Trends in Adult Learning

4. What can be done?

Abstract

Despite widespread recognition that continuous skills development is essential for productivity, innovation and individual well-being, participation in adult learning is declining in many places and remains highly unequal overall. This chapter examines the evolving policy landscape in adult learning and highlights what approaches policymakers can take to improve adult learning systems.

Rethinking adult learning systems

• Despite a strong consensus on the importance of lifelong learning, adult learning participating is stagnating or declining in many OECD countries and remains highly unequal. Time and cost constraints, coupled with limited public investment in lifelong learning, disproportionately exclude disadvantaged adults from upskilling opportunities.

• Incremental reforms will not be enough. Increasing participation requires a fundamental rethink of delivery models and incentive structures, supported by coherent policy packages that integrate financial support, flexible learning pathways and active employer engagement.

• Public financial incentives – such as training leave, individual learning accounts and targeted subsidies to employers – can reduce barriers to participation, particularly for those on low incomes or in non-standard work. These instruments need to be designed to address structural inequalities and incentivise the development of in-demand skills.

• Training leave policies are receiving renewed attention across the OECD area, but their uptake and impact remain uneven. Making leave accessible and attractive to under-represented groups requires sufficient income replacement, employer buy-in and strong public messaging. Governments also face the challenge of aligning participation with labour market needs in a fiscally sustainable way.

• Flexible learning provision – through modular training, micro-credentials and recognition of prior learning (RPL) – can support adults to upgrade their skills in a stepwise manner. However, ensuring the quality, relevance and recognition of these new formats is critical to their effectiveness. This requires agile quality assurance mechanisms, employer engagement and clear learning pathways.

• Participation gaps persist, especially for older workers, migrants and adults with low skills. These reflect deep structural barriers that cannot be addressed by outreach to these groups alone. Reforming adult learning systems to make them more inclusive means simplifying access, tailoring formats to learners’ needs, and embedding equity as a design principle.

• Current adult learning systems are too often reactive: dominated by short, compliance‑based courses, rather than aligning skills development with future labour market needs. To address this, countries need to improve labour market intelligence, establish mechanisms through which this intelligence feeds into adult learning provision and support firms in workforce planning.

• Ultimately, successful adult learning systems are those that are responsive, inclusive and forward looking. They are not built on isolated initiatives, but on a coherent set of mutually reinforcing policies that support individuals throughout their working lives.

Introduction

This report highlights the paradox at the heart of adult learning policy. Despite widespread recognition that continuous skills development is essential for productivity, innovation and individual well-being,1 participation in adult learning is declining in many places and remains highly unequal overall. Structural barriers – most often relating to cost and time constraints – continue to prevent those most in need of learning from accessing it (see Chapter 3). Public investment remains skewed towards initial education and training, while adult learning systems struggle to keep pace with rapid changes in skill requirements.

On the positive side, this report shows that in many places, participation gaps between disadvantaged and more advantaged individuals are closing. Yet, highly qualified workers continue to be much more likely to participate in training than less qualified workers. Older workers, migrants and those in precarious jobs remain under-represented. Many adults with the weakest foundations for learning are overlooked by policies that increasingly assume individual initiative and self-directed engagement in training. This suggests that the main challenge is not simply to increase training provision, but to redesign incentives and delivery models to ensure that participation is more evenly distributed.

In addition, the changing nature of work raises a fundamental question: Are adult learning systems focused on the right kinds of skills? The data suggest that much of what constitutes non-formal learning is related to health and safety compliance, rather than job-specific or transversal skills that enable workers to adapt to new jobs and industries. In a world of accelerating automation, demographic change and green and digital transitions, policies need to shift from a reactive model – training people for existing jobs – to a proactive one, preparing workers for the future. This requires greater alignment between education, labour market policy and industrial strategy – a shift that few countries have fully achieved. It also requires rethinking the distribution of responsibilities of individuals, employers and policymakers in adapting to these changes.

International experience shows that successful adult learning policies do not rely on a single intervention, but on a coherent set of mutually reinforcing reforms (OECD, 2020[1]). To engage the half of adults who currently see no need to participate in learning (see Chapter 3), more is required than isolated incentives. It demands a comprehensive, well-communicated package of support to lower practical barriers, build confidence and demonstrate clear personal and professional value. Financial incentives alone are insufficient without time flexibility; modular courses have little impact without strong recognition of prior learning; and micro-credentials risk fragmentation if they are not stackable, portable and widely recognised (OECD, 2023[2]; OECD, 2021[3]). Countries that have made the most progress in adult learning participation over the past decade – such as Ireland and Estonia – have done so through long-term, institutionally embedded reforms that combine financial incentives, training leave, employer engagement and quality assurance.

The need for reform is urgent. If there is one overarching lesson from this report, it is that small, incremental changes will not be enough. To truly enable lifelong learning, countries need to rethink the very structures and incentives that govern adult learning today.

Expanding access through training leave policies

Lack of time is the most significant barrier to individuals taking up adult learning opportunities, be this for work or family related reasons, according to the 2023 Survey of Adult Skills (see Chapter 3). In response, several OECD countries have introduced or further developed training leave policies that enable workers to balance learning, employment and family commitments.

The economic case

Paid training leave is a strategic investment in human capital, enabling individuals to acquire new skills and upgrade their qualifications without the financial burden of lost earnings. Such policies address market inefficiencies that can lead to underinvestment in worker training. Employers may be reluctant to allow individuals to take paid time off for learning, due to concerns about staff turnover (OECD, 2021[4]). By implementing public policies that provide paid training leave – through individual wage replacement or employer subsidies – governments and social partners can encourage greater investment in skill development while reducing employers’ concerns about shouldering the entire financial burden.

Beyond the direct benefits to workers and employers, paid training leave has significant societal benefits. A skilled workforce not only boosts productivity within individual firms, but also drives broader economic growth and innovation. Depending on the duration of training leave, it can enable individuals to engage in more substantial retraining required in a context of structural change.

An evolving policy landscape

Over the past 10 years, training leave policies have adapted to the changing needs of economies and labour markets. Many governments are now seeking to ensure fiscal responsibility and to address the fact that, like many adult learning incentives, training leave is more likely to be taken up by those who are more likely to participate in training in the first place. At the same time, there is growing interest in directing participation towards the development of skills that are in demand in high-growth sectors and occupations.

Training leave policies vary widely between countries, reflecting different strategies to meet the needs of workers, employers and governments. Key differences include:

• Paid versus unpaid leave: Paid leave provides financial compensation during the leave period, often through direct payments to individuals through the social security system or subsidies to employers. Unpaid leave provides time off without financial compensation, which may be less accessible to lower-income workers. In some countries, while the leave itself may be unpaid, financial support options exist to support learners.

• Full-time versus part-time training leave: Full-time leave involves an extended, uninterrupted period away from work for training. Part-time leave allows workers to reduce their working hours to accommodate training activities.

