4. Strengthening adult learning for inclusion and social mobility

Continuing learning beyond initial education is essential for adults to keep up with a rapidly changing world of work. Labour market megatrends in digitalization, the automation of production processes and a changing demography impact the skills required to perform jobs. Participation in CET measures that aim to update and upgrade skills continuously is therefore essential to maintain the employability of people and increase labour force participation. Adult learning systems therefore have to be evaluated on participation metrics and obstacles to participation in adult learning that could prevent some individuals or groups from participating in education and training beyond their initial education. This section provides an overview of formal and non-formal CET participation in Berlin and puts participation rates into national and international perspective.

There are three types of CET participation: formal, non-formal and informal education. Different survey data sources consider different types of learning when asking survey participants if they engaged in education and training in a specified period prior to the interview. The reference period also largely differs between data sources. Thus, any national and international comparison needs to ensure comparability by specifying both the type of learning or education it refers to and the reference period it considers. Definitions of the three different types of learning and how these are measured in the survey data used within this report are detailed in Box 4.1.

CET participation does not capture all human capital accumulation, especially in cities. As a result, baseline statistics on formal an informal CET participation rates are likely to underestimate the full extent of learning and training that raise human capital. Of the types of learning described in Box 4.1, informal learning is not included in the data analysis conducted for this study. Academic research on learning in big cities shows that the relatively higher amount of social and business contacts in cities facilitate informal learning. Box 4.2 describes the link between population density and informal learning. Consequently, data on CET participation in Berlin comes with the caveat that it might only offer an incomplete picture. To mitigate this issue, this section also compares Berlin to other major OECD metropolitan areas that would have similar patterns of informal learning.

Participation in formal and non-formal CET outside the workplace is low in Berlin compared to international peers across the OECD. Figure 4.1 shows the share of individuals aged 25 to 64 who participated in formal or non-formal (excluding on-the-job) education and training in the four weeks prior to the interview between 2010 and 2020. The graph compares Berlin to other OECD cities. Berlin’s CET participation rate remained constant at around 10% over the observation period. Internationally, Brussels (Belgium) and Warsaw (Poland) show similar participation rates in formal and non-formal (excluding on-the-job) education and training. Other OECD cities such as Helsinki (Finland), Stockholm (Sweden) or Zurich (Switzerland) have much higher participation rates than Berlin. In 2020, participation rates stood at 30.8%, 30.1% and 32.9% respectively in these cities. In London (United Kingdom) and Paris (France), the capital regions of similarly sized European countries, the most recent reported participation rates were 16% and 13% respectively, well-above the level of Berlin.

In Germany, CET participation rates in formal and non-formal education in Berlin are on a par with other city states and higher than in non-city federal states. Figure 4.2 shows the share of individuals aged 25 to 64 who participated in formal or non-formal (excluding guided on-the-job) education and training in the four weeks prior to the interview between 2010 and 2020. The graph compares Berlin to the other German federal states. The national comparison shows that Berlin’s participation rate in formal or non-formal (excluding on-the-job) education and training is on the same level as Hamburg’s and Bremen’s, the other German city states. In 2020, participation rates in these cities were 10.0% and 9.4% respectively. All non-city German federal states report slightly lower participation, down to 5.3% in the federal state of Saarland in 2020. Between 2019 and 2020, participation increased only in Berlin and the federal states of Nordrhein-Westfalen. It should be noted that these participation rates are unadjusted and do not account for differences in age and education of the respective population in the different federal states.

Berlin lags behind all other German federal states for work-related CET. While Berlin has relatively high CET participation outside the workplace the picture is much less favourable for work-related formal and non-formal CET. Based on the most recent Microsensus data, less than 14% of individuals aged 15 or above participated in formal or non-formal work-related CET in 2019. In Sachsen and Thüringen, the two states with the highest participation, around 21% and 20% of the labour force participated in such CET offers respectively (Figure 4.3).

Low work-related CET participation rates in Berlin are not a new phenomenon. For the period since 2014 for which comparable statistics based on the German Microcensus can be produced, work-related CET participation was constant at around 14% of the labour force (Figure 4.4, Panel B). The estimated total number of participants grew from 253 000 in 2014 to 272 000 in 2019, in line with the growth of the labour force in Berlin (Panel A). Consequently, work-related CET has not increased in Berlin despite its growing importance in a rapidly changing labour market (see Chapter 2). The data from 2019 do not take account the effects of the pandemic. Since COVID-19 caused a range of social-distancing measures and took a financial toll on many firms, it likely reduced work-related CET further.

