activity and employment

rates, specifically for women, the youth population
and disadvantaged groups;

2. a better balance between flexibility and security:
flexicurity already ranks high on the agenda. This
momentum should be used to find a suitable
flexicurity pathway together with social partners as a
policy framework for tackling the informal economy
and modernising the Turkish labour market;

3. substantial efforts and investment in education and
training, with a strong increase in the quality and
quantity of vocational training, based on anticipation
of skills demands and improved matching between
skills supply and demand.

Further strengthening of institutional capacities is
imperative in making progress in these fields. This
includes strong strategic coordination between national
programmes, EU funds and support from international
donors, but also implies involvement of the provincial and
local levels including input from social partners in the
design and monitoring of policies and programmes.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS

Strengthening institutional capacities

Strong institutional capacities (with trained and highly
professional staff) coupled with horizontal and vertical
cooperation, form a firm basis for the achievement of
sustainable results, the mainstreaming of pilot projects
and the roll-out of tested approaches throughout the
country.

Specific policy measures should focus on:

(cid:2) Strong capacity development within (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6): planned
staff increases for the future and the size of the
organisation more than justify regular and specialised
staff training, with training measures for all levels, for
new staff and for further upgrading skills in order to
keep abreast of new challenges and international
developments. Active participation in existing
networks (dialogue between public employment
services and the EES Mutual Learning Programme, for
example) may further contribute to strengthening
capacities.

(cid:2) Further development of an integrated labour market
information system at local and national levels
accessible to all relevant stakeholders.

(cid:2) Further strengthening and development of (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)

services to employers in order to canvass for more

vacancies and strengthen (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:19)(cid:20) reputation as a
reliable service provider for employers.

(cid:2) Standardising gender mainstreaming and gender

sensitive approaches in all policy fields, establishing
specific training in this field as a regular part of
capacity-building measures.

(cid:2) Encouraging the stronger involvement of social
partners and NGOs to enhance the partnership
approach at national and local levels, specifically
strengthening the functioning of tripartite bodies with
the involvement of employers’ and workers’
representatives.

(cid:2) Strengthening the capacity of the provincial

employment and vocational training boards to plan and
implement local employment initiatives under an
intensified strategic coordination umbrella through the
exchange of experiences (peer learning) and
benchmarking. These entities have passed a
milestone in coordinating local employment and
training initiatives.

Increasing employment rates

The core drivers to increasing employment rates include
elements from both the demand side (the creation of
more and better jobs-with decent working conditions and
net wages that make work pay) and supply side
(activation of unemployed and inactive people).

Specific measures should include:

(cid:2) Developing and implementing gender mainstreaming
approaches. This approach is highly recommended in
view of the need to increase the extremely low
female employment rates. Targeted approaches for
disadvantaged women (low-skilled women, women
with family commitments) need to be combined with
gender mainstreaming to ensure that the employability
of women is increased and that both women and men
participate in all measures in proportion to their share
of the working-age population.

(cid:2) Reducing youth unemployment and inactivity, with
special attention to female and unskilled young
people, providing guidance and counselling services as
well as options for decent jobs, further training or
sustainable self-employment.

(cid:2) Further increasing and optimising ALMPs. Although
the numbers of participants in ALMPs have doubled
during recent years, the activation rate should be
further increased with specific measures introduced to
reach core target groups. Evaluation capacities must
be developed and this monitoring must become a
regular practice to support continuous improvement of
the efficiency and effectiveness of the measures
implemented.

Flexicurity: balancing flexibility and security

The flexicurity debate is already on the policy-making
agenda. A tailor-made flexicurity path for Turkey should
address the pressing and sensitive issues of labour
relations and informal employment. The aim is to optimise
the balance between flexibility in employment conditions
on one side and more employment and income security

6. MAIN CHALLENGES, STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 119

on the other for the mutual benefit of the economy and
the workforce.

Improving anticipation and matching of skills supply
and demand

(cid:2) Flexibility is mainly provided through informal labour

and informal and semi-informal employment practices.
The movement from an informal to a formal economy
would help increase productivity, wages and social
security revenues and coverage. On the other hand,
this could result in a sizeable number of firms exiting
the market in a way that would impact mainly on
disadvantaged and low-skilled people. Thus, the type
of policies needed must have the strong commitment
of all stakeholders and a mixed approach using
incentives and the enforcement of regulations is
needed to tackle the problem of informal employment
and mitigate the negative side effects. The labour
inspection boards and the Social Security Institution
need to cooperate and have better staffing levels to
adequately support enforcement. (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) should not be
made responsible for enterprise inspections, as the
role of inspectors conflicts with their role as a service
provider for employers.

(cid:2) Better social protection must be used to create basic
income security for those in need with a review of the
possibilities presented by an increased coverage of
the unemployment benefit system. This is closely
connected with the issue of high severance
payments, which could easily be reduced through
replacement with unemployment benefits.
(cid:2) Weak law enforcement and exceptions for small

companies mean that employment protection only
really concerns the larger firms. Greater flexibility for
large establishments could enhance job growth in the
formal sector. There may be room for the
flexibilisation of labour regulations, specifically those
concerning internal functional flexibility (through
retraining of workers to increase adaptability to
changing skills demands) and more flexible working
time arrangements (more favourable part-time
contracts). Specific attention must be paid to the
creation of more favourable conditions for women,
allowing them to better reconcile work and family
commitments. Social partners play a key role in finding
a solution for conflicting interests when a win-win
solution must be negotiated.

(cid:2) Early intervention measures should be implemented
to avoid or minimise unemployment in the case of
restructuring at enterprise and sector level (industrial
branches). Socially responsible restructuring must be
enhanced with far stronger involvement of social
partners and local level stakeholders.

Addressing the issue of anticipation and matching of skills
supply and demand has multiple aspects: (i) anticipation,
in terms of generating reliable and relevant information;
(ii) dissemination of this information; and (iii) using the
knowledge gained for better matching.

(cid:2)

(cid:2) Existing practices (qualitative and quantitative, national
and regional, general and sector approaches) need to
be coordinated and experiences exchanged for good
anticipation of future skills supply and demand. The
active involvement of social partners is also a key
success factor here.
In-depth sector studies with short and mid-term
forecasts might be needed to optimise the reform of
the VET system and to foster the growth potential of
sectors now facing skills shortages.
(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) should further develop and upgrade its job
placement and referral system. It should apply a
multi-channelling approach to further increase job
placement results, but it should also implement a
system with intensive counselling for more difficult to
place jobseekers offering services such as personal
career development plans.

(cid:2)

(cid:2) The career guidance and counselling system must
also be provided with information on future skills
demands prior to being rolled out on a larger scale.

(cid:2) Employers play a crucial role by providing

company-based training, internships or jobs for
disadvantaged people. In many cases, the know-how
of companies is a neglected source of information and
experience. Exploration of how to use grant scheme
programmes to involve companies more intensively in
this process could be beneficial.

IPA funds for the employment component are already
used to address most of the core priorities and
recommendations including: strengthening the capacity of
public employment services; the employment of women
and young people; and tackling informal employment
through a soft approach of awareness-raising and
incentives. There are, however, some gaps or further
options for using IPA funds, such as: developing stronger
evaluation capacities; developing coherent approaches for
anticipation of skills supply and demand, or; strengthening
local employment initiatives in connection with the
provincial employment and vocational training boards.

The following table summarises the recommendations,
describes the expected results and specifies
responsibilities for the various actions, providing some
links between the fields of action and recent or ongoing
international and national programmes and initiatives.

k
r
o
W
e
h
t
n

i

e
u
g
o
a
D

i

l

l

i

a
c
o
S
d
n
a

l

m
s
i
t
r
a
p
i
r
T
f
o
e
o
R
e
h
t
g
n
c
n
a
h
n
E

i

(

s
n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o

i

i

l

e
u
g
o
a
d
e
t
i
t
r
a
p
i
r
t

120

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s
d
n
a

d
n
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
a
e
R

l

l

e
b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r

s
e

i
t
i
t
n
e
n
i
a
M

e
m
o
c
t
u
o
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
E

s
n
o
i
t
c
a
n
i
a
m
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
R

i

e
h
t
g
n
v
o
r
p
m

i
(

.

4
1
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

,

S
S
L
o
M

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

S
S
L
o
M
m
o
r
f

f
f
a
t
s

f
o
y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c
d
e
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

f
o
h
c
a
e
r
t
u
o
d
n
a
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
e
h
t

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

r
e
h
t
r
u
F

s
e
i
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

l
a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

i

g
n
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
S

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
c

l

i
l

b
u
p
f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v
d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v
d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p
e
h
t
d
n
a

s
e
c
i
v
r
e
s

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
c
i
l

l

b
u
p

e
h
t
n

i

y
e
k
r
u
T
f
o
n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
P

i

S
E
P
o
t
S
E
P
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E
G
D

l

i

)
s
e
c
v
r
e
s

e
u
g
o
a
d

i

l

s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

d
e
s
a
b
,
s
e
v
e

l

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o

i

l
l

a

t
a
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

f
f
a
t
s

l

r
a
u
g
e
R

l

s
e
v
e

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
d
n
a

l

a
c
o

l

t
a

s
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

t
e
k
r
a
m

r
u
o
b
a

l

d
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
n

i

l

f
o
p
o
e
v
e
d
r
e
h
t
r
u
F

t
e
k
r
a
m

r
u
o
b
a

l

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

l

t
u
o
b
a
e
b
s
s
e
c
c
a

i

f
f
a
t
s
(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

f
o
s
r
e
b
m
u
n

d
n
a
e
b
a

l

l
i

a
v
a
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

t
n
e
r
a
p
s
n
a
r
T

d
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

r
o
f

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

l

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c
n
o

-

1
1
0
1
0
2

j

,
t
c
e
o
r
p
k
n
a
B
d
l
r
o
W

%
x
x
(

i

s
e
c
v
r
e
s
(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

f
o
e
g
a
r
e
v
o
c

r
e
h
g
H

i

l

s
e
v
e

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
d
n
a

l

a
c
o

l

t
a
m
e
t
s
y
s
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

l

d
n
a
h
t
w
o
r
G
e
b
a
t
i
u
q
E
g
n
i
r
o
t
s
e
R

(

c
i
t
a
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P

,

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E

l

)

n
a
o
L
y
c

i
l

o
P
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

r
e
d
n
e
G

(

j

t
c
e
o
r
p
X
E
A
T

I

,

P
S
F
o
M

,

S
S
L
o
M

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

)

i

i

i

g
n
n
a
r
t
g
n
m
a
e
r
t
s
n
a
m

i

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

,
s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

l

%
x
x
d
n
a
d
e
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
d
e
r
e
t
s
g
e
r
n

i

i

i

)
s
e
c
n
a
c
a
v
d
e
i
f
i
t
o
n
n

i

e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

s
’
(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

i

l

i

i

g
n
p
o
e
v
e
d
,
n
o
s
v
o
r
p
e
c
v
r
e
s
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

i

h
g
u
o
r
h
t
(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

f
o
’
s
s
e
n
e
v
i
t
c
a
r
t
t
a
‘
e
h
t
e
c
n
a
h
n
E

i

l

,
s
s
y
a
n
a
d
n
a
m
e
d
s

l
l
i

k
s
(

l

s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e
r
o
f

i

s
e
c
v
r
e
s

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
d
n
a
w
a

l

r
u
o
b
a

l

e
v
i
t
i
s
n
e
s

r
e
d
n
e
G

e
v
i
t
i
s
n
e
s

r
e
d
n
e
g
d
n
a
g
n
m
a
e
r
t
s
n
i
a
m

i

r
e
d
n
e
G

s
n
g
s
e
d

i

s
l
e
v
e
l

l
l
a
t
a
d
e
t
n
e
m
e
l
p
m

i

h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a

i

i

)
s
e
d
s
b
u
s
g
n
i
r
i
h
,
s
e
t
a
d
d
n
a
c

i

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
e
e
s
-
e
r
p

l

i

s
n
g
s
e
d
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
d
n
a

y
c

i
l

o
p
e
v
i
t
i
s
n
e
s

r
e
d
n
e
G

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

j

5
0
0
2
t
c
e
o
r
p
e
u
g
o
a
D

i

l

l

i

a
c
o
S
O
L

I

r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

,

S
S
L
o
M

,

O
P
S

d
e
c
n
a
h
n
e
d
n
a
h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a
p
h
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p
d
e
c
n
a
h
n
E

i

l
a
c
o

l

d
n
a
l
a
n
o
i
t
a
n
t
a
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l
a
i
c
o
s