• Statutory entitlements versus negotiated agreements: Statutory entitlements are rights to training leave enshrined in national legislation. Negotiated agreements involve the terms of training leave being determined through negotiations between employers and employees, often facilitated by collective bargaining, allowing flexibility but potentially leading to unequal access across companies and sectors.

Austria, for example, has long been the poster child for generous paid leave entitlements for employees, but is in the process of making access more targeted. Its Educational Leave (Bildungskarenz) was introduced in 1998 to allow workers to take time off for education and training, with financial support from the state. Employees could take between 2 and 12 months of full-time leave or opt for part-time leave for up to two years, which was introduced in 2013. During this period, they received a training allowance from the Public Employment Service (AMS) equivalent to their unemployment benefit (usually 55% of previous net income, with a minimum of EUR 14.56 per day). The programme had grown in popularity over the years, reaching just under 20 000 participants in 2021 (Bittschi et al., 2023[5]). While the Educational Leave had helped many to upgrade or retrain, a recent evaluation has highlighted that the measure tended to benefit those who are already well integrated in the labour market. It also showed that the employment and wage effects of participation were limited (Bittschi et al., 2023[5]). To address these challenges, the Educational Leave has been abolished in its current form. A new model Training Time (Weiterbildungszeit), which is specifically targeted at low-skilled adults is under discussion (ORF, 2025[6]).

The Finnish adult education system has traditionally supported individuals wishing to improve their skills through a combination of leave policies and financial support. Under this framework, workers were entitled to up to two years of unpaid study leave over a five‑year period, allowing them to pursue further education while maintaining their employment. To mitigate the loss of income during this period, many workers made use of the Adult Education Allowance (aikuiskoulutustuki), a financial support mechanism administered by the Employment Fund. This allowance was available to workers with at least 8 years’ experience and covered between 55 and 70% of their previous salary, subject to income ceilings. In May 2024, the Finnish Government passed a law to abolish the adult education allowance effective from 1 August, 2024 (Finnish Employment Fund, 2024[7]). Following the reform, adults seeking financial support for education will mainly rely on Finland’s general student financial support system, which consists of a student grant and state‑backed student loans. This system has inherent limitations: financial support is only available for a specific number of months over the life‑course and individuals who have previously attained a higher education qualification may be ineligible for additional support. The reform could change patterns of participation in adult learning, as it may reduce incentives for mid-career professionals to take longer study leaves, especially for those in higher income brackets who previously benefited from more generous income replacement.

Sweden introduced a paid leave policy in 2022. The Student Finance for Transition and Retraining, aims to increase the adaptability of the workforce by enabling adults to undertake training that strengthens their labour market position (Swedish Board of Student Finance, 2022[8]). The programme provides a grant of up to 80% of an individual’s salary for up to 44 weeks of full-time study, with the option to apply for a supplementary loan. To qualify, applicants must be between 27 and 62 years of age, have at least 8 years of work experience and have been employed for at least 12 of the last 24 months. Funding can also be received for part-time study. The training chosen must improve the individual’s employability based on labour market needs. Eligibility criteria are designed to support those most likely to benefit from retraining, although recent evidence suggests that the programme might not reach those most affected by structural change (Fredriksson and Seim, 2024[9]).

In France, although the statutory entitlement for training leave (Congé individuel de formation) was abolished in 2018, individuals have the right to take leave for the purpose of changing occupations, called a career transition project (projet de transition professionnelle, PTP), with the approval of a public body (Transition Pro). The aim of this instrument is to support longer training leave leading to a certification or qualification. Transition Pro assesses whether the planned training corresponds to courses eligible under the Individual Learning Account (CPF). To be eligible, individuals must have been employed for at least 2 years, including 1 year with the same company. The employer cannot deny the application but can postpone the leave for a maximum of 9 months, provided this is justified by the negative impact of the employee’s absence on the company’s operations. The duration of the leave depends on the type of training that the individual plans to undertake. During the leave, employees who earned less than twice the minimum wage are paid 100% of the average salary they received in the 12 months preceding the training. Those who earned more than twice the minimum wage in that time period are paid 90% of their salary in the first year of training and 60% of their salary in the subsequent years. The salary costs are covered by Transitions Pro (Service-Public.fr, 2025[10]).

Key considerations

When designing training leave policies, it is essential to consider the perspectives of all relevant stakeholders to ensure their success. From the worker’s perspective, paid training leave is a powerful tool to reduce the financial burden associated with training or retraining, making adult learning more accessible. However, replacement rates need to be sufficient to secure the livelihoods of low-income workers who may not have the financial flexibility to compensate for the reduced pay.

For employers, training leave presents both opportunities and challenges. On the one hand, facilitating employee development can lead to a more skilled and adaptable workforce, which is beneficial for long-term organisational growth. On the other hand, employers need to address the logistical difficulties of managing leave, such as temporary staff shortages and the administrative complexity of co‑ordinating leave arrangements. These challenges can create resistance to the adoption of educational leave policies, particularly in small enterprises and sectors where maintaining a continuous workforce is critical to operations (OECD, 2021[4]).

For governments, paid leave programmes require significant financial investment so careful oversight is crucial. They may want to ensure that the allocation of resources matches labour market needs and that programmes effectively support the development of in-demand skills.

What is more, employees need to be aware of training leave arrangements and understand the application process. Complex or opaque systems can discourage participation and undermine the effectiveness of such policies. In addition, organisational culture plays a crucial role in encouraging or discouraging the use of training leave. Workplaces that prioritise continuous learning and employee development tend to create an environment in which employees are more likely to take up training leave. Conversely, in organisations where immediate productivity is prioritised over long-term growth, employees may be less inclined to engage in such initiatives.

In conclusion, the design and implementation of training leave policies must strike a delicate balance between the needs and constraints of workers, employers and governments. Effective policies require careful consideration of the specific economic, cultural and organisational contexts in which they are applied. Adult learning policies are most effective when they are designed to reach adults who face the greatest barriers to participation or who may be least aware of the opportunities available to them, and when they are adapted to the economic realities faced by these individuals and by employers.

Addressing cost barriers through financial incentives

Cost remains one of the most significant barriers preventing individuals from participating in adult learning. Financial constraints are particularly acute for low-income workers and those outside the labour market, who may struggle to afford the direct costs, e.g. course fees, and indirect costs of learning, i.e. loss of income associated with time spent in training. While employer-sponsored training remains the dominant form of adult learning (see Chapter 3), it is mainly concentrated among higher-skilled workers, leaving those with lower qualifications with fewer opportunities to upgrade their skills. To address these inequalities, many OECD countries have developed public financial incentives to reduce the direct and opportunity costs of training.

Over the past decade, financial support for adult learning has evolved, with an increasing emphasis on more individualised and portable funding mechanisms. The Council of the European Union’s recommendation on Individual Learning Accounts in 2022 is a key diver of these developments in European countries (Council of the European Union, 2022[11]). Traditional mechanisms, such as tax deductions, have often been criticised for disproportionately benefiting those already in training – typically those with higher earnings and stable employment. In response, governments are seeking to design financial incentives that effectively target those most in need, ensuring that public funds are used efficiently to address skills gaps and promote inclusive workforce development.