Unique demographic, social and economic characteristics by themselves cannot explain the low CET participation rate in Berlin. A 2018 study by the Deutsche Institut für Erwachsenenbildung (“German Institute for Adult Education”; DIE) calculates expected CET participation rates in all German federal states accounting for structural regional differences, such as the local age structure, average education levels and differences in average income. Holding these variables constant, the study shows that Berlin only utilised 77.4% of its CET potential in 2015, the second lowest value in Germany. Only the federal state of Saarland utilised less of its CET potential (75.4%). On the other hand, some federal states such as Baden-Württemberg and Rheinland-Pfalz managed to reach CET participation rates above their potential, with 119.7% and 117.3% respectively (DIE and Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2018[7]).

Local demographic, social and economic characteristics can only account for one third of the differences in CET participation rates across Germany. Thus, other factors such as the quality of CET, visibility of the different CET offers, cooperation between different local CET actors and the CET guidance infrastructure are likely to play an important role (DIE and Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2018[7]).

CET offered by Berlin’s companies is heavily dependent on the company size. Table 4.1 shows the share of companies offering education and training courses to employees by company size. The first column shows the size of the company measured by the number of employees. The second column shows the share of companies in the respective size category that offered education and training courses to their employees in 2019, the year before the COVID-19 outbreak. In 2019, only 49% of companies with fewer than 10 employees offered education and training opportunities to their employees. This share rises sharply with the size of the company: Among companies that employed 10 to 49 employees in 2019, the share stood at 70%, while almost all larger companies employing 50 or more individuals offered employees some form of job-related training.

The share of companies offering training and education courses dropped sharply during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially among very small enterprises. Comparing the second and third column of Table 4.1 reveals that the share of companies offering training and education to employees dropped sharply in Berlin. In 2019, 57% of all Berlin based companies offered some form of education or training to employees. In 2020, that share dropped to 33%. While companies of all sizes reduced their CET offer, very small enterprises (less than 10 employees) recorded the largest relative fall (-42%), followed by enterprises with 10 to 49 employees (-40%).

The type of training offered by companies in Berlin also depends on the company size. Data from an Industrie- und Handelskammer Berlin (“Chamber of Commerce and Industry”; IHK Berlin) survey conducted in 2019 shows that smaller companies more often rely almost exclusively on self-studying instruments to train their employees. Figure 4.5 shows that 53% and 60% of Berlin’s companies (that are IHK Berlin members) offer self-studying using digital media and self-studying using non-digital media respectively, with little variation across companies of different size. However, companies with larger numbers of employees more often offer non-self-studying training instruments. For example, only 37% of companies that employ fewer than 10 employees offer in-service seminars, compared to 94% of companies employing between 200 and 499 salaried employees. Similar trends can be seen in coaching and mentoring, management training and the possibility of pursuing formal studies alongside employment. The gap between the share of the smallest companies and the share of companies employing between 200 and 499 employees that offered these types of training in 2019 stood at 26 percentage points, 32 percentage points and 36 percentage points respectively.

SMEs and microenterprises in particular tend to underinvest into CET due to a lack of resources and insufficient investment incentives. The issue of little CET investment in small companies is not a Berlin-specific problem and exists for two main reasons: First, SMEs may lack the financial and human resources to offer job-related training. Second, they may lack the incentives to invest into their staff since more qualified staff may demand higher wages; if SMEs are unwilling to pay workers according to their additional (marginal) productivity after new skills are acquired, these workers may leave the firm and small businesses suffer a net loss from the training investment (Brunello et al., 2020[8]).

However, the lack of awareness of training needs, the lack of capacity to assess skill needs and the lack of knowledge about existing training opportunities may also play a role for underinvestment into CET in SMEs. Recent OECD research shows that very small SMEs in particular often do not have their own human resource department and rarely employ specialists on skill development. Assessing skill needs, developing targeted training measures and obtaining external funding are often time-intensive tasks that require specialist employees (OECD, 2021[9]).

Investment into CET by small companies in Berlin may therefore be too low. Additional investment into CET leads to upskilling in workers that allows them to transition into higher quality jobs, earn higher salaries and create additional tax income. Incentivising SMEs to invest more into CET through financial and logistic support can thus be desirable if there is evidence that such measures could lead to an increase in structured education and training offered within or by the small company.