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
l
o
v
n

I

i

n
i
(
n
o
n
u
e
d
a
r
t

a
n
o

i

j

o
t

s
r
e
k
r
o
w

f
o
s
t
h
g
i
r
e
h
t
e
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
F

l
e
v
e
l

)
7
8
n
o
i
t
n
e
v
n
o
C
O
L
I
h
t
i

w
e
n

i
l

l

i

a
c
o
s

i

l

f
o
e
o
r
e
h
t
g
n
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
s
d
n
a
g
n
d

i

l
i

u
b
y
t
i
c
a
p
a
C

)

O
L

I

e
h
t

f
o

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

l

a
n
o
g
e
r

i

i

s
e
c
n
e
g
a

,
s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

s
e
v
i
t
a
i
t
i
n

i

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

a
c
o

l

i

c
g
e
t
a
r
t
s
h
g
u
o
r
h
t

.
g
.
e
,
s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

i

g
n
k
r
a
m
h
c
n
e
b
d
n
a
g
n
n
r
a
e

i

l

l

a
u
t
u
m

,
n
o
i
t
a
n
d
r
o
o
c

i

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
P

t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

d
n
a
n
g
s
e
d
o
t

i

s
e
i
t
i
c
a
p
a
c
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p
f
o
s
e
i
t
i
c
a
p
a
c
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
S

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

6. MAIN CHALLENGES, STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 121

k
r
o
W

t
n
e
c
e
D
h
t
i

w
h
t
w
o
r
G

(

d
n
u
F

-

2
1
9
0
0
2
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
t
n
o

i

j

N
U

i

t
n
e
m
e
v
e
h
c
A
G
D
M
y
b
d
e
d
n
u
f

l

)
a
y
a
t
n
A
n

i

n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

I

t
o

l
i

P

d
n
a
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E

l

h
t
u
o
Y

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

:
l
l

A

r
o
f

r
u
o
b
a

l

e
v
i
t
c
a

t
n
e
r
r
u
c

s
’
(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,
s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

,
s
o
o
h
c
s

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

l

a
n
o
g
e
r

i

i

s
e
c
n
e
g
a

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p
,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

y

l
l

a
c
i
f
i
c
e
p
s

,
s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m

t
e
k
r
a
m

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v
d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

a
c
o

l

l
l

a

t
a

s
e
t
a
r
n
o
i
t
a
v
i
t
c
a
e
h
t

f
o
e
s
a
e
r
c
n
%
x
x

i

l

d
e
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
d
e
r
e
t
s
g
e
r

i

f
o
e
r
a
h
s
(

l

s
e
v
e

l

)
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v
d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
h
t
u
o
y
n

i

e
s
a
e
r
c
e
d

g
n
i
r
i
h

,

i

g
n
n
a
r
t

i

t
e
k
r
a
m

r
u
o
b
a

l

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s
d
n
a

s
e
v
i
t
n
e
c
n

i

s
p
u
t
r
a
t
s

l

a
i
r
u
e
n
e
r
p
e
r
t
n
e

d
n
a

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
-
f
l
e
s

s
O
G
N

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
e
h
t

f
o
s
s
e
n
e
v
i
t
c
e
f
f
e
d
n
a

y
c
n
e
c
i
f
f
e

i

o
t
e
c
i
t
c
a
r
p
r
a
u
g
e
r

l

a

s
e
m
o
c
e
b
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
E

l

e
h
t

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

s
u
o
u
n
i
t
n
o
c

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

)
s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
n
o
i
t
a
v
i
t
c
a
n

i

n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

i

t
u
o
d
e
i
r
r
a
c

i

,
s
p
h
s
n
r
e
t
n
i
(

k
r
o
w
o
t

l

o
o
h
c
s
m
o
r
f
n
o
i
t
i
s
n
a
r
t
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

s
p
u
t
r
a
t
s

r
o
f

s
e
m
e
h
c
s

i

t
r
o
p
p
u
s
e
v
s
n
e
h
e
r
p
m
o
C

l

e
p
o
e
p
g
n
u
o
y

r
o
f

s
b
o

j

y
t
i
l

a
u
q
e
r
u
s
n
E

)
s
e
v
i
t
n
e
c
n

i

g
n
i
r
i
h

i

s
e
c
v
r
e
s
g
n

i
l
l

e
s
n
u
o
c
d
n
a
e
c
n
a
d
u
g
r
e
e
r
a
c
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

I

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

e
v
i
t
c
a

i

i

f
o
x
m
e
h
t
d
n
a
n
g
s
e
d
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
e
s
m

i

i
t
p
O

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m

t
e
k
r
a
m

r
u
o
b
a

l

s
e
c
n
v
o
r
p

i

l
l

a
n

i

s
P
L
M
A

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

e
r
u
s
n
E

h
t
i

i

w
s
p
u
o
r
g
d
e
g
a
t
n
a
v
d
a
s
d
f
o
n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
e
r
u
s
n
E

i

s
e
i
t
i
c
a
p
a
c
d
n
a

s
e
c
i
t
c
a
r
p
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
e
v
o
r
p
m

l

I

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
e
g
r
a
t

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

s
P
M
L
A
e
s
i
m

i
t
p
o
d
n
a
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

I

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

S
S
L
o
M

%
x
x

,
e
t
a
r

y
t
i
v
i
t
c
a
h
t
u
o
y
n

i

e
s
a
e
r
c
n
%
x
x

i

:
t
l
u
s
e
R

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
h
t
u
o
y
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

I

-

0
1
9
0
0
2

,
y
a
w
r
o
N

f
o
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
G

e
h
t

y
b
d
e
d
n
u
f

j

t
c
e
o
r
p
O
L

I

r
o
f

s
P
M
L
A
n
o
t
c
e
o
r
P
t
o

j

l
i

P

(

r
o
f

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E
t
n
e
c
e
D
h
g
u
o
r
h
t

)
y
e
k
r
u
T
n

i

n
e
m
o
W

h
t
u
o
y
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

i
(

.

2
1
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

y
t
i
l

a
u
q
E
r
e
d
n
e
G
g
n
c
n
a
v
d
A

i

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s
d
n
a

d
n
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
a
e
R

l

l

e
b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r

s
e

i
t
i
t
n
e
n
i
a
M

e
m
o
c
t
u
o
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
E

s
n
o
i
t
c
a
n
i
a
m
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
R

s
e
t
a
r

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
g
n
i
s
i
a
R

)
t
e
k
r
a
m

r
u
o
b
a

l

e
h
t
n

i

n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

i

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

s
e
t
a
r

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

n
e
m
o
w

s
’
n
e
m
o
w

(

.

1
1
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

P
S
F
o
M

,

S
S
L
o
M

d
n
a

y
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

s
’
n
e
m
o
w
n

i

e
s
a
e
r
c
n
%
x
x

i

:
t
l
u
s
e
R

f
o
s
e
t
a
r

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
d
n
a
y
t
i
v
i
t
c
a
e
h
t
e
s
a
e
r
c
n

I

,
s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

,
s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

l

a
n
o
g
e
r

i

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
n

i

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

c
a
f
e
r
a
c

l

y
l
r
e
d
e
d
n
a
e
r
a
c
d

l
i

h
c
e
d
v
o
r
P

i

i

n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
d
e
c
n
a
a
b
r
e
d
n
e
G

l

i

s
e
c
n
e
g
a

a
t
a
d
g
n
i
r
o
t
i
n
o
m
d
n
a

s
c
i
t
s
i
t
a
t
s

c
i
f
i
c
e
p
s

r
e
d
n
e
G

l

e
b
a

l
i

a
v
a

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

122

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s
d
n
a

d
n
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
a
e
R

l

l

e
b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r

s
e

i
t
i
t
n
e
n
i
a
M

e
m
o
c
t
u
o
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
E

s
n
o
i
t
c
a
n
i
a
m
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
R

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s
d
n
a
y
t
i
l
i

b
i
x
e
l
f

f
o
x
i
m
e
h
t
g
n
i
s
i
m

i
t
p
o

:
y
t
i
r
u
c
i
x
e
l
F

e
t
o
m
o
r
p

(

.

3
1
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

r
u
o
b
a

l

,

K
S
S

,

S
S
L
o
M

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
d
e
r
e
t
s
g
e
r
n

i

i

e
s
a
e
r
c
n
%
x
x

i

e
h
t
g
n
i
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

l

d
n
a
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
l
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

g
n

i
l
k
c
a
T

l

a
m
r
o
f
n

i

i

g
n
s
s
e
r
d
d
a

,

5
0
0
2
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

e
u
g
o
a
D

i

l

l

i

a
c
o
S
O
L

I

l

o
s
a
e
e
S

l

)
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
d
e
r
e
t
s
g
e
r

i

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
d
r
a
o
b
n
o
i
t
c
e
p
s
n

i

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s
h
t
i

l

w
s
e
e
y
o
p
m
e
f
o
e
g
a
r
e
v
o
c

i

r
e
h
g
h
%
x
x

s
b
o

j

f
o
y
t
i
l
a
u
q

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

r
e
t
c
i
r
t
s
d
n
a

s
e
v
i
t
n
e
c
n

i

i

f
o
x
m
e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a
n
a

l

y
p
p
A

w
a

l

r
u
o
b
a

l

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
c
r
o
f
n
e

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

r
o
f

y

l
l

a
c
i
f
i
c
e
p
s

,
y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

l

i

a
c
o
s

f
o
e
g
a
r
e
v
o
c
e
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

k
r
o
w

f
o
s
m
r
o
f

l

i

a
c
p
y
t
a

n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
o
c
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
s
d
n
a

s
r
e
b
m
u
n
f
f
a
t
s
e
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

s
d
r
a
o
b
n
o
i
t
c
e
p
s
n

i

r
u
o
b
a

l

e
h
t
d
n
a
K
S
S
n
e
e
w
t
e
b

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

&
s
s
e
n
e
v
i
t
i
t
e
p
m
o
C
k
n
a
B
d
l
r
o
W

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

,

S
S
L
o
M

r
u
o
b
a

l

t
s
r
i
f
g
n
d
u
c
n

l

i

i

,
s
r
e
k
e
e
s
b
o

j

f
o
y
r
t
n
e
d
e
s
a
E

s
t
n
a
r
t
n
e
t
e
k
r
a
m

i

i

g
n
d
v
o
r
p
(

s
t
n
e
m
e
g
n
a
r
r
a
e
m

l

i
t
-
t
r
a
p
e
b
a
r
u
o
v
a
f
e
r
o
m

,
s
t
n
e
m
e
g
n
a
r
r
a
e
m

l

i

i

i
t
g
n
k
r
o
w
e
b
x
e
l
f
e
r
o
m
e
r
u
s
n
E

)
e
f
i
l

l
i

y
m
a
f
d
n
a

k
r
o
w
g
n

i
l
i

c
n
o
c
e
r

r
o
f

s
n
o
i
t
i
d
n
o
c

r
e
t
t
e
b

s
n
o
i
t
a
u
g
e
r

l

t
n
e
m
y
a
p
e
c
n
a
r
e
v
e
s

f
o
e
s
v
e
R

i

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

.
g
.
e
,

w
a
l

r
u
o
b
a
l

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
l
i

b
i
x
e
l
F

l

i

a
c
o
s

,

S
S
L
o
M

d
e
c
u
d
e
r

,
s
b
o

j

n

i

s
r
e
k
r
o
w

f
o
n
o
i
t
n
e
t
e
r
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

s
f
f
o
-
y
a
l

s
s
a
m

f
o
e
s
a
c
e
h
t
n

i

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
e
v
i
t
n
e
v
e
r
P

l

s
n
o
i
t
a
u
g
e
r
n
o
i
t
c
e
t
o
r
p
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
d
g
i
r
e
t
a
g
i
t
i

i

l

M
(cid:2)

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

,
s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

a
m
r
o
f
n

i

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
d
e
R

l

e
l
p
o
e
p
d
e
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
r
o
f
e
m
o
c
n

i

c
i
s
a
b

f
o
e
g
a
r
e
v
o
c
e
h
t
g
n
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

i

f
o
s
e
i
t
i
l
i

i

b
s
s
o
p
e
h
t

i

w
e
v
e
R

m
e
t
s
y
s

t
i
f
e
n
e
b
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
e
h
t

l

s
m
e
t
s
y
s

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
s

l

i

a
c
o
s
e
t
a
n
d
r
o
o
c

i

r
e
t
t
e
b
d
n
a
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

l

s
e
v
e

l

l

a
c
o

l

d
n
a

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
t
a

y
c

i
l

o
P
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E

l

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p
,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

r
o
f

s
P
M
L
A

(

3
0
0
2
t
c
e
o
r
p
O
L

j

I

g
n
i
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
e
R

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m

(

.