The economic case

Public investment in financial incentives for adult learning is justified by its potential to improve labour market outcomes, economic growth and social inclusion. A well-targeted system of financial support can help address market failures that lead to underinvestment in skills, particularly among low-income and disadvantaged adults (Brunello and Wruuck, 2020[12]; OECD, 2021[4]; Brunello, Rückert and Wruuck, 2024[13]). A key rationale is that skill development generates positive externalities: when individuals acquire new skills, the benefits extend beyond their own returns and those of their employer to the wider economy. A more skilled workforce leads to higher productivity, increased innovation and greater economic resilience in the face of technological change. Without financial support, many people – especially those on lower incomes – may not be able to invest in training, even though the long-term benefits outweigh the short-term costs.

In addition, financial incentives help to compensate for employers’ reluctance to train. Many firms are reluctant to invest in training because of the risk of employees leaving for other jobs after benefitting from the investment in their skills (this is known as the “poaching externality”). Public financial incentives can help mitigate this risk by co-financing training.

There is also a fiscal rationale for investing in financial incentives for training. Increasing participation in adult learning can improve employment rates and reduce reliance on unemployment benefits and other social assistance programmes. Workers with higher skills tend to earn higher wages (OECD, 2024[14]), which translates into higher tax revenues and lower public expenditure on social support.

This is particularly true for basic skills, where employers often have weak incentives to invest. Literacy and numeracy skills underpin the acquisition of more specialised skills, but their economic returns are diffuse and long-term – often benefiting society more than the individual firm. With PIAAC data showing a decline in basic skills levels in many countries (OECD, 2024[14]), government investment is crucial not only to reverse these trends but also to ensure that wider adult learning policies can be effective. Without a solid foundation, the benefits of more advanced or targeted training programmes are unlikely to be fully realised.

Evolving approaches to financial support

OECD countries have developed a range of financial instruments to support participation in adult learning, reflecting differences in funding sources, mechanisms and target groups. Broadly speaking, two main policy levers emerge:2 the individualisation of training incentives through direct financial support to learners, such as Individual Learning Accounts (ILAs), and subsidies for employer-led training, which encourage firms to invest in the development of their workforce.

Individualised training incentives

Individual Learning Accounts (ILAs) are portable and employee‑owned training funds designed to support lifelong learning. These accounts allow individuals to accumulate training credits over time, providing flexibility to engage in skills development regardless of employment status. In some countries, ILAs serve as a centralised funding mechanism, bringing together different forms of training support into a single system.

France’s Individual Learning Account (Compte Personnel de Formation [CPF]) is one of the most prominent examples, introduced in 2015 to give workers greater autonomy in managing their own training. Funded by a company levy, the CPF is available to all individuals active in the labour market. Employed adults accumulate annual credits of between EUR 500 and EUR 800 which can be used to finance approved training courses. The system is accessed through Mon Compte Formation, a personal online account that allows individuals to track their balance and register for training. Additional funding options are available through the digital platform; for example, jobseekers can request support from the public employment service if their CPF balance is insufficient or depleted. The CPF can be used for a wide range of learning activities, including education and training leading to full or partial professional qualifications registered in the National Register of Professional Qualifications, certifications listed in the Specific Register, validation of prior learning and experience, skills assessments, and preparation or training to obtain a driver’s licence.

Other countries have introduced similar schemes with different structures. Singapore’s SkillsFuture Credit (SFC), launched in 2015, provides two tiers of credit payments – SGD 500 at age 25 and an additional SGD 4 000 at age 40 – to support lifelong learning. The funding is linked to training for occupation-specific and transversal skills as defined in its Skills Framework, which is developed with labour market partners to identify and articulate industry-relevant skills (OECD, forthcoming[15]). Several European countries are piloting Individual Learning Accounts (e.g. Czechia, Latvia, Lithuania) or have plans to transform existing financial incentives into Individual Learning Accounts (e.g. Croatia). In the Netherlands, the Labour Market Stimulation scheme (Stimulering Arbeidsmarktpositie [STAP]) replaced a previous tax incentive in 2022, providing up to EUR 1 000 per year for training to individuals aged 18‑67 who were in the national insurance system. While STAP was designed to support the development of vocational skills, it initially allowed a wide range of courses, including personal development programmes. However, the scheme was short-lived and was suspended in 2023 due to budget constraints, concerns about its cost-effectiveness, and the risk of funding courses that were not relevant to the labour market (OECD, forthcoming[15]).

Supporting employer-provided training

The rationale for supporting employer-based training is twofold: first, while firms benefit from a more skilled workforce, they may underinvest due to concerns about employee turnover or uncertain returns to training, particularly for low-skilled workers; second, employer-supported training remains the dominant form of adult learning, and financial incentives can help to shape firm behaviour to promote upskilling.

Germany has gradually expanded co-financing mechanisms to support employer investment in employee training, especially over the last decade. The introduction of the Qualification Chances Act (Qualifizierungschancengesetz) in 2019 and the Work of Tomorrow Act (Arbeit-von-Morgen-Gesetz) in 2020 has been crucial in broadening access to subsidised training for workers at risk of job displacement due to technological advances. These measures are designed to reduce the financial burden on companies, with the Federal Employment Agency covering part of the training costs and wage subsidies for employees undergoing retraining. Under these laws, training subsidies are determined by factors such as company size, type of training, employee characteristics and social dialogue practices. Support can range from 15% to 100% of direct and indirect training costs. Micro‑enterprises (less than 10 employees) receive full coverage of training costs, while larger enterprises (more than 2 500 employees) can claim up to 15% of the costs. Specific groups, including older workers (45+), people with disabilities and low-skilled workers who are upgrading their skills, also receive full funding. Further subsidies are available if more than 20% of a company’s workforce needs retraining or if the company has a collective agreement. In addition, wage costs associated with training can be fully subsidised, depending on the size of the company and the type of training. While the system provides crucial support to SMEs and companies undergoing structural change, as well as to those engaged in social dialogue, the Work of Tomorrow Act has introduced more administrative complexity in the management of these funds. (OECD, 2021[16]; Deutscher Bundestag, 2018[17]; Bundesregierung, 2020[18])

This approach reflects a wider trend towards shared financial responsibility for adult learning, where public funds encourage employers to co‑invest in skills development.

Key considerations

One of the key challenges in designing financial incentives is to ensure that they reach the individuals and groups who need them most. Broad-based subsidies can encourage wider participation, but often risk benefiting individuals who would have undertaken training without financial support. This is a particular concern when resources are limited and there is a need to allocate funds efficiently. On the other hand, narrowly targeted schemes may exclude workers who would greatly benefit from training but do not meet the strict eligibility criteria. Policymakers must therefore carefully consider how to design financial incentives that balance inclusiveness with a targeted approach that directs support to those who face the greatest barriers to learning, without wasting resources on individuals who are already highly motivated or financially secure enough to undertake training on their own.