The share of very small businesses among SMEs in Berlin is slightly higher than in other German regions, exacerbating the problem of underinvestment into CET. In Berlin, 83% of SMEs employ fewer than five employees, compared to 81% in Germany. In total, 58% of Berlin’s working population was employed by SMEs in 2018 (KfW Research, 2018[10]). Even small differences in company size among SMEs may make a large difference in CET offers. Table 4.2 and Figure 4.5 show that training offers drop sharply in microenterprises, compared to SMEs with 20 or more employees.

Another factor that might hold back CET participation in Berlin is self-employment. The share of self-employed among all employed is much higher in Berlin than in other German federal states. Figure 2.11 shows that 13.5% of Berlin’s total employed were self-employed in 2019, a share much larger than in all other German federal states. In addition to the large number of self-employed in Berlin, own-account workers made up 11% of all employed, corresponding to 74% of all self-employed (Senatsverwaltung für Integration, 2019[3]). In Germany as a whole, 54.4% of all self-employed were own-account workers in 2019. Thus, a much larger share of the self-employed in Berlin are own-account workers than in other German cities and regions.

Own-account workers tend to participate very little in continuous education and training, even compared to other self-employed. Across the OECD, CET participation among own-account workers is very low compared to all other workers. OECD analyses show that conditional on age, gender and education, only adults outside the labour force and the unemployed are less likely to participate in CET courses. Compared to the employed, own-account workers are 11% less likely to receive education or training. On the other hand, their willingness to participate in CET is similar to that of full-time employees (OECD, 2019[11]).

The low participation of own-account workers in education and training is explained in parts by their relatively stricter financial and time constraints. Own-account workers often work longer hours due to additional time needed to look for future work assignments. The cost of training is another major barrier to CET participation among own-account workers. Public financial support programmes typically target the employed or the unemployed, such that both the direct and the indirect costs of CET have to be borne by own-account workers themselves. Own-account workers also tend to have fewer legal rights to training since they lack union representation (OECD, 2019[11]).

In summary, Berlin’s low CET participation in international comparison and its very low work-related CET in national comparison are likely caused by a combination of factors. The main challenge is the large share of very small firms, self-employed and own-account workers. The obstacles these groups face to participate in education and training in larger numbers were likely aggravated by the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to additional financial pressure and new challenges such as social distancing requirements within companies. Pre-existing trends towards the automation of production processes and the need for digital skills accelerated. Policies are therefore needed to re-invigorate CET in Berlin. The next section takes a closer look at Berlin’s CET landscape.

As CET ultimately benefits the learner, there are important questions on when and how to use public funds to increase CET participation. CET is important as it prepares adults for their future careers and ensures that companies remain competitive by developing skills in their workforce that respond to changes in production processes. Thus, the main incentive to invest into CET lies with individuals and companies. Nevertheless, some individuals and companies face barriers to CET participation that well-targeted policy instruments can overcome. This section provides an overview of Berlin’s CET landscape. It introduces the main actors in Berlin, distinguishes between different types of instruments used and analyses complementarities between services offered by the German federal government and the government of Berlin.

CET measures in Germany mostly receive funding from individuals and companies. Figure 4.6 shows funding of adult learning beyond initial education in Germany by different sources. In 2015 – the latest year for which a detailed funding breakdown is available – private individuals and companies were responsible for 38% and 43% of total funding respectively. Public funding accounted for the remaining 19%. The public funding comes from the BA and directly from the federal, regional and local governments in approximately equal parts. The BA is funded primarily through unemployment insurance contributions.

The CET landscape in Germany is characterised by a high degree of decentralisation. Individuals and enterprises are generally the main entities responsible for CET uptake and the provision of training. Within its governance structure, companies, the social and economic partners, CET providers and the government at national and federal state level are all involved in shaping CET offers and curricula (OECD, 2021[1]). On the one hand, such a decentralised system is widely recognised for achieving training provision that can be tailored to regional context. On the other hand, the coordination between different stakeholders that is required to make such a system efficient is a major challenge.

Fundamentally, three different types of CET in Berlin can be distinguished by their respective target group. The first type is CET offered to the unemployed in the form of active labour market policies (ALMPs). The primary goal of these measures is to integrate the unemployed back into the labour market, thus ensuring that skills match those demanded on the labour market and unemployment spells do not become too long. The second type is CET offered to the employed to build on their existing skills. The primary objective of such CET is to improve the labour market position of participants and ensure their adaptation to changing job skill requirements. The third type is general adult education, which offers a broad set of education and training courses. It is open to anyone in the population, regardless of age or employment status. Its objective is not primarily labour market related.