8
0
0
2
d
n
a
7
0
0
2

,

n
a
o
L

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v
d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

)

n
o
i
t
a
s
i
t
a
v
i
r
p
d
n
a
g
n
i
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
e
r

e
s
i
r
p
r
e
t
n
e
d
e
n
w
o
e
t
a
t
s

-

r
o
f

s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

s
s
e
n
e
v
i
t
i
t
e
p
m
o
c

r
e
h
g
h
n

i

i

g
n
i
t
l
u
s
e
r

,
s
e
s
i
r
p
r
e
t
n
e

y
t
i
l
i

l

b
a
y
o
p
m
e
d
n
a

y
t
i
l
i

i

b
s
n
o
p
s
e
r

l

i

a
c
o
s
h
t
i

w
s
e
s
i
r
p
r
e
t
n
e
e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
e
R

d
n
a

s
r
e
k
r
o
w

f
o
y
t
i
l
i

b
a
t
p
a
d
a
d
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

n
o
i
t
n
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
c
i
f
i
t
n
e
d

i

y
l
r
a
E

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
f
o
s

l
l

e
p
s

g
n
i
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
e
r
d
n
a

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

K
S
S

,

S
S
L
o
M

e
t
a
r

y
t
r
e
v
o
p
f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
d
e
r

%
x
x

e
e
t
n
a
r
a
u
g
o
t

s
m
e
t
s
y
s
n
o
i
t
c
e
t
o
r
p

l
a
i
c
o
s
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

6. MAIN CHALLENGES, STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 123

)

i

g
n
n
r
a
e

l

g
n
o
e
f
i
l

l

d
n
a

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
t
p
a
d
a
(

T
E
V

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

.

.

2
3
d
n
a
1
3
s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

h
t
i

w

i

,
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s
d
n
a

d
n
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
a
e
R

l

l

e
b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r

s
e

i
t
i
t
n
e
n
i
a
M

e
m
o
c
t
u
o
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
E

s
n
o
i
t
c
a
n
i
a
m
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
R

d
n
a
m
e
d
d
n
a
y
l
p
p
u
s

s
l
l
i
k
s

i

f
o
g
n
h
c
t
a
m
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
p
i
c
i
t
n
a
e
v
o
r
p
m

I

i

y
b
1
1
0
2
e
c
n
s
d
e
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
0
1
’
s

l
l
i

k
S

e
c
n
a
n
r
e
v
o
g

l

e
v
e
l
-
i
t
l
u
m
A

d
n
a
d
e
d
e
e
n
s

i

h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a

i

i

n
o
s
c
e
d
o
t
e
b
a

l

l
i

a
v
a

s

i

a
t
a
d
e
b
a

l

i
l

e
r
d
n
a

t
s
u
b
o
R

y
l
p
p
u
s

s
l
l
i
k
s
e
r
u
t
u
f

t
u
o
b
a
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
n
e
g
e
g
d
e
l
w
o
n
K

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s
d
n
a

s
r
e
k
a
m

d
n
a
m
e
d
d
n
a

s
d
e
e
n

l
l
i

k
s

s
e
d
u
c
n

l

i

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

c
i
f
i
c
e
p
s
m
r
o
f
n

i

o
t

t
n
e
m
s
s
e
s
s
a

l

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
d
n
a
g
n
n
a
r
t
T
E
V

i

i

i

a
n
o
s
e
c
n
v
o
r
p
s
u
o
i
r
a
v
n

i

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

l

e
v
e

l

i

h
g
h
t
a
d
e
r
e
e
t
s

i

s
h
T

(

.

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

d
n
a
B
B
O
T

i

d
n
a
d
e
t
a
n
d
r
o
o
c
e
b
d
u
o
h
s

l

,
d
e
n
i
f
e
d
e
b
o
t
(
h
c
t
a
m
s
m
s

i

l
l
i

k
s

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
d
e
R

e
v
i
t
a
t
i
t
n
a
u
q
d
n
a
e
v
i
t
a
t
i
l

i

a
u
q
g
n
i
t
s
x
e
e
t
a
n
d
r
o
o
C

i

l

)
d
e
s
y
a
n
a
d
n
a
d
e
r
u
s
a
e
m

d
n
a

l

y
p
p
u
s

s

l
l
i

i

k
s
e
t
a
p
c
i
t
n
a
d
n
a

r
o
t
i
n
o
m
o
t

s
e
c
i
t
c
a
r
p

m
r
e
t
-
g
n
o

l

d
n
a
m
r
e
t
-
d
m

i

t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

d
n
a
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

l

s
e
v
e

l

r
o
t
c
e
s
d
n
a

l

a
c
o

l

,
l
a
n
o
i
t
a
n
t
a

s
d
n
a
m
e
d

e
v
i
t
a
t
i
t
n
a
u
q
(

s
d
n
a
m
e
d
s

l
l
i

k
s

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
n
a

i

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

)

l

e
a
c
s
e
g
r
a

l

l

y
e
v
i
t
a
e
r

l

i

e
h
t
g
n
v
o
r
p
m

i
(

.

4
1
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

l

i

i

a
c
n
v
o
r
p

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

S
S
L
o
M

f
o
e
t
a
r

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
e
h
t

l

f
o
e
s
a
e
r
c
n
%
x
x

i

i

g
n
h
c
t
a
m

r
e
t
t
e
b
r
o
f
a
t
a
d
n
o
i
t
a
p
i
c
i
t
n
a
g
n
i
s
U

e
h
t

f
o
m
r
o
f
e
r
e
h
t
e
s
m

i

i
t
p
o
o
t

s
t
s
a
c
e
r
o
f

m
r
e
t
-
d
m
d
n
a

i

f
o

l

a
i
t
n
e
t
o
p
h
t
w
o
r
g
e
h
t

r
e
t
s
o
f
o
t
d
n
a
m
e
t
s
y
s
T
E
V

-
t
r
o
h
s
h
t
i

w
s
e
d
u
t
s

i

l

a
r
o
t
c
e
s

t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

)
s
e
h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a

d
n
a
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

(cid:2)

i

t
h
g
s
e
r
o
f
e
v
i
t
a
t
i
l

a
u
q
a

l
l

e
w
s
a

i

,
c
m
o
n
o
c
e
-
o
r
c
a
m

s
e
g
a
t
r
o
h
s

s

l
l
i

k
s
g
n
c
a
f

i

w
o
n
s
r
o
t
c
e
s

i

l

e
u
g
o
a
d
S
E
P
o
t
S
E
P
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E

l

G
D
e
h
t
n

i

y
e
k
r
u
T
f
o
n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
P

i

i

)
s
e
c
v
r
e
s

s
d
r
a
o
b
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

0
1
’
s

l
l
i

k
S

,
s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e
,

l

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
m
r
e
t
-
g
n
o

l

f
o
n
o
i
t
c
u
d
e
r

%
x
x

k
r
o
w
o
t
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
m
o
r
f
n
o
i
t
i
s
n
a
r
t

i

r
e
s
a
E

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
c

l

i
l

b
u
p
f
o
y
t
i
l

a
u
q

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
c
o
v
d
n
a

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e

l

l

d
e
y
o
p
m
e
n
u
d
e
r
e
t
s
g
e
r

i

g
n

i
l
l

e
n
n
a
h
c
-
i
t
l
u
m
e
k

i
l

s
e
h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a
g
n
d
a
r
g
p
u
(

i

m
e
t
s
y
s

l

a
r
r
e
f
e
r
d
n
a

t
n
e
m
e
c
a
p
b
o

l

j

s
t
i

l

p
o
e
v
e
d
o
t
(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

d
n
a
g
n

i
l
l

e
s
n
u
o
c
e
v
s
n
e
t
n

i

i

l

,
s
a
t
r
o
p
d
e
s
a
b
t
e
n
r
e
t
n

i

h
t
i

w

t
l
u
c
i
f
f
i
d
e
r
o
m

r
o
f

l

s
n
a
p
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
r
e
e
r
a
c

l

l

a
n
o
s
r
e
p

)
s
P
M
L
A
o
s
a
e
e
s
(

l

)
s
r
e
k
e
e
s
b
o

j

l

e
c
a
p
o
t

g
n

i
l
l

i

e
s
n
u
o
c
d
n
a
e
c
n
a
d
u
g
r
e
e
r
a
c
e
c
n
a
h
n
e
y
g
n
o
r
t
S

l

s
d
n
a
m
e
d
s

l
l
i

k
s
e
r
u
t
u
f

t
u
o
b
a

i

a
t
a
d
g
n
s
u
,
s
e
c
v
r
e
s

i

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

(cid:2)

y
n
a
p
m
o
c
-
n

i

d
n
a

i

s
p
h
s
n
r
e
t
n

i

e
t
o
m
o
r
P

s
e
v
i
t
n
e
c
n

i

d
n
a

t
r
o
p
p
u
s
e
t
a
i
r
p
o
r
p
p
a

l

i

a
c
o
s

,

E
N
o
M

i

i

f
o
n
o
s
v
o
r
p
g
n
s
a
e
r
c
n

i

i

d
n
a

s
m
e
t
s
y
s
T
E
V
e
s
n
r
e
d
o
M
(cid:2)

i

i

s
r
e
d
v
o
r
p

&
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
n
e
e
w
t
e
b
s
k
n

i
l

r
e
g
n
o
r
t
s
h
t
i

w

,
T
E
V
C

i

s
e
s
s
e
n
s
u
b
d
n
a
g
n
n
a
r
t

i

i

124

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

6.4 SOCIAL INCLUSION

In Turkey, the EU accession process is an important
framework for promoting the social inclusion agenda.
Without underestimating recent social policy and the
actions of the Turkish government, it has not been
possible to finalise the JIM as a key process in addressing
the social exclusion challenges in Turkey. Thus, social
inclusion policy seems to be created on an ad-hoc basis
rather than on systematic and comprehensive
assessment. Integrated social statistics coupled with
independent evaluation of accessibility and use of social
protection programmes should be the main mechanisms
to produce relevant measurement of vulnerable and
socially excluded groups to form the basis for their
inclusion in policy programmes and priorities.

Overall, the focus of social inclusion policy has been
widened from its initial position and the risk of exclusion is
now clearly associated with the elements of low
education, lack of employment, number of household
members, membership of a disadvantaged group, region
and age. Identification of vulnerable groups is being made
on the basis of those official statistics available (poverty
rate and unemployment rate for example) as well as data
and information from relevant central and regional public
agencies. However, the clear definition and assessment
of vulnerability and exclusion within central and regional
government policy documents and programmes is a
challenge that remains to be met. There is a need to
move beyond political and academic discourse and
through the setting of clear, realistic targets and
increasing the priority of social sector spending. The
objectives of the European Platform against Poverty and
Social Exclusion are important stepping stones in this
context.

Priority 1: Enhanced policy agenda –
Recommendations

(cid:2) The concepts of social inclusion, social cohesion

and equity are relatively new in policy discourse in
Turkey and these concepts are neither
mainstreamed nor referred to in the national
policy-making processes. The terms ‘poverty’ and
‘economic vulnerability’ are more commonly seen in
the spotlight of government agendas. Far more
work is needed on awareness-raising and policy
learning measures – where changes of beliefs,
attitudes, behaviours and goals are incurred in
response to new information from and the
experiences of peer entities – to promote the
concepts of social inclusion, social cohesion and
equity and their added value for education and
training, employment and broader social policy
making in Turkey.

(cid:2) Public discussions on the new constitution can be
used as a window of opportunity to achieve broad
consensus on how to enhance respect for and the
protection of minorities and address long-standing
challenges of social inclusion in education,
employment and society at large for groups including
Roma and other marginalised populations.

(cid:2) Present social policy is based on the world view of

undeniable individual rights where social services are
considered an entitlement rather than an act of charity
as a result. A broad consensus is required to develop
consistent overarching social policies that cut across
the variety of political, cultural, religious, social and
economic realities at the core of the present
fragmentation of welfare-oriented activities.

(cid:2) Policy making could be improved through better use
of existing research on social inclusion in Turkey.
Enhanced collaboration among academic disciplines
and between policy sectors may yield important
benefits for all parties involved. It is important to
stress that members of disadvantaged communities
can make important contributions to the social policy
research and dialogue agenda. Hence, a more
inclusive approach to research and policy dialogue is
recommended.