An equally important consideration is the accessibility of financial incentives, which often depends on awareness and administrative simplicity. Despite the availability of training grants and tax incentives in many countries, take‑up remains low because individuals and enterprises are either unaware of these schemes or find the application processes too complex and time‑consuming. Simplifying administrative procedures, providing clear and accessible guidance and ensuring active promotion of available schemes are all essential steps to increase the take‑up of financial incentives. A transparent, user-friendly application process can significantly improve participation and thus the overall impact of these programmes on adult learning outcomes.

Similarly, the alignment of training incentives with labour market needs is crucial to ensure that the resources invested in training lead to tangible economic benefits. Financial incentives should not only encourage participation in education and training, but also ensure that the training undertaken is relevant to current and future labour market needs. This requires close co‑operation between governments, employers and training providers to ensure that funded programmes are designed to equip workers with skills that are genuinely in demand. If incentives for training are not aligned with the needs of employers, there is a risk that public funds will be directed towards low-value courses that provide little benefit to the workforce. In some cases, this misalignment can exacerbate skills mismatches in the labour market, resulting in a workforce that is overqualified in some areas but underprepared in others.

In addition, the experience of Individual Learning Accounts (ILAs) in several countries has highlighted the importance of robust oversight to ensure the integrity of financial incentive schemes. Without proper regulation and monitoring, there is a risk that these incentives will be exploited by unscrupulous training providers offering low quality courses that fail to deliver meaningful skills development. In such cases, the financial resources allocated to the incentives may be wasted and participants may not gain the skills they need to improve their employability. Establishing clear accreditation standards, continuous monitoring of training outcomes and regular evaluation of course quality are essential measures to ensure that financial incentives support high quality, effective education and training (OECD, 2024[19]; OECD, 2021[20]).

Enhancing flexibility in adult learning provision

The data presented in this report suggests that much non-formal adult learning is often of short duration and focused on compliance‑based training, such as health and safety, rather than broader skills development (Chapter 1). This highlights the need for stackability, portability and recognition of these shorter programmes, particularly for workers facing career transitions due to economic change. Many countries are moving towards more flexible learning models, including micro-credentials and modular qualifications that can be accumulated and used across sectors. However, it remains a challenge to ensure that these qualifications are of high quality, recognised by employers and accessible to all workers.

The economic rationale

The economic rationale for more flexible provision of adult learning is to adapt to the realities of an increasingly dynamic labour market. Traditional adult learning systems often fail to meet the needs of today’s learners. Existing programmes tend to be long, rigid and not adapted to the requirements of continuous skills development. As such, they are ill-suited to workers who need flexible, targeted and accredited learning opportunities to up-skill, re‑skill or move between careers (OECD, 2023[21]).

For adults, the availability of more adaptable learning pathways – such as modular courses, micro-credentials and Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) systems – enhances career mobility and reduces barriers to employment. These flexible models allow adults to acquire relevant skills incrementally, which is particularly valuable for individuals undergoing career transitions or re‑entering the labour market after a period of unemployment. Importantly, such flexibility helps adults avoid the need to commit to long, rigid courses that may be incompatible with their personal or professional lives, thus facilitating greater participation in lifelong learning.

For employers, flexible adult learning systems provide a means of ensuring that the workforce remains responsive to changing skills requirements. As the pace of technological change accelerates, industries are under increasing pressure to adopt innovations, adapt business models and ways of working. Flexible learning systems enable employers to up-skill or reskill their workforce in a timely manner, helping to fill skills gaps and mitigate the risk of labour shortages or mismatches. Moreover, by providing training that is closely aligned with industry needs and workers’ interests, these systems can foster stronger employer-employee relationships and promote a more skilled and adaptable workforce.

At a societal level, the widespread adoption of flexible learning pathways has the potential to strengthen labour market resilience, particularly in times of economic transition or technological disruption. The ability for individuals to accumulate skills in a modular, flexible way allows for a more adaptable workforce that can smooth the transition for workers, reducing the social and economic costs associated with labour market disruptions.

Evolving approaches

Despite these benefits for individuals, employers and the wider economy, many OECD countries continue to face challenges in creating more flexible learning pathways. In response, three key policy levers – recognition of prior learning (RPL), modularisation and micro-credentials, and quality and relevance assurance – are evolving to create more dynamic and inclusive learning opportunities.

Recognition of prior learning

Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) allows individuals to validate skills and knowledge acquired through work experience, non-formal and informal learning. This can reduce the time and cost of gaining formal qualifications, making it an important tool for adults who have acquired considerable skills but lack recognised qualifications. The RPL process may also provide other outcomes in the form of credits or units towards a new qualification, an exemption from entry requirements or a certificate of labour market competence (Meghnagi and Tuccio, 2022[22]). However, despite its potential, RPL remains underutilised in many countries due to complex procedures, inconsistent assessment methods and limited awareness. This underutilisation represents a missed opportunity from an economic perspective: RPL can improve the efficiency of adult learning systems by making better use of existing skills in the labour market, reducing duplication of training provision and accelerating reskilling pathways – particularly for mid-career workers. Without accessible and credible RPL systems, individuals and employers face higher opportunity costs in obtaining formally recognised qualifications, which may discourage investment in upskilling altogether.

Several countries have sought to develop and integrate RPL into their qualifications frameworks. Portugal’s Qualifica Centres provide structured pathways for individuals to have their skills assessed and certified, increasing accessibility and awareness of RPL opportunities. In Finland, RPL has been embedded into vocational education, allowing workers to gain formal qualifications through competency-based assessments rather than traditional coursework. In France, Spain and Switzerland, individuals can obtain part of or full qualifications through RPL (OECD, 2023[23]; SEFRI, 2025[24]) What is more, in France, adults can use funds from their individual learning accounts (CPF) to fund the process for the recognition of prior learning (Accompagnement pour la validation des acquis de l’expérience) (Service-Public.fr, 2025[25]).

However, challenges remain in ensuring consistency, transparency and labour market recognition. Many RPL systems still require individuals to provide extensive documentation, disadvantaging those in informal or non-standard employment. Moreover, while RPL is embedded in some National Qualification Frameworks (NQF), there is often a gap between policy and practice, with employers and training providers reluctant to fully accept non-certified learning experiences.

Modularisation and micro-credentials

Modular learning – where courses are broken down into smaller, stackable units – has emerged as effective way of providing flexible and targeted upskilling opportunities. Unlike traditional qualifications, which often require long-term, full-time study, modular courses allow learners to accumulate credits over time, helping them to balance training with work and family responsibilities. They also support the recognition of partial learning, providing value to individuals who, despite their intentions, are unable to complete a full qualification for various reasons.

Micro-credentials are closely related to the modularisation of adult learning provision, although the two are not equivalent. Micro-credentials are a form of certification awarded upon completion of learning experiences that are typically than traditional education and training programmes. They may serve as standalone qualifications or be embedded within broader learning pathways, functioning as modular components of a larger programme (Kato, Galán-Muros and Weko, 2020[26]; OECD, 2023[2]).

