Young people in Greece are not facing isolated challenges, but a chain of interlinked barriers: difficulties entering stable employment, insufficient income protection during unemployment, a rollercoaster education system, limited access to affordable housing, and weak family support systems for those who wish to start a family. These barriers delay or prevent young people from achieving the career they dream, economic independence and an autonomous life.
For more than a decade, young Greeks have been asked to be patient. Patient for a better education system that always seems to be “under reform”. Patient with a labour market that delays stable employment. Patient with a housing system that prices them out. Patient with a social model that assumes family support will fill the gaps left by the state. But patience is not a policy, and certainly not a strategy.

The European Union Youth Strategy (2019–2027) is a framework for EU cooperation on youth policy that aims to engage, connect, and empower young people across member states by promoting participation, mobility, inclusion, and resilience through 11 European Youth Goals developed in participatory dialogue with young people themselves (more on this milestone in my upcoming opinion piece:). However, despite Greeceʼs formal commitment as an EU member, the Strategy has not yet been fully translated into a comprehensive National Youth Strategy or fully operationalized through our National Youth Council and the responsible Ministry, with clear targets, cross-ministerial coordination, and dedicated implementation mechanisms. Several factors contribute to this gap, including institutional fragmentation of youth policy across different ministries, the absence of an overarching national framework that integrates EU youth goals into domestic youth policy priorities, and the fact that Greece is still in the process of finalizing its first fully integrated National Action Plan for Youth.

As a result, while specific EU-aligned policies (such as youth employment or mobility programs) exist, there is not yet a single, coherent national structure or strategy that systematically implements the EU Youth Strategyʼs broader objectives in a joined-up manner at the national level. If there is one lesson emerging clearly from comparative European experience, it is this: youth-related challenges in education, participation, employment, housing and family formation are not isolated failures.

They are symptoms of a deeper structural issue that underpins all these areas: the absence of a comprehensive National Youth Strategy in Greece.

Today, youth policies in Greece exist in fragments. Employment initiatives sit under one ministry, Vocational Education, Training and Lifelong Learning under another, housing measures and family policy under yet another. The result is not coordination, but overlap, gaps, and confusion. Young people are expected to navigate this complexity alone, at precisely the moment when they are trying to build independence.

The data tells a sobering story. Greece has one of the lowest youth employment rates in the OECD, one of the highest shares of young people living with their parents, and one of the latest ages of family formation in Europe.

A National Youth Strategy is not a symbolic document. When designed seriously, it functions as an organising framework, a social contract between the state and a generation. Spainʼs Youth Strategy 2030 offers a compelling example. Rather than addressing youth unemployment, housing access and social inclusion in isolation, Spain adopted a single roadmap developed with youth organisations, implemented across 22 ministerial departments, and backed by measurable targets and funding.

Young people do not aspire merely to survive policy, they want to plan and succeed in their lives. Quality education is the base. Stable employment enables housing independence; housing stability enables family formation; family choices shape demographic outcomes. When policies fail to align these stages, young people delay decisions not out of preference, but out of constraint.

In Greece, recent initiatives, from the National Demographic Action Plan and the Youth Entrepreneurship Programme to the National Dialogue on Education, are steps in the right direction. But without a unifying strategy, they risk becoming short-term fixes rather than long-term solutions. A housing subsidy means little without predictable income. University departments with outdated curricula appear increasingly superficial and disconnected from reality. Employment programmes lose impact if young people cannot afford to live near opportunities. Family incentives cannot succeed when economic insecurity defines early adulthood.

This is precisely where a National Youth Strategy becomes indispensable. It allows governments to move from reactive policymaking to long term strategic planning. It forces coordination across ministries. It clarifies priorities. Most importantly, it recognises young people not as beneficiaries of isolated measures, but as citizens navigating transitions that require continuity and support. Countries like Denmark demonstrate how institutional coherence changes outcomes. Early intervention, strong local coordination, integrated income and housing support allow young people to leave the parental home earlier and enter the labour market with fewer disruptions.  France, through sustained investment and evaluation of youth policies, shows how visibility and accessibility can turn fragmented programmes into a recognisable promise.

Greece does not lack ideas. It lacks architecture.

A National Youth Strategy would not replace sectoral policies, it would connect them. It would establish clear objectives for youth employment, youth well-being, education, housing affordability, and family support, while embedding monitoring mechanisms. Crucially, it would institutionalise meaningful youth participation, ensuring that policies reflect lived realities rather than assumptions.

This is not simply a youth issue. It is an economic issue, a social cohesion issue, and a democratic issue. When young people feel excluded from meritocratic education, stable work, independent living, and long-term planning, trust in institutions erodes. When uncertainty becomes the norm, emigration becomes a rational choice. The cost of inaction is already visible. Young people feel policies are ad-hoc and insufficient, because the state doesnʼt have one clear, multi-sectoral roadmap reflecting youth voices and priorities.

A National Youth Strategy sends a powerful message: that the state understands youth independence not as a personal achievement against the odds, but as a collective responsibility. It reframes youth policy from crisis management to strategic future-building. Encouragingly, Greece stands at a moment of opportunity. With growing recognition of demographic challenges and social fragmentation, the need for a youth-centred, cross-sectoral approach has never been clearer. The question is no longer whether Greece can afford a National Youth Strategy, but whether it can afford not to have one.

A comprehensive youth strategy has the advantage of providing a unified vision and framework for youth policies across different ministries and levels of government, reducing fragmentation, overlaps and policy incoherence. Such a strategy makes it possible to address different dimensions together, recognising interconnections instead of treating challenges in isolation, and signals clear political commitment to young people. The joint strategy also makes it easier for the government to communicate priorities and measure progress.

As Chairwoman of the Hellenic National Youth Council, I would like to state clearly and sincerely: we do not only support the idea of a National Youth Strategy, we urgently need one. We need to invest more decisively and systematically in young people, in line with what other leading European countries are already doing.

Investing in youth is not a demographic expense, it is a long-term investment in social cohesion, economic resilience and democratic trust. Greeceʼs young people are ready to contribute. What we need now is a clear political commitment. After thorough analyses, diagnostic reports and international comparisons, there is very little room left for doubt and even less room left for lost time. The evidence is clear, the challenges are well documented, and the solutions are no longer theoretical. At this point, what we mainly need is momentum and follow-through.

Young people are ready to flourish, to contribute, to work, to build families, to stay. What they need is not patience, but a plan.

Elvira Mentzelioti is Chairwoman of the Committee on Womenʼs Rights and Gender Equality at the Hellenic
National Youth Council and Representative at the European Commission Presidentʼs Youth Advisory Board. She is
an undergraduate student at the Department of Food Science and Technology at the University of Peloponnese,
Head of a Focal Point at the Anna Lindh Foundation Greek Network and Core Group member of the EU Youth Hub
ELIAMEP, advocating for youth participation in policy-making across Greece and Europe.