INSTITUTIONAL CONSEQUENCES FOR SOCIAL MOBILITY AND YOUTH POLICY: A GOVERNANCE AND OPPORTUNITY FRAMEWORK FOR UZBEKISTAN

Abstract

This article investigates how institutions shape the conversion of educational attainment, social protection, labour-market participation and civic inclusion into opportunities for upward social mobility among young people, with Uzbekistan as the principal policy setting. The paper addresses a persistent analytical gap between the formal expansion of youth-policy instruments and the practical capacity of young people from different social backgrounds to convert those instruments into durable life chances. A qualitative, documentary research design integrates institutional theory, social stratification scholarship, and a structured analysis of published policy documents and international development reports. The materials include Uzbekistan's youth-policy legislation, selected World Bank analyses of higher-education financing, skills formation and gender inequality, OECD research on intergenerational mobility, and ILO evidence on youth labour markets. The findings are analytical rather than the results of an original survey. Five interrelated institutional mechanisms emerge: unequal access to quality education and finance; segmented transitions from schooling to decent employment; gendered care obligations; territorially uneven access to services and networks; and implementation gaps between centrally articulated rights and local administrative practice. The analysis develops a framework distinguishing policy access, effective participation, conversion of support into employment and agency, and the longer-term distribution of mobility outcomes. It argues that counting programme beneficiaries is an insufficient test of youth-policy success unless institutions also monitor who is excluded, how opportunities are distributed, and whether benefits persist. The paper concludes with recommendations for equity-sensitive programme targeting, longitudinal evaluation, coordinated local delivery and participatory governance. Its contribution is a transparent institutional framework that can support future survey-based and mixed-method research without claiming causal effects not established by the reviewed evidence.