The ‘Three Nos’ Crisis in Việt Nam: Why the Youth are Rejecting the Workforce

The phenomenon of millions of young people who are “not in school, not employed, and not in vocational training” is often described as a generational crisis. But labeling youth as “three no’s” oversimplifies a complex reality. 

Their withdrawal from education and work is not necessarily a lack of willpower, but rather a sign of a growing disconnect between individual effort and the rewards the current economy can offer.

The reality of the “three no’s” and the pressures on youth

“Three no’s”—meaning no employment, no education, and no vocational training—have emerged as a striking label to describe the situation of young people in Việt Nam.

In the fourth quarter of 2025 alone, approximately 1.4 million young people aged 15–24 fell into this category, accounting for about 10% of the youth population. 

The rate was higher in rural areas than in urban ones (11.7% vs. 8%) and higher among women than men (12% compared to 8.3%). 

During the same period, the youth unemployment rate for those aged 15–24 stood at 9%, significantly above the overall average, with urban areas exceeding 11%. [1]

The term “three no’s” originates from the English acronym NEET (Not in Employment, Education, or Training). [2]

NEET itself is a problematic concept, as it fails to fully capture reality by grouping together a wide range of “unemployment” situations driven by very different reasons. 

This includes those actively seeking work; those who have become discouraged and stopped looking; those staying at home to perform unpaid care work; individuals taking a break due to mental health concerns; and those engaged in informal or temporary work that goes unrecognized or is not considered “proper” employment, among others.

For this reason, the “three no’s” should be understood more comprehensively: they are not only an economic indicator of wasted human potential but also a social signal that a segment of young people is withdrawing from traditional forms of work.

Hence, the “three nos” must also be viewed as a social indicator of young people withdrawing from traditional work and participation.

In Việt Nam, a paradox highlights this withdrawal: despite the labor market’s broad “stability,” young people face challenges in securing decent employment. 

For instance, an article by the International Labour Organization (ILO) recounts the story of a Vietnamese female graduate with excellent academic results who cycled through multiple short-term, low-paying jobs without insurance, eventually requiring psychological support. [3] 

The ILO further notes that many young workers face informal employment arrangements characterized by low wages, excessive overtime, a lack of social insurance, and dismal career prospects. [4]

For this “stuck” generation, the “three nos” do not represent a personal failure. Instead, they expose deep-rooted challenges tied to the labor market, educational systems, societal expectations, and rapid economic shifts.

The Causes

Society and the media frequently reduce the causes of the “three nos” to a single explanation: laziness. Although it has some merit, this perspective is incomplete. A more profound analysis reveals at least four distinct layers of systemic issues driving this phenomenon.

The first layer involves a severe mismatch between academic degrees and actual skills. With the rapid expansion of higher education, a degree is no longer an automatic “passport” to a career. 

Academic programs heavily emphasize theoretical knowledge, whereas employers demand practical competencies like digital literacy, foreign languages, communication, and project-based experience. 

Because education fails to keep pace with labor market shifts, many graduates remain unprepared for employment. [5] As a result, employers do not fully trust the capability implied by a degree, and students lack the necessary internship opportunities to build real-world competence.

Job quality represents the second layer. Issues such as low wages, instability, lack of insurance, and weak career pathways mean that “starting work immediately” is no longer inherently better than “pausing.” 

Young workers regularly endure poor incomes, excessive hours, inadequate social protection, and dismal prospects—factors that “affect the development capacity and career opportunities of the future generation.” [6] 

When early employment consists merely of prolonged probation or short-term gig work offering no valuable skill accumulation, “temporary withdrawal” becomes a rational decision to avoid falling into a cycle of unsuitable labor.

The third layer highlights unequal opportunities based on geography and gender. As previously noted, the “three nos” rate is higher in rural regions than in urban centers, and it impacts women more than men. 

The rural–urban divide stems from unequal access to job information, career guidance, and professional networks. Meanwhile, gender disparities are tied to unpaid domestic care, societal expectations that “girls should work close to home,” and barriers involving safety and travel expenses. 

As these challenges compound, the “three nos” can turn into a prolonged state with few avenues for escape.

Finally, the fourth layer is characterized by psychological burnout and a crisis of expectations. [7] Entire generations were raised on the promise that studying hard guarantees a good job. 

When this promise fails, young people experience more than just unemployment; they suffer a profound loss of meaning, a reduced sense of belonging, and deep uncertainty regarding their place and contributions in society.

The Consequences 

Perhaps the most concerning outcome of this phenomenon is the “scarring effect.” This concept refers to the long-term damage incurred when young people leave education but fail to enter the labor market early in life. 

These individuals risk skill deterioration, declining confidence, and reduced employment opportunities for years, even if economic conditions later improve. [8]

For the economy, this trend represents a massive waste of the “golden population” window and significantly increases the risk of social stratification. Individuals with established networks, family resources, and foreign language skills can quickly re-enter the race, whereas those without such advantages are far more likely to be left behind. [9]

For society, a prolonged “three nos” phenomenon threatens to erode trust in equal opportunity, increase skepticism toward institutions, and thin out the future middle class. Simultaneously, it exposes glaring weaknesses in the employment structure, the limited appeal of vocational training systems, and the broken transition from school to the labor market. 

Highlighting this disconnect, an article in Kinh tế Sài Gòn Online points out that businesses are increasingly concerned about the lack of practical skills among young workers. Because career guidance remains largely formalistic and families maintain a strong preference for academic degrees, vocational training, and technical careers remain severely undervalued, sometimes even viewed as “second-tier” options. [10]

As living costs rise, competition intensifies, and the resulting rewards fail to match the required effort, young people may simply seek to exit the game rather than struggle to enter it. In that sense, the “three nos” functions as a form of quiet non-compliance. 

It is a way for young people to express their profound dissatisfaction with the limitations of current social structures by deliberately withdrawing from norms considered “correct,” doing so entirely without protests or slogans.

***

Understanding the “three nos” as a social message rather than a personal failure allows society to withhold judgment and focus instead on designing policies that actively support young people.

With 1.4 million youth standing outside of education and employment, this issue demands the immediate attention of society and the state as a whole. 

As Việt Nam enters a new era of “rising,” the Party and the state must seriously reflect and seek actionable solutions to this phenomenon. It is no longer sufficient to merely present this crisis through statistics or to place blame on young people using unfair labels such as lazy, passive, or lacking initiative.

---

Thái Bảo wrote this article in Vietnamese and published it in Luật Khoa Magazine on Jan. 17, 2026. Đàm Vĩnh Hằng translated it into English for The Vietnamese Magazine.