Different actors within the Berlin CET landscape are responsible for delivering CET guidance and education and training depending on the target group. Similar to other German federal states, a range of actors are involved in the guidance and delivery of CET:

  • The Bundesagentur für Arbeit – Regionaldirektion Berlin-Brandenburg (“Regional Directorate of the Federal Employment Agency – Berlin-Brandenburg”; BA); The BA is the German Public Employment Service (PES) and primarily focusses on the implementation of active labour market policies targeting the unemployed. Main services include linking clients to jobs and vocational training, career counselling, employer counselling, supporting job-related education and training as well as supporting the labour market integration of people with disability. Recently, the BA has also adopted measures geared towards CET of the employed. The BA has 10 regional directorates, with the directorate for Berlin-Brandenburg responsible for Berlin.

  • The Senatsverwaltung für Integration, Arbeit und Soziales (“Berlin Senate Department for Integration, Labour and Social Affairs”; SenIAS); The SenIAS complements some measures offered by the BA through additional active labour market policies that target specific segments of both the employed and the unemployed.

  • The Job Centers, jointly managed by the BA and the SenIAS, provide job market guidance and training to unemployed who are social assistance (“Hartz 4”) recipients.

  • The Volkshochschulen (“Adult Education Centres”; VHS), coordinated by the Senatsverwaltung für Bildung, Jugend und Familie (“Senate Department for Education, Youth and Family”; SenBJF); VHS offer general adult education open to anyone with courses generally not designed to support labour market prospects of participants.

  • The Landeszentrale für politische Bildung Berlin (“Berlin’s Agency for Civic Education”; LPBB); LPBB is a non-partisan institution to offer civic education under the supervision of SenBJF.

  • The Senatsverwaltung für Gesundheit, Pflege und Gleichstellung (“Senate Department for Health, Care and Equality”; SenGPG); SenGPG offers job-related CET guidance to women specifically.

  • Private sector companies; Private sector companies provide on-the-job training to employees at their own discretion.

  • Social partners; Social partners such as trade unions and employer organisations and economic partners such as Chambers of Commerce and Trade and Chambers of Skilled Crafts play a key role in consulting on legislative processes at the federal state level, shaping regulations on ALMPs and formal vocational CET, negotiating collective and company agreements that affect CET provision (OECD, 2021[1]).

  • Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and other social economy actors; NGOs and other social economy actors target specific vulnerable segments of the population and provide training and education services that foster societal and labour market integration.

On the ground, job-related CET and CET counselling financed by the BA, the Job Centers and the SenIAS is primarily delivered through certified private Bildungsträger (“CET providers”). A certification as a CET provider can be obtained through a fachkundige Stelle (“expert office”) listed in Germany's national accreditation body’s database. A certification is required for all measures funded by the BA, the Job Centers and the SenIAS and is generally valid for three years. Employers offering on-the-job training generally do no need to be certified.

A striking feature of Berlin’s CET landscape is the strict institutionalised distinction between job-related CET and general adult education. Work-related CET in Berlin is the joint responsibility of the BA Berlin-Brandenburg and SenIAS and delivered through certified CET providers. General adult learning is separated from these labour market related efforts. It is primarily delivered through the 12 VHS, which are institutions of the Berlin boroughs and are run and equipped by them at their own responsibility following the Berlin Schools Act (Section 123). The SenBJF performs regulatory tasks of citywide importance. This includes the regular publication of a comparative performance and quality development report and issuing of fee and remuneration regulations that are valid throughout Berlin’s VHS. The independence of the VHS mean that they have almost complete discretion over their curricula.

The recent passing of a new law on adult learning in Berlin has further cemented the VHS as an integral part of Berlin’s CET system. The law came into force in August 2021. It makes three major contributions to general adult education in Berlin: First, it provides legal safeguarding to the VHS and Berlin’s LPBB. Second, adult learning providers can apply for official recognition as adult learning providers and use their status to apply for government funding. Third, the visibility of adult learning will be increased through regular reports on adult education in Berlin and the establishment of an Erwachsenenbildungsbeirat (“Adult Learning Advisory Board”). The new law is described in more detail in Box 4.3.

While positive for general adult education, the law exemplifies the strong divide between general adult education and labour market specific training in Berlin. For example, as shown in Box 4.3, the advisory board includes only one member jointly appointed by the Industrie- und Handelskammer (“Chamber of Commerce and Industry”), the Berliner Handwerkskammer (“Chamber of Crafts Berlin”) or the Vereinigung der Unternehmensverbände in Berlin und Brandenburg (“Association of businesses in Berlin and Brandenburg”). Its membership is otherwise heavily skewed towards the representation of vulnerable minority groups. The link to Berlin’s labour market and wider local economy is almost entirely missing. Other OECD cities such as London do not distinguish between civic education and work-related education and training as strictly, but rather acknowledge that economic and societal objectives are intertwined. Box 4.4 describes London’s approach to adult learning in more detail.