(cid:2) Policy makers might consider developing a national
strategy for youth skills and a national action plan on
preventing social disadvantage, overcoming school
failure and reducing youth dropouts based on the two
parallel approaches of eliminating system level
practices that hinder equity and targeting low
performing disadvantaged schools.

Priority 2: Institutional framework and capacity
enhancement – Recommendations

(cid:2) Mapping (at central and local level) of all the

institutions involved in inclusive social policies to
provide an overview of the various ministries and
institutions involved in policy design, programming,
implementation and evaluation as a first step towards
a more transparent social welfare system. Additional
support may be needed to coordinate and fine tune
the implementation of the various programmes with a
view to enhancing the overall effectiveness of ongoing
efforts and support.

(cid:2) The 2011 Sample Study Population and Housing
Survey (field applied in October 2011) could be
expanded to provide more detailed information on the
groups and communities identified as having a high
risk of social exclusion.

(cid:2) The JIM process could be used as a tool to facilitate
the participation of NGOs and community-based
organisations representing disadvantaged groups,
which would contribute to better identification of
disadvantaged groups within Turkish society. The JIM
document needs to fully reflect government policy
discourse on issues such as the Roma and other
disadvantaged groups within Turkish society.

(cid:2) Social impact assessments must be carried out in a
systematic manner to assess the impact of social
policies in force.

(cid:2) Constituencies for reform in Turkey and the EU would
benefit from stronger platforms for the exchange of
information and learning from innovative practices in
order to share know-how in the implementation of
various aspects of the social policy agenda. Capacity
and financial support (via grants) could be provided for
the creation of professional policy networks on social
inclusion and/or other mechanisms to promote such
exchanges.

6. MAIN CHALLENGES, STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 125

(cid:2)

(cid:2) Turkey might consider constructive international
cooperation within the framework of the Roma
Decade (2010-15) and other EU Roma platforms. It is
suggested that the establishment of an overarching
institutional coordination working group between
relevant government departments would enhance the
facilitation of inter-departmental dialogue on the
subject. This dialogue will benefit from sector
sub-working groups made up of Roma community
representatives, professionals, academics, etc.
Increased public expenditure on ALMPs for
marginalised groups. Adequate use of active labour
market measures may be crucial in achieving the
social inclusion of identified vulnerable groups. The
targeting of integrated measures must be enhanced
through long-term sustainable projects and extensive
financial support, and there must be further
exploration of openings for combined action
(concurrently at national policy and local grassroots
levels) in a way that contributes to the achievement of
significant positive impacts.

(cid:2) Additional support is needed to strengthen central and
the regional statistical offices. (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6) staff requires
technical support to enhance the design of
questionnaires to better reflect the causes of social

exclusion for identified disadvantaged groups.
Financial and technical support to local
community-based organisations, NGOs and
researchers will enhance the technical skills needed
for conducting face-to-face interviews with
marginalised segments of the population who are
generally not very willing to provide the required
information – an attitude also partly aggravated by low
levels of education and a lack of trust in the
interviewing process.

(cid:2) Financial support to public and private institutions as
well as civil society and community entities (through
formalised peer learning activities and peer reviews on
social inclusion in education and employment, for
example) could provide rapid access to research and
social policy evaluations in other jurisdictions in
Turkey, the region and the EU and, crucially, be helpful
in tailoring lessons learned to a specific policy, political
and socio-economic context.

The table below summarises the recommendations,
describes the expected results, specifies the entities with
the main responsibility for each measure and attempts to
link each field of action with recent or ongoing
international and national programmes and initiatives.

126

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

d
n
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
a
e
R

l

l

d
n
a
e
b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r
y
t
i
t
n
e
n
i
a
M

e
m
o
c
t
u
o
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
E

s
n
o
i
t
c
a
n
i
a
m
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
R

,
s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

i

n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
O
g
n
n
n
a
P
e
t
a
t
S

l

i

f
o
h
c
a
e
r
t
u
o
d
n
a

y
t
i
l

a
u
q
e
h
t

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
v
o
r
p
m

i

r
e
h
t
r
u
F

a
d
n
e
g
a
y
c
i
l

o
p
d
e
c
n
a
h
n
E

:
1
y
t
i
r
o
i
r
P

,

4
s
x
a

i

y
t
i
r
o
i
r
P
P
O
D
R
H

s
s
e
c
o
r
p
n
o
i
t
a
t
l
u
s
n
o
c
e
h
t
g
n
d
a
e

i

l

i

s
e
c
v
r
e
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

c

i
l

b
u
p

.
c
t
e
s
r
o
n
o
d

s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

e
h
t

l
l

a
h
t
i

w

,
s
O
G
N

,
s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

,
s
e
e
t
t
i

m
m
o
c

i

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o
d
e
s
a
b
-
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r
d
n
a

i

a
m
e
d
a
c
a

,
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
c

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
a

i
l
r
a
p

i

,
s
e
i
r
t
s
n
m
e
n

i

i
l
(

s
e
i
t
r
a
p

l

a
c
i
t
i
l

o
p

,
s
s
e
r
p

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

.
c
t
e

l

i

a
c
o
S
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
c
u
d
e
R
y
t
r
e
v
o
P
n
o
y
g
e
t
a
r
t
S

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

n
o
d
e
s
a
b
y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s
n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

i

l

i

a
c
o
s

f
o
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
D

l

i

n
o
s
u
c
n
I

l

,
e
r
e
h
w
s
t
h
g
i
r

l

i

a
u
d
v
d
n

i

i

l

i

e
b
a
n
e
d
n
u
f
o
w
e
v
d
l
r
o
w
e
h
t

i

n
a
d
e
r
e
d
s
n
o
c
e
r
a

i

i

s
e
c
v
r
e
s

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
t
l
u
s
e
r

a

s
a

y
t
i
r
a
h
c

f
o
t
c
a
n
a

t
o
n
t
n
e
m
e
l
t
i
t
n
e

i

n
a
m
a

i

s
a
n
o
s
u
c
n
I

l

l

i

a
c
o
S
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
c
u
d
e
R
y
t
r
e
v
o
P
n
o

d
n
a

s
u
o
g

i

i
l

e
r

,
l
a
r
u
t
l
u
c

,
l
a
c
i
t
i
l

o
p
f
o
y
t
e
i
r
a
v

a
g
n
i
r
e
v
o
c

n
o
s
e
n

i
l

i

l

e
d
u
g
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
h
s
k
r
u
T
e
h
t

i

r
o
f

a
e
r
a

s
u
c
o
f

s
e
i
t
i
l

a
e
r

i

c
m
o
n
o
c
e
d
n
a

l

i

a
c
o
s

d
n
a
n
o
s
e
h
o
c

i

l

i

a
c
o
s

i

,
n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

l

i

a
c
o
s

y
t
r
e
v
o
p
g
n
i
t
a
b
m
o
c
d
n
a
n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

i

l

i

a
c
o
s
g
n
i
t
o
m
o
r
p

f
o
s
t
p
e
c
n
o
c
e
h
T

n

i

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
g
n
n
r
a
e

i

l

y
c

i
l

i

i

o
p
d
n
a
g
n
s
a
r
-
s
s
e
n
e
r
a
w
A

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
n

i

o
t
d
e
r
r
e
f
e
r

r
o
d
e
m
a
e
r
t
s
n
a
m
e
b
o
t

i

y
t
i
u
q
e

l

i

a
c
o
s

i

,
n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

l

i

a
c
o
s

f
o
s
t
p
e
c
n
o
c
g
n
i
t
o
m
o
r
p

s
e
s
s
e
c
o
r
p
g
n
k
a
m
-
y
c

i

i
l

o
p

r
e
d
a
o
r
b
d
n
a

l

i

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
,
g
n
n
a
r
t
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e

i

l

r
o
f
e
u
a
v
d
e
d
d
a

r
i
e
h
t
d
n
a

y
t
i
u
q
e
d
n
a
n
o
s
e
h
o
c

i

i

g
n
k
a
m
y
c

i
l

o
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
S

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N
e
h
t

s
n
o
i
t
n
e
m
y

l
l

a
c
i
f
i
c
e
p
s
P
O
D
R
H

l

f
o
e
b
a
p
a
c

y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

y
c

i
l

o
p

l

i

i

a
c
o
s
g
n
h
c
r
a
r
e
v
o
n
A

,

i

n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
O
g
n
n
n
a
P
e
t
a
t
S

l

i

n
o
h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r
g
n
i
t
s
x
e
e
h
t

i

y
b
d
e
m
r
o
f
n

i

i

g
n
k
a
m
y
c

i
l

o
P

l

i

a
c
o
s
n
o
h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r
g
n
i
t
s
x
e
e
h
t

i

f
o
e
s
u
r
e
t
t
e
B

,
s
O
G
N

,
s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

,
s
e
e
t
t
i

m
m
o
c

i

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o
d
e
s
a
b
-
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r
d
n
a

i

a
m
e
d
a
c
a

,
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
c

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
a

i
l
r
a
p

,
s
e
i
r
t
s
n
m

i

i

s
e
i
t
r
a
p

l

a
c
i
t
i
l

o
p

,
s
s
e
r
p

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

.
c
t
e

e
n

i
l

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

E
N
o
M

,

S
S
L
o
M

i

d
e
g
a
t
n
a
v
d
a
s
d
f
o
s
r
e
b
m
e
m
m
o
r
f

s
n
o
i
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
C

d
n
a
h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r

y
c

i
l

o
p

l

i

a
c
o
s
e
h
t
o
t

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

a
d
n
e
g
a
e
u
g
o
a
d

i

l

s
e
n

i
l

i

i

i

p
c
s
d
c
m
e
d
a
c
a
g
n
o
m
a
n
o
i
t
a
r
o
b
a

l
l

o
c
d
e
c
n
a
h
n
e

s
r
o
t
c
e
s

y
c

i
l

o
p
n
e
e
w
t
e
b
d
n
a

l

e
u
g
o
a
d
y
c

i

i
l

o
p
d
n
a
h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r
o
t
h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a
e
v
s
u
c
n

l

i

I

s
a
e
r
a
d
e
v
i
r
p
e
d
n

i

n
o
i
t
a
r
e
n
e
g
e
r
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
v
o
n
n

i

l

i

a
c
o
S

e
h
t
e
c
n
a
h
n
e
o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t
d
n
a

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
F

i

s
e
h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a

l

a
t
n
e
m

i
r
e
p
x
e
d
n
a

s
p
u
o
r
g
t
e
g
r
a
t

c
i
f
i
c
e
p
s

l

a
c
o

l

n

i

s
t
n
a
r
g

l

l

a
b
o
g
f
o
e
s
u
e
h
t
h
g
u
o
r
h
t

–

l

)
e
p
m
a
x
e
r
o
f

,
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

i

i

r
o
f
g
n
c
n
e
f
-
g
n
i
r
g
n
d
v
o
r
p
P
O
D
R
H
h
t
i

i

w

l

r
a
u
c
i
t
r
a
p
n
i
(

e
h
t
n

i

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a

l

a
c
o

l

d
n
a

l

a
n
o
g
e
r

i

f
o
t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

i

n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

e
v
i
t
c
a

f
o
s
a
e
r
a

i

n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

l

i

a
c
o
s

i

n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

l

i

a
c
o
s
e
h
t

r
o
f

t
a
i
r
a
t
e
r
c
e
s

f
o
t
n
e
m
h
s

i
l

b
a
t
s
e
d
n
a

i

,
n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t
e
h
t

s
a
m
r
o
f
t
a
p
y
c

l

i
l

o
p

6. MAIN CHALLENGES, STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 127

,
s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a
e
c
n
a
n
r
e
v
o
g

l

e
v
e
l
-
i
t
l
u
m
A

m
e
t
s
y
s
e
r
a
f
l
e
w

l

i

a
c
o
s

t
n
e
r
a
p
s
n
a
r
t
e
r
o
m
A

e
h
t

l
l

a

f
o
)
l
e
v
e

l

l

a
c
o

l

d
n
a

l

a
r
t
n
e
c

i

t
a
(
g
n
p
p
a
M

t
n
e
m
e
c
n
a
h
n
e
y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c
d
n
a
k
r
o
w
e
m
a
r
f