Many countries are now embedding micro-credentials in their national education and training systems. Poland is piloting a national microcredentials system using the Odznaka+ (Badge+) online platform for digital credentials. New Zealand’s Micro-Credential Framework formally integrates short courses into the NQF, ensuring that they have value beyond individual training providers. In Ireland, micro-credentials are included as special awards in the NQF. Australia launched Microcred Seeker, a centralised online platform for micro-credentials, in late 2022, following recommendations from the 2019 Australian Qualifications Framework Review. While micro-credentials were not formally integrated into the National Qualifications Framework, stakeholder consultations highlighted the need for clear, consistent guidance to improve their recognition and value. Microcred Seeker provides a transparent, user-friendly database of micro-credential courses across all sectors and training providers (OECD, 2023[21]).

The growing number of micro-credentials – often issued by different providers, including universities, schools and private companies – raises concerns about their transferability and labour market recognition. Without standardised frameworks, there is a risk of fragmentation if micro-credentials lack clear progression routes towards larger qualifications or employer confidence. Countries are working to address this by establishing credit transfer systems that allow learners to ‘stack’ credentials towards formal degrees, ensuring coherence in modular learning pathways.

Ensuring quality and relevance

As flexible learning opportunities become more widespread – particularly in the form of short, modular courses and micro-credentials – ensuring their quality and labour market relevance has become a pressing policy concern. Unlike traditional qualifications, many new forms of learning are delivered online or by private providers, often outside the scope of established accreditation systems. This creates uncertainty for learners about the value of their qualifications and limits employers’ confidence in recognising them.

Quality assurance has an important role to play in addressing this gap, but existing frameworks are often not designed to accommodate rapidly evolving and decentralised learning formats. Micro-credentials in particular present particular challenges: their strength lies in their speed and adaptability to changing skills needs, but this very flexibility can undermine consistent standards and comparability across providers (OECD, 2023[2]). A lack of clear, trustworthy quality assurance mechanisms can leave learners vulnerable to investing in low quality training that does not support their progression.

In response, countries are beginning to adapt their quality assurance systems to cover newer forms of learning. New Zealand is one of the few countries to have established a stand-alone quality assurance process for micro-credential programmes. Micro-credentials undergo a thorough assessment to ensure they meet the required quality standards and criteria, mirroring the rigorous accreditation process used for other, more formal learning opportunities. This process includes a comprehensive review of the content, delivery methods, assessment practices and outcomes of the micro-credential, ensuring alignment with industry standards and addressing identified skills needs. Once a micro-credential successfully meets the required criteria, it is approved and registered by NZQA, giving it official recognition and credibility within the New Zealand education and training landscape. In addition, micro-credentials quality assured by NZQA must be delivered by accredited education and training providers – meaning that New Zealand has a system of accrediting both providers and individual courses (NZQA, 2024[27]). 

Some countries have opted for programme‑level quality assurance systems for micro-credentials. However, this level of oversight is typically reserved for some institutions, such as private higher education institutions or those without university status. In Ireland, traditional and technological universities have the authority to award qualifications and to monitor the quality and development of their own programmes. Consequently, QQI, the national regulatory body, carries out institutional level assessments for these universities. For other types of micro-credential providers, particularly private independent providers, QQI carries out quality assurance at the programme level ​(OECD, 2023_[7])​. 

In some countries, assuring the relevance of learning opportunities to the labour market goes hand-in-hand with ensuring quality. Singapore’s SkillsFuture Industry Transformation Maps are a well-established example, bringing together industry leaders to define occupational standards and align modular training with workforce needs. Ireland has also embedded employer engagement in its quality assurance framework for micro-credentials, with national guidelines developed through collaboration between education providers, Quality and Qualifications Ireland (QQI) and industry stakeholders to ensure relevance and transferability.

Maintaining trust in flexible learning systems will depend on balancing flexibility with clear standards, consistent recognition, and transparency. As digital and non-traditional learning expands, strengthening quality and relevance assurance – not only to protect learners but also to ensure employer buy-in – will be critical to realising the potential of flexible adult learning systems.

Key considerations

A key challenge for flexible adult learning systems is to ensure that modular courses and micro-credentials make a meaningful contribution to career progression. This requires mechanisms that enable learners to build on their achievements over time, whether through formal credit transfer systems, employer recognition or validation within sectoral or institutional frameworks. While integration into qualifications frameworks can provide coherence and visibility, not all systems require formal alignment to be effective. The key is for learners to understand the value of their training and how it relates to further learning or labour market opportunities.

Another concern is the depth and sustainability of learning. While modular formats improve accessibility, many focus narrowly on immediate, job-specific skills that may not support long-term adaptability. As demand grows for workers who combine technical expertise with transversal skills such as problem-solving and collaboration, training systems need to ensure that short courses are embedded in broader learning pathways. Stackable qualifications and competency-based assessment can help ensure that short-term learning contributes to sustainable skills development.

For flexible learning to be widely recognised and used, greater employer engagement is essential. Despite growing interest in micro-credentials and modular learning, employer recognition remains uneven, limiting their value in recruitment and progression decisions. Involving industry in the design, validation and co-financing of training can help bridge this gap. Initiatives that allow employers to shape training content and standards – together with the use of trusted digital credentials – can improve the labour market relevance and transparency of flexible learning.

Finally, making flexible learning accessible to all workers requires targeted support. While modular formats reduce some barriers, they are often least accessible to the workers who would benefit most – such as those in precarious employment, older adults and the low-skilled. Expanding financial incentives for short courses that are portable and accessible, and providing quality career guidance, are key to enabling all adults to upskill and reskill in ways that meet the changing demands of the labour market.

Strengthening targeted policies for underrepresented groups

Despite policy efforts to widen access to adult learning, participation remains highly unequal (see Chapter 2). This report shows that older workers, migrants and those with lower formal qualifications are significantly less likely to participate in training than other groups. These disparities reflect both structural barriers – such as cost, time constraints and accessibility – and lower perceived benefits of training among these groups. What is more, individuals who have had negative experiences of formal education may lack confidence in their ability to learn, while others may struggle to find training opportunities that meet their specific needs.

Addressing these inequalities requires more than targeted initiatives. In many cases, adult learning systems as a whole fail to meet the needs of disadvantaged groups. If systems remain overly complex, inflexible or employer-dependent, even well-designed outreach and targeted financial incentives will have limited impact. Ensuring access requires rethinking adult education systems – including simplifying learning pathways, embedding more flexible, learner-centred approaches and enable adults to train for skills in demand.

Economic rationale

Despite clear economic benefits, both individuals and enterprises systematically underinvest in training for those groups most in need – such as the low-skilled, migrants and older adults – due to market failures and misaligned incentives. Individuals in these groups may face liquidity constraints, lack of awareness of training opportunities, time or location barriers, or perceive the returns to training as uncertain, leading to low participation in lifelong learning (see Chapter 2). From the employer’s perspective, firms may be reluctant to invest in training for workers who are perceived as having lower productivity or higher turnover risks, particularly in sectors with low profit margins or a high prevalence of temporary contracts.