Four policy instruments to encourage CET participation can be distinguished: CET guidance, financial incentives for individuals, education and training leave and financial incentives for companies. The general idea of all measures is to increase CET participation of individuals for whom the (long-term) benefits of education and training is larger than the direct or indirect (short-term) cost. Depending on the barrier to participation individuals face, different instruments can be deployed. CET guidance is used to raise awareness of CET services and increase participation of individuals who either did not know about existing offers or were not able to navigate these offers on their own. Education and training leave improves the conditions for CET participation by removing work-related time constraints that hamper participation rates. Financial incentives loosen financial constraints of individuals or companies or incentivise participation of individuals who may be unaware of the benefits.

A plethora of CET guidance providers exist in Berlin. Table 4.2 gives an overview of the different CET guidance offered in Berlin, listed by the actors involved and their respective target groups. The main guidance providers are the SenIAS in its Berliner Beratung zu Bildung und Beruf (“Berlin Guidance on Education and Profession network”; BBB) and the BA’s Lebensbegleitende Berufsberatung im Erwerbsleben (“Lifelong Vocational Guidance for adults in employment”; LBBiE). Smaller-scale guidance offers exist, with some complementing existing services offered by the main providers (IQ-Netzwerk, Grundbildungszentrum Berlin) and some existing for historical reasons (Berufsperspektiven für Frauen). CET guidance offers in the Berlin’s VHS also exist, but are currently limited in scope, an observation discussed in more detail in section 3.2. The BA and the Job Centers also provide CET guidance to the unemployed specifically.

The CET guidance offered by the BA is open to all individuals, while SenIAS also targets some population groups specifically. The SenIAS operates a network of counselling centres. The network consists of seven career guidance centres that are open to all individuals and three more specialised centres. The specialised centres target individuals seeking further formal education (Fachberatung berufliche Qualifizierung), SMEs (Qualifizierungsberatung in KMU), migrants seeking language training (Erfolg mit Sprache und Abschluss) and refugees seeking general career guidance (Mobile Beratung zu Bildung und Beruf für geflüchtete Menschen; MoBiBe). Geographically, the counselling centres are spread out evenly across Berlin’s boroughs (OECD, 2022[15]).

All centres offer a wide range of CET guidance services, with some overlap between the services provided by the SenIAS and the BA. These services include counselling on formal education and training, professional (re-)orientation, CV writing, access to employment, career development, application procedures, CET while employed, learning strategies and sources of CET funding. Additional in-house services include the mapping of skills and formal education, the provision of a computer to facilitate the browsing of online databases, and support with the administrative steps in applications for jobs and education measures (OECD, 2022[15]). While both the SenIAS and the BA offer comprehensive CET guidance services, navigating through different very similar offers may not always be straightforward and could potentially discourage some individuals.

An overview of adult learning and CET offers is available online through national databases such as Kursnet (“Course net”). Kursnet is the BA’s main nationwide online platform that functions as a search tool for CET offers. Other nationwide online tools hosted by the BA include Karriere und Weiterbildung (“Career and CET”), Erkundungstool Check-U (“Exploratory Tool Check-U”), Berufsentwicklungsnavigator (“Career Development Navigator”), berufe.tv (“jobs.tv”) , berufsfeld-info.de (“Occupational Field Info”), Typisch ich (“Typical Me”) and Lernbörse (“Learning Bourse”). Different websites target different segments of the population, such as young people, people interested in vocational training and occupations, employed individuals who want to advance their skills and the general public (OECD, 2021[1]).

The SenIAS also operates the Berlin-specific Berliner Weiterbildungsdatenbank (“CET Database Berlin”; WDB). The database includes around 40 000 entries from approximately 1 100 adult education providers. It is updated daily. Its interface is easy to operate and only requires users to enter their postcode and the CET field in which they are interested. Users can also limit the geographical search distance to display offers in their vicinity. WDB’s main focus is on professional development courses but it also includes a wide range of courses offered by the VHS on topics related to civil society, politics and culture. A cooperation exists between the WDB and the Brandenburg-specific similar database Weiterbildung Brandenburg (“Further education in Brandenburg”). In the main WDB search portal, the offers of both databases are displayed. WDB also offers generic links to general CET funding options for each course in the database. However, to increase take-up of these financial instruments, displayed funding options could be tailored to individual needs more precisely and links to required documents could be provided.