l
a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

I

:
2
y
t
i
r
o
i
r
P

h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r
d
e
c
n
a
h
n
e
d
n
a

,

4
s
x
a

i

y
t
i
r
o
i
r
P
P
O
D
R
H

l

e
b
d
u
o
h
s
d
n
a
d
e
d
e
e
n
s

i

.
c
t
e
s
r
o
n
o
d

i

h
g
h
a

t
a
d
e
r
e
e
t
s
d
n
a
d
e
t
a
n
d
r
o
o
c

i

i

d
n
a
g
n
k
a
m
y
c

i
l

o
p

l

e
v
e

l

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

i

b
s
n
o
p
s
e
r
d
n
a

s
e
o
r

l

l

i

a
c
o
s

f
o
w
e
v
e
r

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
c
n
u
F

n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

d
e
m
a
e
r
t
s
n
a
M

i

d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
,
t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
e
e
v
o
r
p
m

l

i

o
t
d
e
s

i
l

a
m
r
o
f

i

,
g
n
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
,
n
g
s
e
d
y
c

i

i
l

o
p
n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

i

l

i

a
c
o
s

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

n
a

s
a

s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p

l

i

a
c
o
s
e
v
s
u
c
n

i

l

i

n

i

d
e
v
o
v
n

l

i

s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

d
n
a

i

i

s
e
i
r
t
s
n
m
s
u
o
i
r
a
v
e
h
t

f
o
w
e
v
r
e
v
o

i

i

,
g
n
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
,
n
g
s
e
d
y
c

i

i
l

o
p
n

i

l

d
e
v
o
v
n

i

l

n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

,
s
O
G
N

,
s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

,
s
e
e
t
t
i

m
m
o
c

i

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o
d
e
s
a
b
-
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r
d
n
a

i

a
m
e
d
a
c
a

,
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
c

y
r
a
t
n
e
m
a

i
l
r
a
p

,
s
e
i
r
t
s
n
m

i

i

s
e
i
t
r
a
p

l

a
c
i
t
i
l

o
p

,
s
s
e
r
p

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

.
c
t
e

y
t
i
u
q
e
r
e
d
n
h
t
a
h
t

i

s
e
c
i
t
c
a
r
p

l

e
v
e

l

m
e
t
s
y
s
g
n
i
t
a
n
m
e

i
l

i

l

s
o
o
h
c
s
d
e
g
a
t
n
a
v
d
a
s
d
g
n
m
r
o
f
r
e
p
w
o

i

i

l

g
n
i
t
e
g
r
a
t
d
n
a

f
o
s
e
h
c
a
o
r
p
p
a

l

e

l
l

a
r
a
p
o
w

t
e
h
t
n
o
d
e
s
a
b
s
t
u
o
p
o
r
d

,
s
e
g
a
t
n
a
v
d
a
s
d

i

l

i

a
c
o
s
g
n
i
t
n
e
v
e
r
p
n
o
n
a
p
n
o
i
t
c
a

l

i

h
t
u
o
y
g
n
c
u
d
e
r
d
n
a
e
r
u

l
i

a
f

l

o
o
h
c
s
g
n
m
o
c
r
e
v
o

i

h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r
g
n
i
t
s
x
e
o
t

i

s
k
n

i
l

i

g
n
k
a
m
y
c

i
l

o
p

l

i

a
c
o
s
d
n
a

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

d
n
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
a
e
R

l

l

d
n
a
e
b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r
y
t
i
t
n
e
n
i
a
M

e
m
o
c
t
u
o
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
E

s
n
o
i
t
c
a
n
i
a
m
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
R

l

s
m
r
o
f
t
a
p
a
m
o
R
U
E
r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a

)
5
1
-
0
1
0
2
(
e
d
a
c
e
D

l

s
m
r
o
f
t
a
p
a
m
o
R
U
E
r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a

)
5
1
-
0
1
0
2
(
e
d
a
c
e
D

a
m
o
R
e
h
t

f
o
k
r
o
w
e
m
a
r
f
e
h
t
n
h
t
i

i

w
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
p
o
o
c

a
m
o
R
e
h
t
n

i

i

e
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
o
t

s
e
i
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a
h
s
k
r
u
T
d
n
a

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
r
e
t
n

i

e
v
i
t
c
u
r
t
s
n
o
c
n

i

i

s
e
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p
y
e
k
r
u
T

i

n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o
a

l
l

e
r
b
m
u
O
G
N
a
m
o
R
y
e
k
r
u
T
o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
S

,

i

n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
O
g
n
n
n
a
P
e
t
a
t
S

l

i

d
n
a

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
s

l

l
l
i

k
s
h
t
u
o
y
n
o
y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
a
g
n
h
s

i

i
l

b
a
t
s
e
r
e
d
s
n
o
c

i

i

t
h
g
m
s
r
e
k
a
m
y
c

i
l

o
P

l

a
t
n
e
m

t
r
a
p
e
d
-
r
e
t
n

i

n
a

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
f
d
e
c
n
a
h
n
E

i

p
u
o
r
g
g
n
k
r
o
w
n
o
i
t
a
n
d
r
o
o
c

i

l

a
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

i

g
n
h
c
r
a
r
e
v
O

j

t
c
e
b
u
s
e
h
t
n
o
e
u
g
o
a
d

i

l

a
m
o
R

f
o
g
n
i
t
s
s
n
o
c

i

s
p
u
o
r
g
g
n
k
r
o
w
-
b
u
s

i

l

a
r
o
t
c
e
s
-
b
u
s

;
s
t
n
e
m

t
r
a
p
e
d
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g
t
n
a
v
e
e
r
n
e
e
w
t
e
b

l

l

i

,
s
a
n
o
s
s
e
f
o
r
p
,
s
e
v
i
t
a
t
n
e
s
e
r
p
e
r

y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

i

.
c
t
e
,
s
c
m
e
d
a
c
a

e
n

i
l

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

E
N
o
M

,

S
S
L
o
M

l

n
a
p
n
o
i
t
c
a

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
a
d
n
a

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d
s

l

l
l
i

k
s
h
t
u
o
y
n
o
y
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

l

i

a
c
o
s

l

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E
G
D
e
h
t

l

m
r
o
f
t
a
p
n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

i

n

i

y
e
k
r
u
T
f
o
n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
P

i

G
D

,
t
n
e
m
e
g
r
a
n
E
G
D

l

i
t
l
u
M

t
n
e
m
y
o
p
m
E

l

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P
y
r
a
c
i
f
e
n
e
B

i

l

a
c
o
L

i

,
y
t
e
c
o
S

l
i

i

v
C
n
o

P
2
P

,
y
t
i
l
i

c
a
F
n
o
i
t
a
r
t
s
n
m
d
A

i

i

U
E
r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

i

a
c
o
s
n
o
s
m
r
o
f
t
a
p

l

i

n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

128

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

d
n
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
a
e
R

l

l

d
n
a
e
b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r
y
t
i
t
n
e
n
i
a
M

e
m
o
c
t
u
o
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
E

s
n
o
i
t
c
a
n
i
a
m
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
R

,

4
s
x
a

i

y
t
i
r
o
i
r
P
P
O
D
R
H

n
o
i
t
c
a
e
h
t

s
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

y
t
i
r
u
c
e
S

s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p
n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

i

l

i

a
c
o
s

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

e
h
t

f
o

n
a
e
p
o
r
u
E
d
n
a

t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g
y
e
k
r
u
T
n
e
e
w
t
e
b

,
s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

l

i

a
c
o
S
d
n
a

r
u
o
b
a
L
f
o
y
r
t
s
n
M

i

i

t
r
o
p
p
u
s
n

i

k
r
o
w
e
m
a
r
f

i

c
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

a
n

i

l

s
n
a
p
n
o
m
m
o
C

s
s
e
c
o
r
p
M
I
J
e
h
t

f
o
t
n
e
m
e
e
r
g
a
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
s

i
l

a
n
F

i

,
s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

4
s
x
a

i

y
t
i
r
o
i
r
P
P
O
D
R
H

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
5
d
n
a

f
o

.
c
t
e
s
r
o
n
o
d

,

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
N

d
n
a

y
r
t
s
u
d
n

I

f
o
y
r
t
s
n
M

i

i

t
c
e
f
f
e
’
n
o
i
t
a
r
u
d
–
t
c
e
o
r
p
‘

j

f
o
y
r
t
s
n
M

i

i

e
c
r
e
m
m
o
C

e
h
t
e
t
a
t
i
l
i

c
a
f
o
t

l

o
o
t

a

s
a
d
e
s
u
s
n
o
s
s
u
c
s
d
M
I
J

i

i

d
e
s
a
b
-
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c
d
n
a

s
O
G
N

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
p

i

e
e
r
h
t
e
h
t

f
o
s
g
n
i
t
e
e
m

l

a
u
n
n
A

,
s
p
u
o
r
g
d
e
g
a
t
n
a
v
d
a
s
d
g
n
i
t
n
e
s
e
r
p
e
r

i

s
n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o

i

e
r
u
s
n
e
o
t

r
e
d
r
o
n

i

s
r
e
t
s
n
m

i

i

i

e
h
t
g
n
y
f
i
t
n
e
d

i

r
e
t
t
e
b
n

i

l

l

p
e
h
d
u
o
w
h
c
h
w

i

l

e
v
e

l

p
o
t
e
h
t

t
a

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

a
c
i
t
i
l

o
p

i

y
t
e
c
o
s
h
s
k
r
u
T
n
h
t
i

i

i

w
s
p
u
o
r
g
d
e
g
a
t
n
a
v
d
a
s
d

i

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m

s
a

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p
d
e
s
a
b
-
r
o
t
c
e
s
g
n
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
s
P
O
D
R
H

e
h
t

s
s
e
s
s
a
o
t

s
t
n
e
m
s
s
e
s
s
a

t
c
a
p
m

i

l

i

a
c
o
s

c
i
t
a
m
e
t
s
y
S

e
h
t
h
t
i

w
n
o
i
t
a
n
d
r
o
o
c
n

i

i

n
a
p

l

e
h
t
d
n
o
y
e
b
d
n
a

t
c
a
p
m

i

g
n
i
t
s
a

l

a
h
t
i

w

i

i

n
o
s
s
m
m
o
C

l

d
e
p
o
e
v
e
d
s
r
o
t
a
c
d
n

i

i

t
c
a
p
m

I

s
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

l

i

a
u
d
v
d
n

i

i

d
n
a
m
r
e
t
-
t
r
o
h
s
o
t
d
e
s
o
p
p
o

e
c
a
p
n

l

i

s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p

l

i

a
c
o
s

f
o
t
c
a
p
m

i

n

i

y
e
k
r
u
T
f
o
n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
P

i

e
n

i
l

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

E
N
o
M

,

S
S
L
o
M

o
t

s
m
r
o
f
t
a
p
y
c

l

i
l

o
p
d
n
a
e
s
i
t
r
e
p
x
e
d
e
c
n
a
h
n
E

e
h
t
n

i

d
e
s
u
w
o
h
-
w
o
n
k
U
E
d
n
a
h
s
k
r
u
T

i

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

,
s
e
i
r
t
s
n
m

i

i

e
v
i
t
a
v
o
n
n

i

m
o
r
f
n
r
a
e

l

d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

e
g
n
a
h
c
x
e

l

i

a
c
o
s
e
h
t

f
o
s
t
c
e
p
s
a

s
u
o
i
r
a
v

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

d
e
s
a
b
-
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c
,
s
O
G
N

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

,
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
c

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o

i

h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r
d
n
a

i

a
m
e
d
a
c
a

l

a
n
o
g
e
r

i

,
s
s
e
r
p

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

.
c
t
e
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g

n

i

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

l

a
c
o

l

d
n
a

l

a
n
o
g
e
r

i

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
p
c
i
t
r
a
P

i

0
1
’
s

l
l
i

k
S
d
n
a

)
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
P
t
r
o
p
p
u
S

l

i

a
c
o
S

(

S
E
D
O
S

l

a
n
o
g
e
r

i

-

s
a
d
n
e
g
a

l

a
c
o

l

d
n
a

l

i

a
n
o
g
e
r
g
n
i
t
t
e
s

e
v
i
t
a
v
o
n
n

i

r
i
e
h
t

l

r
o
f
d
e
t
a
u
a
v
e
d
n
a
d
e
w
e
v
e
r

i

s
e
c
i
t
c
a
r
p

y
e
k
r
u
T
n

i

m
r
o
f
e
r

r
o
f

i

s
e
c
n
e
u
t
i
t
s
n
o
c

y
b
a
d
n
e
g
a

y
c

i
l

o
p

t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T

n

i

s
e
i
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t

i

e
v
s
n
e
h
e
r
p
m
o
c

a
n

i

s
p
u
o
r
g
d
e
s

i
l

i

a
n
g
r
a
m
g
n
i
t
e
g
r
a
t

i

s
e
g
e
t
a
r
t
s

t
n
e
m
p
o
e
v
e
d

l

t
a
t
S
k
r
u
T
g
n
i
t
r
o
p
p
u
s
P
O
D
R
H

e
h
t

r
o
f

)
s
t
n
a
r
g
a
v
(

i

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
i
f
d
n
a

y
t
i
c
a
p
a
C

i

g
n
m
a
e
r
t
s
n
a
m

i

i

f
o
m
a
e
h
t
h
t
i

w
s
t
n
e
m
e
e

l

l

i

a
c
o
s

r
o
f

s
k
r
o
w
t
e
n
y
c

i
l

o
p

l

i

a
n
o
s
s
e
f
o
r
p
f
o
n
o
i
t
a
e
r
c

h
c
u
s
e
t
o
m
o
r
p
o
t

i

s
m
s
n
a
h
c
e
m

r
e
h
t
o
d
n
a
n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

i

l

i

g
n
s
u
o
H
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
u
p
o
P
y
d
u
t
S
e
p
m
a
S
1
1
0
2
e
h
T

l

s
e
g
n
a
h
c
x
e

e
b
d
u
o
c

l

)
1
1
0
2
r
e
b
o
t
c
O
n

i

d
e

i
l

p
p
a
d
e
i
f
(

l

y
e
v
r
u
S

r
e
n
n
a
m
e
v
s
u
c
n

l

i

i

d
n
a

n
o
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

d
e

l
i

i

a
t
e
d
e
r
o
m
e
d
v
o
r
p
o
t
d
e
d
n
a
p
x
e

i

i

h
g
h
t
a
g
n
e
b
s
a
d
e
i
f
i
t
n
e
d

i

s
e
i
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c
d
n
a

s
p
u
o
r
g

i

n
o
s
u
c
x
e

l

l

i

a
c
o
s

f
o
k
s
i
r

6. MAIN CHALLENGES, STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 129

.