These market failures justify targeted public intervention. Without policy action, these groups will be left further behind, and skill gaps and shortages will persist, reducing labour market efficiency, constraining economic growth and exacerbating inequality. Public investment in lifelong learning – through financial incentives, employer co‑investment schemes and tailored outreach initiatives – not only expands the talent pool but also boosts productivity by enabling workers to move into higher-value jobs. Ensuring that training systems are accessible to all workers is therefore not just a social policy objective, but a fundamental economic strategy for maintaining competitiveness in an era of rapid technological and demographic change.

Evolving approaches

Countries have adopted a range of targeted measures to increase participation in adult learning. These strategies seek to reduce structural barriers, enhance the perceived value of training, and create learning environments that are tailored to specific needs.

Community-based learning initiatives

Traditional education and training institutions can struggle to reach out to and engage with underrepresented learners, particularly those who are economically inactive or lack confidence in their learning abilities. To overcome these challenges, some countries have invested in community-based learning initiatives, which provide training in familiar and accessible settings. These initiatives aim to reach individuals who may be hesitant to engage with formal education but who benefit from localised, supportive learning environments.

In Ireland, family literacy programmes have been integrated into national strategies to improve the literacy and numeracy skills of children and young people. The National Adult Literacy Agency (NALA) has been a key advocate for family literacy, highlighting the role that parents and communities can play in language, literacy and numeracy development. NALA has developed resources such as the helpmykidlearn.ie website and the Family Project television series to raise awareness and support family learning initiatives. These efforts are complemented by extensive research on family learning provision in and outside of Education and Training Boards in Ireland, as well as the development of guidelines (Devitt and Coleman, 2022[28]; ETBI, NALA and SOLAS, 2021[29]).

In the United Kingdom, trade unions have played an important role in promoting adult learning through initiatives such as Union Learning Representatives (ULRs) (UnionLearn, n.d.[30]). ULRs are members of independent trade unions who are elected to promote the value of learning, support learners and organise training in the workplace. Central to their role is engaging learners who are otherwise difficult for providers to reach. They also provide information, advice and guidance, carry out initial skills assessments, link learners with providers, support learners through union learning centres, arrange flexible provision for shift workers and plan next steps in learning. Evaluations of the approach have shown that trade unions can provide a bridging function between employers and employees with low skills (Stuart et al., 2016[31]). Until 2020, this initiative was supported by the Union Learning Fund, which led to concerns about the future of union-led learning initiatives (UK Parliament, 2020[32]).

In Italy, the Provincial Centres for Adult Education (CPIA) respond primarily to the needs of low-skilled adults who have not completed upper secondary education and to migrants whose qualifications are not recognised in Italy. The learning offer of the CPIA is organised in three strands: literacy and Italian language courses, courses corresponding lower secondary education and to the achievement of the certification attesting to the acquisition of basic skills relating to compulsory education, and courses corresponding to a technical, vocational or artistic upper secondary school diploma. At the end of each course, students need to demonstrate they have acquired certain competences. To facilitate access and shorten learning times, the CPIA offer a programme to identify, assess and certify which of these final competences the adult might already possess. The validation of these competences translates into a reduction of the number of hours of classes that the student will need to attend.

Work-based learning for adults with low skills

For many low-skilled workers, the opportunity cost of leaving work to participate in training is too high. What is more, they may have bad experiences with traditional classroom-based training. To address this, some countries have focused on work-based learning models, which allow individuals to develop new skills while remaining employed. These initiatives provide structured on-the‑job training opportunities that are closely aligned with industry needs, ensuring that training directly contributes to career advancement.

Norway’s Skills Plus programme (Kompetansepluss) is one of the longest-running programmes of its kind in the OECD. Launched in 2006, it aims to provide adults with opportunities to acquire basic skills such as literacy, numeracy and digital literacy in the workplace. The programme provides grants to both private and public enterprises to facilitate tailor-made training that combines basic skills training with work-related learning activities. Over 100 000 workers have received training through the programme since its inception. There is evidence that participation results in employees making fewer mistakes, communicating better and being more motivated. (Norwegian Directorate for Higher Education and Skills, 2025[33]).

In Belgium, Socio-Professional Integration Centres (CISP) are integration operators providing career guidance, basic education, and vocational training to low-skilled unemployed adults. CISPs use innovative and personalised teaching methods to meet the needs of the low-skilled. There are two types of CISP: traditional CISP, whose approach consists of courses and practical exercises in a classroom, and ‘work-based training enterprises’ (EFT) where trainees are exposed to real work situations by participating in the activities of the enterprise. CISPs also provide psychosocial support, childcare and transport subsidies to trainees. Each year about 14 000 people are trained in a CISP, 25% of them are in EFT.

Bridging programmes for migrants and refugees

Migrants and refugees often face multiple barriers to labour market integration, including language difficulties, unrecognised qualifications, and unfamiliarity with local work practices. To address these challenges, many countries have developed bridging programmes that combine language training with vocational education, ensuring that individuals gain both the communication skills and occupational competencies needed to secure stable employment.

In Canada, the Ontario Bridge Training Program (OBTP) continues to help internationally educated professionals transition into the Canadian labour market. The programme provides specialised, occupation-specific training and support services to help immigrants meet licence requirements and secure employment commensurate with their qualifications. Eligibility criteria include residence in Ontario, international post-secondary education and work experience in the occupation. The programme has a focus on high-demand sectors to align with labour market needs. (Canadian Ministry of Labour, 2024[34])

Key considerations

While targeted policies can help to increase participation in adult learning, their success depends on careful design and implementation. Several key factors influence their effectiveness:

• Addressing multiple barriers simultaneously: Underrepresented groups often face a combination of financial, informational and logistical barriers to learning. Interventions that focus on only one aspect – such as financial incentives – may fail to address deeper structural challenges. Successful interventions tend to combine: financial support (e.g. training vouchers, wage subsidies), personalised guidance (e.g. career counselling, mentoring) and flexible learning formats (e.g. modular courses, online and blended learning).

• Building trust and awareness: Many disadvantaged learners are unaware of available training opportunities or may be sceptical about the value of learning. Community-based initiatives and peer networks can play a crucial role in raising awareness and building trust. Culturally sensitive outreach programmes – such as those involving community leaders or migrant organisations – can help reach learners who might not otherwise engage with formal training providers.

• Ensuring that training leads to tangible employment outcomes is critical to sustaining participation. Programmes that are closely aligned with employer needs help learners to see a clear return on investment. Close collaboration between governments, employers and training providers is essential to ensure that skills development initiatives add value to people’s life chances.

• Evaluating impact and scaling up successful models: While many targeted initiatives have shown promising results, scaling up effective programmes remains a challenge. Policymakers should invest in robust monitoring and evaluation frameworks to assess which interventions are most effective in reaching underrepresented groups. Successful models should then be scaled up and adapted to different contexts, ensuring that best practice is widely shared.