The WDB also offers further in-built services for companies and adult education providers but could. Companies can use WDB’s interactive instruments to analyse the need for qualification within their own establishment. They can also send inquiries to adult learning providers to find suitable offers. Information on CET funding opportunities for companies are also available within WDB. However, feedback from social partners gathered by the OECD for the purposes of this report also revealed that employers often find it difficult to navigate the WDB. Future updates of the database could specifically address employers on the WDB’s home page. Adult learning providers primarily use the platform to publish their offers, which they can then also cross-post in other CET databases such as the nationwide Kursnet.

Financial incentives for individuals can take different forms but generally aim to remove financial constraints that hamper CET participation. The main forms of financial incentives offered to individuals are education allowances, loans at preferential rates, CET premiums, scholarships, CET subsidies, tax incentives and education vouchers (OECD, 2021[1]).

In 2020, the German federal government offered 10 such financial incentive schemes. The different programmes funded by the German federal government are summarised in Table 4.3. On the highest level, these can be distinguished by the type of policy instrument, their respective target group and the scope of the measure. Target groups are often narrowly defined and eligibility depends on a range of socio-economic characteristics such as the level of education, age, employment status and income. The scope of the measure refers to the type of training the programme supports.

The wide range of financial incentive instruments allows for targeting specific segments of the population but bears risks of low take-up. The first potential issue is that individuals may find it hard to navigate through the different offers and are unlikely to be aware of all the different funding options. The second risk pertains to the narrowly defined target groups and type of CET covered. Without an overarching framework, such specific targeting may lead to some individuals “falling through the cracks”. For example, earlier OECD work notes that individuals who find their skills and qualifications to become less relevant in the labour market do not have options to upgrade their skills on their own initiative but have to rely on government measures targeted at employers (OECD, 2021[1]). Box 4.6 describes the two new laws that govern these financial support options for employers – the Qualifizierungschancengesetz (Skills Development Opportunities Act”) and the Arbeit-von-morgen-Gesetz (“Work of Tomorrow Act”) – in detail.

The German federal states further complement these financial incentives according to regional needs, but Berlin did not offer additional financial incentives to individuals before the COVID-19 pandemic started. In 2019, 10 out of 16 German federal states offered additional vouchers covering direct costs for job-related CET. The target group of these additional offers were mostly low-educated and low-income individuals, as well as employees and owners of small and micro enterprises (OECD, 2021[1]). However, some measures also target the development of specific skills. One example includes the “Bavarian education cheque”, a programme that ran until July 2021. It was supported by the European Social Fund and paid EUR 500 to employees who aimed to develop their digital skills in training courses that last a minimum of 8 hours (Bayerischen Staatsministeriums für Familie, 2021[16]). In addition to education vouchers, 8 out of 16 federal states offered CET premiums for formal vocational upskilling qualifications in 2019 (OECD, 2021[1]).

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Berlin’s SenIAS introduced a CET premium for workers who were forced to reduce their working hours during the pandemic. Like other OECD countries, Germany introduced a job retention scheme in the form of short-time work (Kurzarbeit) to contain the employment fallout caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Since March 2020, firms can request financial support from the federal government if 10% of their workforce are affected by cuts in working hours. Public employment services reimburse employers for these reductions in working hours while employees continue to receive parts of their salaries for hours they do not work (OECD, 2021[17]). To encourage uptake of education and training among affected employees, the SenIAS introduced an additional premium. Employees working reduced hours receive EUR 250 monthly if they participate in education or training measures every day of the month. Longer or shorter training courses are supported proportionally against this benchmark. Only courses offered by the BA Berlin-Brandenburg are eligible for support (Senatsverwaltung für Integration Arbeit und Soziales, 2021[18]).

Due to the high share of own-account workers in Berlin compared to other German regions and cities, they present a natural target group for city-level initiatives. As detailed above, both the share of self-employed in total employment and the share of own-account workers among the self-employed are higher in Berlin than in other German cities and regions. Across the OECD, CET among own-account workers are supported through five main instruments: Tax deductions, subsidies, financial incentives, wage replacement schemes and employment insurance plans (OECD, 2019[11]).Box 4.5 provides an example from Vienna, Austria, where training is financed for some own-account workers.