.

2
3
d
n
a
1
3
s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

g
n
o
e
f
i
l

l

d
n
a

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
t
p
a
d
a
(

)

i

g
n
n
r
a
e

l

.

.

2
3
d
n
a
1
3
s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
A
P

I

g
n
o
e
f
i
l

l

d
n
a

y
t
i
l
i

b
a
t
p
a
d
a
(

)

i

g
n
n
r
a
e

l

d
e
s
a
b
-
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

,
s
O
G
N

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

,
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
c

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o

i

h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r
d
n
a

i

a
m
e
d
a
c
a

l

a
n
o
g
e
r

i

,
s
s
e
r
p

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

.
c
t
e
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g

i

n
o
s
u
c
x
e

l

l

i

a
c
o
s

f
o
s
e
s
u
a
c
e
h
t

f
o
n
o
i
t
a
c
i
f
i
t
n
e
d

i

r
e
t
t
e
B

l

i

a
n
o
g
e
r
d
n
a

l

a
r
t
n
e
c
n
e
h
t
g
n
e
r
t
s
o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

a
n
o
i
t
i
d
d
A

s
t
c
a
p
m

i

e
v
i
t
i
s
o
p
t
n
a
c
i
f
i
n
g
s

i

i

n
g
s
e
d
o
t

f
f
a
t
s
(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

d
n
a

s
e
c
i
f
f
o

l

a
c
i
t
s
i
t
a
t
s

i

r
o
f
n
o
s
u
c
x
e

l

l

i

a
c
o
s

f
o
s
e
s
u
a
c
e
h
t
n
o
s
e
r
i
a
n
n
o
i
t
s
e
u
q

s
p
u
o
r
g
d
e
g
a
t
n
a
v
d
a
s
d
d
e
i
f
i
t
n
e
d

i

i

d
n
a

s
O
G
N

i

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o
d
e
s
a
b
-
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

l

a
c
o

l

o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t
d
n
a

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
F

i

s
p
u
o
r
g

d
n
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
n

i

f
o
g
n
i
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
c
n
a
h
n
E

h
g
u
o
r
h
t

l

s
e
v
e

l

n
o
i
t
c
a
g
n
n
b
m
o
c

i

i

r
o
f

s
e
i
t
i
l
i

i

b
s
s
o
p

d
n
a

,
t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

i

i

a
c
n
a
n
i
f
e
v
s
n
e
t
x
e
,
s
t
c
e
o
r
p

j

l

e
b
a
n
a
t
s
u
s

i

,

m
r
e
t
-
g
n
o

l

f
o
e
c
n
e
s
e
r
p
e
h
t
e
r
u
s
n
e

y
c

i
l

o
p

l

a
n
o
i
t
a
n
t
a

y
l
t
n
e
r
r
u
c
n
o
c
d
e
t
n
e
m
e
p
m

l

i

s
n
o
i
t
c
a

o
t
e
t
u
b
i
r
t
n
o
c
o
t

l

)
s
e
v
e

l

s
t
o
o
r
s
s
a
r
g

l

a
c
o

l

d
n
a

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

,
s
e
i
r
t
s
n
m

i

i

l

l

e
b
a
r
e
n
u
v
d
e
i
f
i
t
n
e
d

i

i

f
o
n
o
s
u
c
n

l

i

l

i

a
c
o
s
e
h
t
g
n
v
e
h
c
a

i

i

s
p
u
o
r
g
d
e
s

i
l

i

a
n
g
r
a
m

d
e
r
i
u
q
e
r

s

l
l
i

k
s

l

i

a
c
n
h
c
e
t
e
h
t
e
c
n
a
h
n
e
o
t

s
r
e
h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r

l

a
n
o
g
e
r

i

,
s
s
e
r
p

,
s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

.
c
t
e
t
n
e
m
n
r
e
v
o
g

,
s
r
e
b
m
a
h
c

,
s
n
o
i
t
a
s
n
a
g
r
o

i

h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r
d
n
a

i

a
m
e
d
a
c
a

d
e
s
a
b
-
y
t
i
n
u
m
m
o
c

,
s
O
G
N

,
s
r
e
n
t
r
a
p

t
x
e
t
n
o
c

l

a
c
o

l

e
h
t
o
t

s
n
o
s
s
e

l

e
s
e
h
t

r
o

l
i

a
t

l

i

a
c
o
s

,
s
r
e
y
o
p
m
e

l

,
s
e
i
r
t
s
n
m

i

i

o
t

r
e
d
r
o
n

i

U
E
e
h
t
d
n
a
n
o
g
e
r
e
h
t

i

,
y
e
k
r
u
T
n

i

s
e
c

i

i
l

o
p

s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a
g
n
n
r
a
e

i

l

r
e
e
p

e
n

i
l

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

E
N
o
M

,

S
S
L
o
M

l

i

a
c
o
s

l

f
o
s
n
o
i
t
a
u
a
v
e
d
n
a
h
c
r
a
e
s
e
r
o
t

s
s
e
c
c
a
d
p
a
R

i

r
o
f

s
n
o
i
t
u
t
i
t
s
n

i

e
t
a
v
i
r
p
d
n
a

c

i
l

b
u
p
o
t

t
r
o
p
p
u
s

l

i

a
c
n
a
n
F

i

f
o
e
s
u
a
c
e
b
y
l
t
r
a
p
,
d
e
d
e
e
n
n
o
i
t
a
m
r
o
f
n

i

e
h
t
e
d
v
o
r
p

i

o
t
g
n

i
l
l
i

w
n
u
y
l
t
s
o
m
n
o
i
t
a
u
p
o
p
e
h
t

l

f
o
s
t
n
e
m
g
e
s

e
h
t
n

i

t
s
u
r
t

f
o
k
c
a

l

d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
e
f
o

l

e
v
e

l

w
o

l

s
s
e
c
o
r
p
g
n
w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

i

d
e
s

i
l

i

a
n
g
r
a
m
h
t
i

w
s
w
e
v
r
e
t
n

i

i

e
c
a
f
-
o
t
-
e
c
a
f
n

i

e
n

i
l

,

(cid:6)
(cid:5)
(cid:4)
(cid:3)

(cid:2)

,

E
N
o
M

,

S
S
L
o
M

r
o
f

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m

t
e
k
r
a
m

r
u
o
b
a

l

e
v
i
t
c
a

f
o
e
s
u
e
t
a
u
q
e
d
A

r
o
f

s
P
M
L
A
n
o
e
r
u
t
i
d
n
e
p
x
e
c

i
l

b
u
p
e
s
a
e
r
c
n
I

s
e
m
m
a
r
g
o
r
p

l

s
r
e
d
o
h
e
k
a
t
s

d
n
a

s
e
r
u
s
a
e
m
d
e
t
a
e
R

l

l

d
n
a
e
b
i
s
n
o
p
s
e
r
y
t
i
t
n
e
n
i
a
M

e
m
o
c
t
u
o
d
e
t
c
e
p
x
E

s
n
o
i
t
c
a
n
i
a
m
d
n
a
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
R

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

131

(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)

Active labour market policies

(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)

(cid:11)(cid:11)(cid:9)

(cid:11)(cid:9)(cid:12)

(cid:11)(cid:13)(cid:12)

(cid:11)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:15)

(cid:11)(cid:14)

Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions of Turkey

European Employment Strategy

European Social Fund

European Training Foundation

European Trade Union Confederation

European Union

(cid:11)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:6)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:19)

Statistical Office of the European Union

(cid:21)(cid:2)(cid:5)

(cid:21)(cid:7)(cid:5)

Southeastern Anatolia Project

Gross domestic product

(cid:22)(cid:2)(cid:10)(cid:23)(cid:8)(cid:24)

Confederation of Turkish Real Trade Unions

(cid:22)(cid:7)(cid:25)

(cid:22)(cid:26)(cid:7)

Human Development Index

Human resources development

(cid:22)(cid:26)(cid:7) (cid:27)(cid:5)

Human Resources Development Operational Programme

(cid:25)(cid:15)(cid:13)

(cid:25)(cid:7)(cid:5)

(cid:25)(cid:3)(cid:27)

(cid:25)(cid:27)(cid:4)

(cid:25)(cid:5)(cid:2)

(cid:25)(cid:9)(cid:15)(cid:11)(cid:7)

(cid:8)(cid:24)(cid:10)(cid:14)(cid:26)

(cid:28)(cid:2)(cid:5)

(cid:28)(cid:25)(cid:4)

Information and communication technology

Internally displaced person

International Labour Organisation

International Organisation for Migration

Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance

International Standard Classification of Education

Turkish Employment Agency

Joint Assessment Paper of Employment Policy Priorities

Joint Inclusion Memorandum

(cid:10)(cid:27)(cid:9)(cid:21)(cid:11)(cid:29)

Small and Medium Enterprises Development Organisation

(cid:3)(cid:12)(cid:5)(cid:26)

(cid:3)(cid:12)(cid:9)

(cid:4)(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:9)(cid:5)

(cid:4)(cid:18)(cid:30)(cid:11)

Labour force participation rate

Labour Force Survey

Ministry of Family and Social Policies

Ministry of National Education

132

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

(cid:4)(cid:7)(cid:21)

(cid:4)(cid:18)(cid:3)(cid:9)(cid:9)

(cid:4)(cid:31)(cid:9)(cid:8)(cid:2)(cid:7)

(cid:4) (cid:27)

(cid:30)(cid:21)(cid:27)

(cid:30)(cid:14)(cid:13)(cid:9)

(cid:27)(cid:11)(cid:15)(cid:7)

(cid:27)(cid:25)!

(cid:5)(cid:11)(cid:9)

(cid:5)(cid:25)(cid:9)(cid:2)

(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)

(cid:26)(cid:7)(cid:2)

(cid:9)(cid:4)(cid:11)

Millennium Development Goals

Ministry of Labour and Social Security

Independent Industrialists and Businessmen’s Association

Post-secondary vocational school

Non-governmental organisation

Nomenclature of territorial units for statistics

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

Organised industrial zone

Public employment service

Programme for International Student Assessment

Purchasing power parity

Regional Development Agency

Small and medium-sized enterprise

(cid:9)(cid:27)(cid:7)(cid:11)(cid:9)

Social Support Programme

(cid:9)(cid:5)(cid:27)

(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:10)

State Planning Organisation

Social Security Institution

(cid:9) (cid:7)(cid:21)(cid:4)

General Directorate of Social Assistance and Solidarity

(cid:13)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:25)(cid:9)

(cid:13)(cid:11)(cid:9)(cid:10)

(cid:13)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)

(cid:13)(cid:27)(cid:29)(cid:29)

(cid:13)(cid:26) 

(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:25)(cid:10)

(cid:13)(cid:31)(cid:26)(cid:10)(cid:23)(cid:8)(cid:24)

(cid:13)(cid:16)(cid:17)"(cid:9)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:19)

(cid:14)(cid:30)

(cid:14)(cid:30)(cid:7)(cid:5)

(cid:14)#$%&’

((cid:11)(cid:13)

()(cid:2)

 *(cid:10)

Teaching and Learning International Survey

Turkish Confederation of Tradesmen and Craftsmen

Turkish Confederation of Employer Associations

Turkish Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges

Turkish lira

Turkish Statistical Institute

Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions

Turkish Statistical Institute

United Nations

United Nations Development Programme

United Nations Children’s Fund

Vocational education and training

Vocational Qualifications Authority

Higher Education Council

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 133

COUNTRY CODES

AL

BA

IS

XK*

ME

RS

HR

Albania

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Iceland

Kosovo

Montenegro

Serbia

Croatia

MK**

former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

TR

Turkey

(*) Provisional code used by Eurostat.