Targeted interventions alone are not sufficient if the broader adult learning system remains rigid and exclusionary. Many disadvantaged learners are unable to access training not because of a lack of targeted initiatives, but because the system itself is too complex, too employer-dependent or too inflexible to meet their needs. Strengthening adult learning therefore requires a dual approach: expanding targeted interventions, but also challenging the fundamental structure of the system to ensure that it provides real opportunities for all learners.

Aligning adult learning with labour market needs

Ensuring that adult learning systems are responsive to labour market needs is crucial for economic growth, workforce adaptability and social inclusion. This report has shown that much of adult learning participation relates to training for regulatory compliance, such as health and safety certification, rather than to broader upskilling or reskilling initiatives aligned with emerging job opportunities. While these courses are crucial, they should be separated out as they blur the picture of existing investment in training that is effectively preparing workers for future labour market needs.

To address this challenge, many countries have moved towards aligning adult learning policy to labour market demand. This shift includes strengthening skill anticipation and labour market intelligence, developing sectoral training strategies, and promoting employer involvement in training design. It should be noted that designing adult learning systems that respond to labour market needs require more than better anticipation – they also need to ensure that training content is regularly updated to reflect those changes, that firms are able to anticipate skills needs, and that incentives are in place to encourage both workers and employers to invest in relevant training.

The economic rationale

Training that is aligned with labour market needs ensures that adult learning translates into tangible economic benefits for individuals, enterprises and economies. By training in in-demand skills individuals can experience wage growth and career progression. Enterprises can improve productivity, enhance competitiveness and adapt more effectively to changing industry trends. This is particularly important in high-growth and high value‑added sectors, where the skills of the workforce have a direct impact on innovation and economic performance.

Beyond individuals and enterprises, matching training to labour market demand helps to reduce skills mismatches. When workers are trained in skills that are not relevant to employers’ needs, vacancies go unfilled while skilled people struggle to find work. A well-designed adult learning system reduces these inefficiencies by ensuring that supply and demand for skills are more closely matched, leading to lower unemployment rates and a more dynamic labour market.

Evolving approaches

Over the past decade, governments have prioritised improving skills anticipation mechanisms and strengthening firms’ capacity for effective workforce planning.

Advances in skills anticipation

Many countries are investing in real-time labour market data and sophisticated skills forecasting models to better predict future workforce needs. In Australia, Jobs and Skills Australia (JSA) is working with data analytics companies to analyse real-time trends in job advertisements. This initiative aims to identify skills that have grown in demand in recent years by matching information from job advertisements to detailed occupational profiles within the Australian Skills Classification. Such analyses provide granular insights into evolving skill requirements across different sectors. Similarly, the UK’s Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) is using big data approaches to monitor the evolution of green jobs and skills. By applying machine learning algorithms to data from job advertisements, BEIS produces detailed, real-time insights into the growth of ‘clean growth jobs’ across the United Kingdom. This data informs policy making in line with the government’s Ten Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution. (OECD, 2023[35])

In the Flemish Region (Belgium), the analysis of online job vacancies informs the regular update of occupational standards, recognised documents that define the skills, abilities and attitudes that workers in an occupation must possess to effectively carry out their tasks, by VDAB, the Flemish public employment service. These standards are then used to develop labour market tools (orientation, matching, training and education) and a labour market monitoring framework (vacancies, jobseeker profiles, labour shortages).

Another notable development is the shift from anticipating occupational needs to anticipating skill needs. This shift allows countries to gain deeper insights into the specific skills required in the future workforce, the basis for modularisation and creating more flexible learning pathways (see above). For example, Slovenia uses a national skills taxonomy to predict future skills needs, while Singapore and Germany use job vacancy data in an analogous way (SkillsfutureSG, 2025[36]). Beyond quantitative analysis, some countries complement their anticipation exercises with qualitative methods such as focus groups, interviews with experts and companies, and employer surveys, as seen in Estonia, Spain, and Italy. By combining both quantitative data and qualitative insights, these countries are refining their ability to accurately reflect skill needs and to better align education and training systems with emerging labour market trends.

Building business capacity for workforce planning

While government efforts are crucial in anticipating labour market trends, companies also need support to plan effectively for their future workforce needs (OECD, 2024[37]). In France, for example, skills operators (Opérateurs de Compétences, OPCO) provide advisory services to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). These organisations help define training needs, identify opportunities and advise on available financial support. There are 11 sectoral OPCOs with numerous branches throughout France, staffed by social partners who ensure that services are tailored to the specific needs of different sectors. (OECD, 2021[4])

In Finland, the public employment services implement Joint Purchase Training (Yhteishankintakoulutus) in co‑operation with employers or groups of employers. This initiative provides technical assistance to enterprises in developing tailor-made training programmes, selecting providers and selecting participants (OECD, 2020[38]). The German programme People as Corporate Value (UnternehmensWert Mensch) provides targeted and subsidised consultancy services for SMEs to develop modern, people‑centred HR strategies. Companies can hire consultants for a fixed period at a subsidised rate, depending on the size of the company. Evaluations of the programme indicate that participating companies would not have undertaken similar initiatives without the support of the programme (INQA, 2015[39]).

Key considerations

Ensuring that adult learning systems are responsive to labour market needs requires policies that reflect the accelerating pace of economic and technological change, the emergence of new skills and the need for rapid adaptation of training provision. Digitalisation, automation and the green transition are redefining job requirements faster than traditional training models can adapt. To stay relevant, adult learning must be reimagined as a fluid, lifelong process – modular, stackable and responsive – so that adults can continuously upgrade their skills without leaving the labour force.

Beyond technical expertise, the future of work depends on new combinations of skills – combining technical with transferable skills. As machines take over predictable tasks, employers value workers who can problem-solve, collaborate and pivot in dynamic environments. Training must embed these multi-dimensional skills to ensure workers are not only skilled, but also resilient in an era of constant disruption.

Workforce planning remains another weak link. Many companies, especially SMEs, struggle to predict future skills needs, leaving critical gaps in training investment. Equipping employers with better skill assessment and anticipation tools can bridge this gap. The closer businesses and training providers work together to quickly implement trainings that address fast-emerging skills requirements, the more seamless the transition from education to employment.

Aligning adult learning with labour market needs is not just about predicting future skills; it requires a system that can evolve in real time. Governments, businesses and educators must move from reactive to anticipatory strategies, building learning ecosystems that are as agile as the economies they serve.

References

[5] Bittschi, B. et al. (2023), Evaluierung der Bildungskarenz und der Bildungsteilzeit Oktober 2023 Österreichisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, https://www.wifo.ac.at/.

[13] Brunello, G., D. Rückert and P. Wruuck (2024), “Adult learning: The employers’ provision of retraining and re-skilling”, in Carcillo, S. and S. Scarpetta (eds.), Handbook on Labour Markets in Transition, Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, Cheltenham, UK.

[12] Brunello, G. and P. Wruuck (2020), Employer Provided Training in Europe: Determinants and Obstacles, http://www.iza.org.