The educational leave law in Berlin is generous compared to other German federal states. Educational leave laws are a competence of the German federal states and allow employees to take leave from work for educational purposes. All but two federal states have such educational leave laws. Table 4.4 shows the generosity of these measures by German federal states. Most states offer employees five days of educational leave per year. Berlin’s model of offering 10 days per two years adds some flexibility to the generic model. Under the law, educational leave is granted for job-related training and political education. Political education is understood as a broad term that covers general adult education on broader societal issues.

Participation in educational leave remains relatively low in Berlin, but a slight upward trend is visible over the past decade. In 2018, the latest year for which complete data is available, 16 520 employees in Berlin took educational leave. This corresponds to approximately 1% of the underlying eligible population. In absolute terms, the number of educational leave takers thus increased significantly compared to the year 2010, when 9 834 took advantage of this measure. However, as the size of the labour force also grew over the same time period, the relative number of participants only increased marginally (Figure 4.7).

The vast majority of employees taking educational leave did so to pursue work-related training. In 2018, 85% of educational leave takers pursued work-related training. Around 10% took time off work to take courses on political education. Another 5% of educational leave takers engaged in a combination of both types of CET.

Women in Berlin are more likely to take educational leave than men. The data shown in Figure 4.7 can be further disaggregated by gender and the level of education. In 2018, 57% of educational leave takers were female, a continuation of a historical trend. Since 1991, women constituted more than 50% of educational leave takers in every recorded year.

Individuals without professional qualification constitute a negligible share of educational leave takers. Only 7% of employees taking time off work for educational purposes did not hold any professional qualification. EU-LFS data shows that the share of Berlin’s labour force without professional qualification (a level of education below upper secondary education) among 25 to 64 year olds stood at 12.9% in 2018. Thus, low-educated individuals are underrepresented among those who take educational leave, even though they are among the groups to benefit the most from additional training or education.

Companies in Berlin stress the importance of financial incentives for expanding their CET offers. Figure 4.8 shows that 73% of Berlin-based companies surveyed by the IHK respond that financial support would be the most useful type of support to help them expand their in-house CET. 52% of companies state that greater flexibility of financial support by the government would be helpful. Access to information on CET offers and support in CET planning are further reasons mentioned by 30% and 29% of surveyed companies respectively.

The German federal government does offer generous financial incentives to increase CET in small companies. The German federal government has recently passed two new laws, the Qualifizierungschancengesetz (“Skills Development Opportunities Act”) and the Arbeit-von-morgen-Gesetz (“Work of Tomorrow Act”) that support companies in their efforts to offer CET to employees. The amount of the subsidy depends on a range of parameters such as the size of the company, the share of workers within the company who require training, the type of CET offered and the education level and work experience of participants. Very small companies can get up to 100% of their incurred direct and indirect cost reimbursed. Box 4.6 describes these laws in more detail.

Unlike other federal states, Berlin does not offer additional financial incentives to companies to improve CET participation. In Germany, 13 out of 16 federal states complement the instruments provided by the federal government (OECD, 2021[1]). Some of these measures predate the new instruments laid out in the Skills Development Opportunities Act and the Work of Tomorrow Act and are therefore likely to be phased out. However, some of these complementary initiatives fill important gaps: For example, federal states generally support education and training opportunities without any lower limit on their duration. Therefore, they add some flexibility to measures funded under the countrywide Skills Development Opportunities Act and the Work of Tomorrow Act, where the minimum course duration is three weeks to be eligible for funding. Measures on the federal state level are often co-funded by the European Social Fund (ESF) (OECD, 2021[1]).

However, early data for the whole of Germany shows that the take-up of these new measures remains low, in particular among the smallest SMEs. A survey conducted by the BA in October/November 2020 suggests that only one in ten German companies make use of the new financial instruments that aim to support CET. Among surveyed companies that employ fewer than 10 employees, only 26% were aware of the new instruments, compared to 67% of companies that employ more than 250 employees. Only 6% of the smallest companies had made use of the financial support measures, compared to 35% among large companies. Companies that employ between 11 and 250 employees fell in between these extremes on both metrics (Institute for Employment Research, 2021[20]).

Employers name five reasons for the low-take up of financial support to increase CET offers. Fifty-three percent of German companies that were aware of the CET financial support options but did not make use of them responded not having found suitable CET courses and programmes for their employees. 37% responded that the administrative burden was too high, 34% responded refused to engage with the BA, 30% of the surveyed companies responded that their employees were not interested in CET and 27% responded that the minimum duration to become eligible for financial support was too long (Institute for Employment Research, 2021[20]). Taken together, a lack of awareness among small employers in particular and the lack of (human) resources to navigate through offers appear to be the major bottlenecks that hamper take-up.