(**) Provisional code that does not affect the definitive denomination of the country to be attributed after the conclusion
of the negotiations currently taking place at the United Nations.

135

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adaman, F. and Kaya, A., ‘WP2 Turkey: Draft country report for the DG Employment migration study’, Istanbul, April, 2011.

Akkök, F., European inventory on validation of non-formal and informal learning 2010 – Country report: Turkey, GHK, 2010.

Alkan, A., ‘Gendered structures of local politics in Turkey’, Digest of Middle East Studies, Vol. 18(1), Spring, 2009,

pp. 31-56.

Altu(cid:16), S., Filiztekin, A. and Pamuk, (cid:3)., ‘Sources of long-term economic growth for Turkey: 1880-2005’, European Review

of Economic History, Vol. 12(3), 2008, pp. 393-430.

Arts, W. and Gelissen, J., ‘Three worlds of welfare capitalism or more? A state-of-the-art report’, Journal of European

Social Policy, Vol. 12, 2002, pp. 137-158.

Aybars, A. and Tsarouhas, D., ‘Straddling two continents: Social policy and welfare policy in Turkey’, Social Policy and

Administration, Vol. 44(6), 2010, pp. 746-763.

Bakis, O., Levent, H., Insel, A. and Polat, S., Turkiye’de Egitime Erisimin Belirleyicileri [Determinants of access to

education in Turkey], Report, Education Reform Initiative, Sabanci University, 2009.

Berber A(cid:16)ta(cid:17), Ö., Pilot project on active labour market policies for advancing gender equality through decent

employment for women in Turkey, Final report, ILO Office for Turkey, Ankara, 2010.

Bu(cid:16)ra, A., ‘Poverty and citizenship: An overview of the social policy environment in republican Turkey’, International

Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 39, 2007, pp. 33-52.

Bu(cid:16)ra, A. and Adar, S., ‘Social policy change in countries without mature welfare states: The case of Turkey’, New

Perspectives on Turkey, No 38, Spring, 2008, pp. 83-106.

Bu(cid:16)ra, A. and Candas, A., ‘Change and continuity under an eclectic social security regime: The case of Turkey’, Middle

Eastern Studies, Vol. 47(3), 2011, pp. 515-528.

CPESSEC (Centre of Public Employment Services of Southeast European Countries), Statistical Bulletin, No 1, July, 2008.

CPESSEC (Centre of Public Employment Services of Southeast European Countries), Statistical Bulletin, No 2, July, 2009.

Dayioglu, M. and Ercan, H., Labour market policies and institutions with a focus on inclusion, equal opportunities and the

informal economy: Turkey, Informal background document for the ILO, February, 2010.

Deniz, D., Top development aid agencies in Turkey: A primer, [online], 5 April, 2011. Last accessed 16 February 2012 at:

www.devex.com/en/news/top-development-aid-agencies-in-turkey-a-primer/73930

Duman, A., Anticipation and management of restructuring in Turkey, Contribution to the ‘Comparative overview analysis
of the ways in which the restructuring phenomenon is dealt with worldwide’, Paper for DG Employment, October,
2011.

EARGED (Chamber of Education Research and Development), PISA 2009 project national working paper, Ankara, 2010.

Ecevit, Y., A critical approach to women’s entrepreneurship in Turkey, ILO Office for Turkey, Ankara, 2007.

EDUSER Educational Consultancy, European inventory on validation of informal and non-formal learning: Turkey, 2007.

Last accessed February 2013 at:
www2.cedefop.europa.eu/etv/Information_resources/EuropeanInventory/publications/inventory/chapters/2007/turkey.pdf

Emini, F. and Görün, M., ‘Regional development agencies as local actors of development policies and the case of

Turkey’, European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 18(1), 2010, pp. 120-129.

Ercan, H., Youth employment in Turkey, ILO Office for Turkey, Ankara, 2007.

136

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

Ercan, H., Improving the capacity to anticipate EU-wide labour market and skills requirements: Turkey, Contribution to

the European Employment Observatory Review: Autumn 2008, 2008.

Ercan, H., Crisis and self-employment in Turkey, Contribution to the European Employment Observatory Review:

Self-employment, July 2010, 2010a.

Ercan, H., Youth employment measures in Turkey, Contribution to the European Employment Observatory Review:

Youth Employment Measures, October 2010, 2010b.

Ercan, H., ‘Turkey labour market analysis’, Background paper prepared for the European Training Foundation’s study

Labour market review from the flexicurity perspective: Turkey, 2010c.

Ercan, H., Adapting unemployment benefit systems to the economic cycle: Turkey, Contribution to the European

Employment Observatory Review, July, 2011.

Ercan, H., Taymaz, E. and Yeldan, E., Crisis and Turkey: Impact analysis of crisis response measures, ILO Office for

Turkey, Ankara, 2010.

ERI (Education Reform Initiative), E(cid:7)itimde E(cid:8)itlik: Politika Analizi ve Öneriler [Equity in education: Policy analysis and

recommendations], ERI, Istanbul, 2009.

ERI (Education Reform Initiative), Education monitoring report 2009, ERI, Istanbul, 2010.

ERI (Education Reform Initiative), Vocational education in Turkey: An overview, ERI, Istanbul, 2011a.

ERI (Education Reform Initiative), Türkiye’de Kayna(cid:8)t(cid:9)rma/Bütünle(cid:8)tirme Yoluyla E(cid:7)itimin Durumu [Turkey

inclusion/integration through the education status], ERI, Istanbul, 2011b.

ERI (Education Reform Initiative), Education monitoring report 2010, ERI, Istanbul, 2011c.

Erol, Y. and Alp, S., Türkiye’deki Meslek Yüksekokullar(cid:9)n(cid:9)n Meslek Lisesi Kaynakl(cid:9) Problemleri [Turkish vocational

schools: Problems in higher vocational education], Ankara University IVETA regional conference, Ankara, 2003.

Ertugal, E. and Dobre, A., ‘Dynamics of regionalisation and the impact of the EU: Comparing regional reforms in

Romania and Turkey’, Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 63(7), 2011, pp. 1195-1222.

Erzan, R. and Kiri(cid:17)çi, K., Turkish immigrants: Their integration within the EU and migration to Turkey, Bo(cid:16)aziçi University,

Istanbul, 2004.

Esen, Ç., It is time to devise a new policy for Turkey’s industrial zones, [online], Tepav (Economic Policy Research

Foundation of Turkey), 22 August, 2011. Last accessed 23 September 2011 at:
www.tepav.org.tr/en/kose-yazisi-tepav/s/2660

ESI (European Stability Initiative), Islamic Calvinists: Change and conservatism in Central Anatolia, ESI, Berlin, 2005.

ETF (European Training Foundation), Education and business study: Turkey, ETF, Turin, 2010.

ETUC (European Trade Union Confederation), Turkish trade unions and industrial relations, ETUC, Brussels, April, 2010.

Eurofound (European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions), Fourth European Working

Conditions Survey, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 2007. Last accessed
4 October 2011 at: www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2006/98/en/2/ef0698en.pdf

European Commission, Statistical portrait of the European Union 2007, Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities, Luxembourg, 2006.

European Commission, Progress towards the Lisbon objectives in education and training: Indicators and benchmarks

2009, Commission staff working document, Brussels, 2009. Last accessed February 2013 at:
http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/doc/report09/report_en.pdf

European Commission, Turkey 2010 progress report, SEC(2010) 1327, Commission staff working document, Brussels,

2010a.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 137

European Commission, ‘Conclusions on Turkey’, Extract from Enlargement strategy and main challenges 2010-2011,

COM(2010) 660, Brussels, 2010b.

European Commission, Employment in Europe 2010, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2010c.

Last accessed February 2013 at: http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/eie/index_en.html

European Commission, Turkey 2011 progress report, SEC(2011) 1201 final, Commission staff working document,

Brussels, 2011a.

European Commission, Progress towards the common European objectives in education and training: Indicators and

benchmarks 2010/2011, Commission staff working document, Brussels, 2011b.

European Commission, ‘Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance – Multi-annual indicative planning document

2011-2013: Turkey’, Annex to Commission implementing decision of 28 June 2011 adopting a multi-annual indicative
planning document 2011-2013 for Turkey, C(2011) 4490 final, Brussels, 2011c.

European Commission, 2011 Pre-accession economic programmes of candidate countries: EU Commission

assessments, Occasional Papers 80, Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, Brussels, July, 2011d.

European Commission and Council of the European Union, Joint report on social inclusion, Brussels, 2004.

Eurostat, Pocketbook on candidate and potential candidate countries, Publications Office of the European Union,

Luxembourg, 2010.

Eurydice, Organisation of the education system in Turkey 2009/2010, EACEA, Brussels, 2010.

Ferrera, M., ‘The “southern model” of welfare in social Europe’, Journal of European Social Policy, Vol. 6(1), 1996,

pp. 17-37.

Fundación Secretariado Gitano, Understanding employment and decent work challenges in Turkey: The situation of

Roma in Turkey, FSG, Madrid, 2010.

Gonand, F., Joumard, I. and Price, R., ‘Public spending efficiency: Institutional indicators in primary and secondary

education’, OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No 543, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2007. Last accessed
February 2013 at: www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/public-spending-efficiency_315010655867

Gönenç, R. and Rawdanowicz, L., ‘Regulatory reforms to unlock long-term growth in Turkey’, OECD Economics

Department Working Papers, No 821, OECD Publishing, 2010.

Government of Turkey, Hükümet Programi [government programme (2023 target)]. Last accessed February 2013 at:

www.basbakanlik.gov.tr/Forms/pgGovProgramme.aspx

Grütjen, D., ‘The Turkish welfare regime: An example of the Southern European model? The role of the state, market

and family in welfare provision’, Turkish Policy Quarterly, Vol. 7(1), 2008, pp. 111-129.

GTZ, ‘Ex ante evaluation of the Human Resources Development Operational Programme’, Ankara, September, 2007.

Hausmann, R., Tyson, L. and Zahidi, S., The global gender gap report 2010, World Economic Forum, Geneva, 2010.

IBF International Consulting, ‘Interim evaluation of the HRD Operational Programme Turkey’, November, 2011.

ILO (International Labour Office), Youth employment, ILO Office for Turkey, Ankara, 2011a. Last accessed

23 September 2011 at: www.ilo.org/public/english/region/eurpro/ankara/areas/youth.htm

International Crisis Group, Turkey: Ending the PKK insurgency, Europe Report No 213, ICG, Brussels-New York, 2011.

IOM (International Organisation for Migration) Turkey, Program areas, [online]. Last accessed 16 February 2012 at:

www.turkey.iom.int/projects.htm

(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6), ‘The role of public employment services in overcoming the economic crisis’, Paper for the European Labour

Forum at the ITC ILO, 23-25 February 2011, (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6), Ankara, 2010.

(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6), Dünden Bugüne: 1946-2011 [From past to present], (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6), Ankara, 2011a.

138

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6), 2011-2015 Institutional strategic plan (in Turkish only), (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6), Ankara, 2011b.

Kaya, N., Forgotten or assimilated? Minorities in the education system of Turkey, Minority Rights Group International,

London, 2009.

Kay(cid:18)r, Ö., Karaca, S. and (cid:3)enyüz, Y., Meslek Liseleri Ara(cid:8)t(cid:9)rmas(cid:9)nda Ortaya Cican Temel Baz(cid:9) Bulgular [Results of survey

on basic vocational schools], Ankara, 2004.

Majcher-Teleon, A. and Bardak, U., European Training Foundation, Flexicurity analysis of the labour market in Turkey,

Working paper, ETF, Turin, 2011.