[18] Bundesregierung (2020), Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung. Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Förderung der beruflichen Weiterbildung im Strukturwandel und zur Weiterentwicklung der Ausbildungsförderung A. Problem und Ziel [Draft law on continuing vocational training in times of change].

[34] Canadian Ministry of Labour, I. (2024), CFP release - 2024 Ontario Bridge Training Program (OBTP), https://www.ontario.ca/page/available-funding-opportunities-ontario-government.

[11] Council of the European Union (2022), Council Recommendation of 16 June 2022 on individual learning accounts (2022/C 243/03).

[17] Deutscher Bundestag (2018), Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Stärkung der Chancen für Qualifizierung und für mehr Schutz in der Arbeitslosenversicherung (Qualifizierungschancengesetz) [Draft law to strengthen opportunities for qualification and for more protection in unemployment...].

[28] Devitt, A. and R. Coleman (2022), Family literacy provision NALA Research Report on Family Literacy Provision outside of Education and Training Boards (ETBs) in Ireland.

[40] EC (2025), Building a Union of Skills to boost talent and competitiveness, https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/whats-new/newsroom/22-04-2025-building-a-union-of-skills-to-boost-talent-and-competitiveness_en.

[29] ETBI, NALA and SOLAS (2021), Family Literacy Practice in ETBs Guidelines, Case studies and Recommendations Guidelines learning works.

[7] Finnish Employment Fund (2024), News concerning the adult education allowance, https://www.aikuiskoulutustuki.fi/en/news-concerning-the-adult-education-allowance/.

[9] Fredriksson, P. and D. Seim (2024), Who Receives Student Finance for Transition and Retraining? An Empirical Study of the First Two Application Periods, SNS Research Brief, No 104., https://www.sns.se/en/articles/sns-research-brief-104-who-receives-student-finance-for-transition-and-retraining-an-empirical-study-of-the-first-two-application-periods/.

[39] INQA (2015), Auswertung Modellphase Zusammenfassung, https://www.unternehmens-wert-mensch.de/fileadmin/Materialien/uWM-Auswertung_Modellphase-Zusammenfassung.pdf (accessed on 16 June 2021).

[26] Kato, S., V. Galán-Muros and T. Weko (2020), “The emergence of alternative credentials”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 216, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b741f39e-en.

[22] Meghnagi, M. and M. Tuccio (2022), “The recognition of prior learning: Validating general competences”, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 270, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2d9fb06a-en.

[33] Norwegian Directorate for Higher Education and Skills (2025), Competence plus, https://hkdir.no/programmer-og-tilskuddsordninger/kompetansepluss (accessed on 27 March 2025).

[27] NZQA (2024), Guidelines for micro-credential listing, approval and accreditation, https://www2.nzqa.govt.nz/tertiary/approval-accreditation-and-registration/micro-credentials/guidelines/ (accessed on 26 January 2024).

[19] OECD (2024), Bridging Talent Shortages in Tech: Skills-first Hiring, Micro-credentials and Inclusive Outreach, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/f35da44f-en.

[14] OECD (2024), Do Adults Have the Skills They Need to Thrive in a Changing World?: Survey of Adult Skills 2023, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b263dc5d-en.

[37] OECD (2024), Understanding Skill Gaps in Firms: Results of the PIAAC Employer Module, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b388d1da-en.

[35] OECD (2023), Assessing and Anticipating Skills for the Green Transition: Unlocking Talent for a Sustainable Future, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/28fa0bb5-en.

[21] OECD (2023), Flexible adult learning provision, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/topics/policy-sub-issues/adult-learning/booklet-flexibility-2023.pdf/_jcr_content/renditions/original./booklet-flexibility-2023.pdf.

[2] OECD (2023), “Public policies for effective micro-credential learning”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, No. 85, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a41f148b-en.

[23] OECD (2023), Recognition of prior learning: A practical guide for policy makers, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/topics/policy-sub-issues/adult-learning/booklet-rpl-2023.pdf.

[16] OECD (2021), Continuing Education and Training in Germany, Getting Skills Right, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1f552468-en.

[20] OECD (2021), Improving the Quality of Non-Formal Adult Learning: Learning from European Best Practices on Quality Assurance, Getting Skills Right, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f1b450e1-en.

[3] OECD (2021), “Quality and value of micro-credentials in higher education: Preparing for the future”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, Vol. 40, https://doi.org/10.1787/9c4ad26d-en.

[4] OECD (2021), Training in Enterprises: New Evidence from 100 Case Studies, Getting Skills Right, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7d63d210-en.

[38] OECD (2020), Continuous Learning in Working Life in Finland, Getting Skills Right, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2ffcffe6-en.

[1] OECD (2020), Increasing Adult Learning Participation: Learning from Successful Reforms, Getting Skills Right, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/cf5d9c21-en.

[15] OECD (forthcoming), Advancing Adult Skills through Individual Learning Accounts: A Step-by-Step Guide for Policymakers, OECD.

[6] ORF (2025), Bildungskarenz wird zu „Weiterbildungszeit“ [Educational leave becomes ‘further training time’], https://orf.at/stories/3389471/.

[24] SEFRI (2025), Prise en compte et validation, https://www.sbfi.admin.ch/sbfi/fr/home/formation/fpc/f-c/prise-en-compte-et-validation.html.

[25] Service-Public.fr (2025), Compte personnel de formation (CPF) d’un salarié du secteur privé, https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F10705.

[10] Service-Public.fr (2025), Projet de transition professionnelle (PTP), https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F14018 (accessed on 28 February 2025).

[36] SkillsfutureSG (2025), Skills demand for the future economy report, https://jobsandskills.skillsfuture.gov.sg/sdfe-2025.

[31] Stuart, M. et al. (2016), Evaluation of the Union Learning Fund Rounds 15-16 and Support Role of Unionlearn. Final Report, University of Leeds, Leeds, https://www.unionlearn.org.uk/sites/default/files/publication/ULF%20Eval%201516%20FINAL%20REPORT.pdf (accessed on 29 November 2020).

[8] Swedish Board of Student Finance (2022), Student finance for transition and retraining, https://www.csn.se/languages/english/student-finance-for-transition-and-retraining.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com.

[32] UK Parliament (2020), Future of the Union Learning Fund, House of Commons Library, https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2020-0139/?utm_source=chatgpt.com.

[30] UnionLearn (n.d.), Union Learning Reps, https://www.unionlearn.org.uk/union-learning-reps-ulrs.

Notes

← 1.  Member Countries of the European Union have long worked together to achieve common goals in the area of skills and adult learning. Most recently, shared goals have been defined under the Union of Skills initiative, which fosters a co‑ordinated approach to upskilling and reskilling across the EU by aligning national efforts with common priorities in lifelong learning and labour market resilience. It builds on the European Skills Agenda from 2020 (EC, 2025[40]).

← 2.  It should be noted that these refer to newly introduced policies in the past decade. More generally, many countries continue to primarily rely on direct supply-side funding of education and training institutions.