Marsh, A., ‘Ethnicity and identity: Who are the Gypsies?’, We are here! Discriminatory exclusion and struggle for rights

of Roma in Turkey, Istanbul, 2008.

McKinsey Global Institute, Turkey: Making the productivity and growth breakthrough, MGI, Washington, DC, 2003. Last

accessed 23 September 2011 at: www.mckinsey.com/mgi/publications/turkey/index.asp

MEBGEP (Ministry of National Education Capacity Building project), Green Paper on new governance model: Education

administration reform in Turkey, IPA 2006-2010, 2010.

Mikhail, S., The new tertiary education institutions in Turkey: Options for reform of the Meslek Yuksek Okulus (MYOs)

[post-secondary vocational schools], Ankara, 2006.

Ministry of Industry and Trade, Regional Competitiveness Operational Programme 2007-2009, Ankara, September, 2007.

Ministry of Labour and Social Security, Human Resources Development Operational Programme 2007-2009, CCI

No 2007TR051PO001, Ankara, 2007.

Minority Rights Group International, State of the world’s minorities and indigenous peoples 2011, MRG, London, 2011.

MoNE (Ministry of National Education), Lifelong learning strategy paper, MoNE, Ankara, 2009.

MoNE (Ministry of National Education), National education statistics: Formal education 2009-2010, Official Statistics

Programme, MoNE, Ankara, 2010.

MoNE (Ministry of National Education), Turkish educational system 2010, Directorate General for Foreign Relations,

Ankara, 2010.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development), Employment protection in 2008 in OECD and

selected non-OECD countries, [online]. Last accessed 23 September 2011 at:
www.oecd.org/document/11/0,3746,en_2649_37457_42695243_1_1_1_37457,00.html

OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development), Small and medium-sized enterprises in Turkey:

Issues and policies, OECD, Paris, 2004.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development), OECD economic surveys 2006: Turkey, OECD, Paris,

December, 2006.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development), OECD economic surveys 2010: Turkey, OECD, Paris,

September, 2010a.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development), Education at a glance 2010: OECD indicators, OECD,

Paris, 2010b.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development), PISA 2009 results – Learning trends: Changes in

student performance since 2000, Vol. V, OECD, Paris, 2010c.

Owen, R. and Pamuk, (cid:3)., A history of Middle East economies in the twentieth century, I.B. Tauris, London, 1998.

Özaslan, M., Dinçer, B. and Özgür, H., Regional disparities and territorial indicators in Turkey: Socio-economic

Development Index (SEDI), ERSA conference papers ersa06p858, European Regional Science Association,
Louvain-la-Neuve, 2004.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 139

Özaslan, M., Dinçer, B. and Özgür, H., ‘Regional disparities and territorial indicators in Turkey: Socio-economic

Development Index (SEDI)’, Proceedings of the 46th Congress of the European Regional Science Association
(ERSA), 30 August-3 September, University of Thessaly, Greece, 2006.

Pamuk, (cid:3)., ‘Economic change in twentieth-century Turkey: Is the glass more than half full?’, The Cambridge history of
Turkey – Volume 4: Turkey and the modern world, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008, pp. 266-300.

Pehlivan, Ö., Challenges, progress and plans for effective donor coordination in Turkey, Undersecretariat of Treasury,
General Directorate of Foreign Economic Relations, Presentation made on 2 April, 2009. Last accessed February
2013 at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/projects-in-focus/donor-coordination/2-3_april_2009/turkey_en.pdf

Polat, S., Türkiye’de E(cid:7)itim Politikalar(cid:9)n(cid:9)n F(cid:9)rsat E(cid:8)itsizli(cid:7)i Üzerindeki Etkileri [Effects of inequality of educational

opportunity on policies in Turkey], Thesis, State Planning Organisation, Ankara, 2009.

Republic of Turkey, National programme for Turkey under the IPA Transition Assistance and Institution Building

Component for 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011, Ankara.

Republic of Turkey, Prime Ministry General Directorate on the Status of Women, National Action Plan for Gender

Equality 2008-2013, Ankara, 2008.

Republic of Turkey and European Commission, ‘Joint Inclusion Memorandum of the Republic of Turkey’, Draft version,

2006.

Seker, M. and Guilherme Correa, P., Obstacles to growth for small and medium enterprises in Turkey, World Bank

Policy Research Working paper No 5323, World Bank, Washington, DC, May, 2010.

Sural, N., ‘Economic implications of employment protection legislation in Turkey: Has Turkey found its juste milieu?’,

Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, Vol. 30(2), Winter, 2009, pp. 335-372.

SVET (Strengthening the vocational education and training system in Turkey), Reforms of the vocational and technical

education: Green Paper, EuropeAid/112707/C/SV/TR, Ankara, 2005.

Taneri, P. and Engin-Demir, C., ‘Quality of education in rural schools: A needs assessment study (Ankara-Kalecik

sample)’, International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, Vol. 3(1), 2011, pp. 91-112. Last accessed February
2013 at: www.iojes.net/userfiles/Article/IOJES_356.pdf

Taymaz, E., Informality and productivity: Productivity differentials between formal and informal firms in Turkey, ERC
Working Papers 0901, Economic Research Center, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, March, 2009.

Taymaz, E., Growth, employment, skills and female labor force, Paper prepared for the State Planning Organisation and

the World Bank, Ankara, March, 2010.

TOBB (Turkish Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges), ‘We must provide employment for 750,000 every year’,

[online], Statement by TOBB president M. Rifat Hisarc(cid:18)kl(cid:18)o(cid:16)lu, 2011. Last accessed 15 June 2011 at:
www.tobb.org.tr/Sayfalar/Eng/Detay.aspx?rid=595&lst=MansetListesi

Toksöz, G., Antalya province labour market analysis, ILO Office for Turkey, Ankara, April, 2011.

Tunali, I., General versus vocational secondary school choice and labour market outcomes in Turkey: 1988-1998, Paper

presented at the 10th annual ERF conference, 15 October, 2003.

Turkish Prime Ministry and State Planning Organisation, Ninth Development Plan 2007-2013, Decision of the Turkish

Grand National Assembly, No 877, Ankara, 2006.

Turkish Prime Ministry and State Planning Organisation, Medium-term Programme 2011-2013: Main macroeconomic

and fiscal targets, Ankara, October, 2010.

TurkStat (Turkish Statistical Institute), National education statistics: Formal education 2009-2010, TurkStat, Ankara,

2010a.

TurkStat (Turkish Statistical Institute), National population projections 2010, TurkStat, Ankara, 2010b. Last accessed

February 2013 at: www.turkstat.gov.tr/VeriBilgi.do?tb_id=39&ust_id=11

140

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

TurkStat (Turkish Statistical Institute), Income and living conditions survey 2010, TurkStat, Ankara, 2010c. Last accessed

February 2013 at: www.turkstat.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=8661

TurkStat (Turkish Statistical Institute), Results of the 2009 poverty study, Press release, No 3, 6 January, TurkStat,

Ankara, 2011a.

TurkStat (Turkish Statistical Institute), Labour force household survey 2010, TurkStat, Ankara, 2011b.

TurkStat (Turkish Statistical Institute), Labour force survey June 2011, Press release, No 192, 15 September, TurkStat,

Ankara, 2011c.

TurkStat (Turkish Statistical Institute), Annual industry and service statistics 2009, Press release, No 204, 5 October,

TurkStat, Ankara, 2011d.

TurkStat (Turkish Statistical Institute), National education statistics: Formal education 2011-2012, TurkStat, Ankara, 2012.

UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), Turkey 2008 human development report: Youth in Turkey, UNDP,

Ankara, 2008.

UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), Human development report 2009 – Overcoming barriers: Human

mobility and development, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2009.

UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), Human development report 2010 – The real wealth of nations:

Pathways to human development, Palgrave Macmillan, New York. 2010a.

UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), Outcome evaluation: Poverty reduction programme in Turkey, UNDP,

Ankara, 2010b.

UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation), Early childhood care and education regional

report: Europe and North America, Draft, 27 August, UNESCO, Paris, 2010.

Unicef (United Nations Children’s Fund), Unicef Turkey, [online]. Last accessed February 2013 at:

www.unicef.org.tr/en/content/detail/18/expected-results-for-2011.html

WEF (World Economic Forum), The global competitiveness report 2009-2010, WEF, Geneva, 2009.

WEF (World Economic Forum), The global competitiveness report 2010-2011, WEF, Geneva, 2010a.

WEF (World Economic Forum), The global gender gap report 2010, WEF, Geneva, 2010b.

WEF (World Economic Forum), The global competitiveness report 2011-2012, WEF, Geneva, 2011.

Wolleb, G. and Daraio, A., Regional challenges in the perspective of 2020: Regional disparities and future challenges,

Ismeri Europa and WIIW, Rome, 2009.

World Bank, Turkey: Education sector study, Report No 32450-TU, World Bank, Washington, DC, December, 2005.

World Bank, Turkey country Economic Memorandum sustaining high growth: Selected issues, Report No 39194, World

Bank, Washington, DC, 2008a.

World Bank, Investing in Turkey’s next generation: The school-to-work transition and Turkey’s development, Report

No 44048-TU, World Bank, Washington, DC, 2008b.

World Bank, Estimating the impact of labor taxes on employment and the balances of the social insurance funds in

Turkey, Report No 44056-TR, World Bank, Washington, DC, 2009a.

World Bank, Female labor force participation in Turkey: Trends, determinants and policy framework, Report

No 48508-TR, World Bank, Washington, DC, 2009b.

World Bank, Knowledge Economy Index, [online], 2009c. Last accessed 11 October 2011 at:

http://info.worldbank.org/etools/kam2/kam_page5.asp

World Bank, Turkey – Expanding opportunities for the next generation:A report on life chances, World Bank,

Washington, DC, 2010a.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 141

World Bank, Informality: Causes, consequences, policies – Turkey country Economic Memorandum, Report No 48523-TR,

World Bank, Washington, DC, 2010b.

World Bank, World development indicators 2011, World Bank, Washington, DC, 2011a. Last accessed February 2013 at:

http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators/wdi-2011

World Bank, World Bank – Turkey partnership: Country program snapshot, 2011b.

World Bank, Turkey: Projects & programs, [online]. Last accessed February 2013 at:

www.worldbank.org/en/country/turkey

Yeldan, E. and Ercan, H.,Growth, employment policies and economic linkages: Turkey , Employment working paper

No 84, International Labour Office, Geneva, 2011.

Yilmaz, H., Beceriler, Yeterlilikler ve Meslek E(cid:7)itimi: Finansman Yap(cid:9)s(cid:9) ve Politika Önerileri [Skills, competences and

vocational training: Financing structure and policy recommendations], Türkonfed and ERI, Istanbul, 2007.

YÖK (Higher Education Council), Meslek Yüksekokullar(cid:9): Mevcut Durum ve Öngörüler [Vocational schools: Current

status and predictions], YÖK, Ankara, 2006.

Young-Hyman, T., ‘The potential for effective regional development agencies in Turkey: A comparative analysis’,

Regional & Federal Studies, Vol. 18(4), 2008, pp. 375-402.

Yükseker, D., ‘Neoliberal restructuring and social exclusion in Turkey’, Turkey and the global economy: Neo-liberal

restructuring and integration in the post-crisis era, Routledge, London, 2009, pp. 262-280.

EUROPEAN TRAINING FOUNDATION

TURKEY – REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the
European Union

2013 – 144 pp. – 21.0 x 29.7 cm

ISBN: 978-92-9157-608-1
doi:10.2816/1839

HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS

Our priced publications are available from EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu), where you 
can place an order with the sales agent of your choice.

The Publications Office has a worldwide network of sales agents. You can obtain their contact 
details by sending a fax to (352) 29 29-42758.

Europe Direct is a service to help you
find answers to your questions
about the European Union

Freephone number (*):
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow
access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.

More information on the European Union
is available on the Internet
(http://europa.eu).

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of 
this publication.

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the 
European Union, 2013.

ISBN: 978-92-9157-608-1 
doi:10.2816/1839

© European Training Foundation, 2013.

Reproduction is authorised provided the source
is acknowledged.

Printed in Italy

© Cover photos: ETF/A. Jongsma

CONTACT US

Further information can be
found on the ETF website:
www.etf.europa.eu

For any additional information
please contact:

European Training Foundation
Communication Department
Villa Gualino
Viale Settimio Severo 65
I – 10133 Torino

E info@etf.europa.eu
F +39 011 630 2200
T +39 011 630 2222

TURKEY
REVIEW OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

-

C
N
E
-
7
5
8
3
1
1
3
A
T

-

-

-