Despite the low take-up of financial support measures, employers in Berlin continue to attach importance to CET, with a rising need for digital skill development. Figure 4.9 shows that the overall importance of CET for employers has approximately stayed constant. However, some CET content have gained importance among employers, while the development of some other skills has become less relevant. For example, the share of employers that named digital skills and the ability to adapt to digitalisation has increased by 16 and 13 percentage points respectively between 2016 (2017) and 2019. On the other hand, the share of employers that named business specific skills as a particular important CET topic dropped by 16 percentage points over the same period. The development of other skills, such as project management and the ability to speak foreign languages, has stayed constant. Taken together, the findings imply that Berlin’s employers acknowledge the increasing importance of skills that allow employees to adapt to a changing labour market.

To engage Berlin’s SMEs in local skill development, innovative solutions are needed. The analysis in this chapter suggests that financial support is important but by itself often insufficient to increase training and education offers in SMEs. At the same time, the need for updating and upgrading employees’ skills within SMEs according to structural labour market changes is evident. Other cities across the OECD have therefore started to acknowledge the need to go beyond financial incentives. For example, the city of Vantaa, Finland, has started to contact SMEs proactively. Training programmes are then developed jointly with SMEs. Box 4.7 describes the approach taken by the city of Vantaa in more detail.

In response to the resource constraints SMEs face, so-called Weiterbildungsverbünde (“CET employers’ networks”) have recently started to develop in Berlin. Initiated by the German Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (BMAS) as part of the Nationale Weiterbildungsstrategie (“National Skills Strategy”; NWS) in 2021, CET employers’ networks aim to bring together local companies, actors from the wider CET training landscape, as well as regional labour market actors. They aim to develop and organise joint training measures that can be carried out across company boundaries in a resource-saving manner. The focus is in particular on the exchange between the partners of a network, the identification of further training needs in participating companies as well as advice on and research for suitable further training offers. Four of such employers’ networks in Berlin have started receiving funding from BMAS. Table 4.5 provides an overview of the networks. The funding covers up to 70% of costs incurred by these networks, up to a maximum of EUR 1 million for 36 months (Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales, 2021[22]).

Two of these CET employers’ networks explicitly focus on developing training measures that improve digital skills and respond to newly arising skills needs in light of the automation of production processes. Both the Netzwerk Großbeerenstraße and the R-Learning Kollektiv plan to put their emphasis on creating courses that help their members advance the digital skills of their employees.

The success of CET employers’ networks will depend on how well they manage to integrate SMEs that have not offered training and education to employees so far. To this end, the city of Berlin could support the participation of very small companies in the networks. SenIAS could track developments closely within networks such as the Netzwerk Großbeerenstraße, for which it serves as a partner. To develop networks further and beyond the initial funding period, the city of Berlin could follow the suggestions put forward by the Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände (“Confederation of German Employers' Associations”; BDA). The BDA proposes to engage large companies in such networks. These could open their training courses and workshops outside of regular operating hours, and with their expertise, they could offer advanced training on new machines and technologies for employees of SMEs (Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände, 2021[23]). SenIAS could take over the coordination of their engagement in the long-term.

Ranked by hours of education offered per capita, Berlin has one of the strongest VHS systems in Germany. Figure 4.10 shows the number of VHS courses offered per 1 000 residents in Berlin (Panel A) and the hours of education and training offered within Berlin’s VHS per 1 000 residents (Panel B) in 2019. While the number of VHS courses offered is around the median when compared to German federal states, the 243 hours of education and training offered by Berlin’s VHS per 1 000 residents is third only to the federal states of Niedersachsen and Baden-Württemberg that offered 282 and 262 hours of course work per 1 000 residents respectively. The two metrics combined suggest that VHS in Berlin offer mostly training and education of relatively longer duration compared to other German federal states.

A striking feature of CET offered by the VHS in Berlin is the large amount of language courses. Figure 4.11 shows that the explanation for the relatively long duration of courses in Berlin’s VHS lies in the relatively large share of language courses in the total amount of courses offered. In 2019, 50.4% of courses offered in Berlin’s VHS were language courses, compared to 32.3% on average across all German federal states. Language courses require relatively more hours of teaching than courses on other commonly taught topics such as health or culture. Courses on health and culture made up 18.1% and 16.3% of total courses offered in Berlin in 2019, compared to 34.7% and 15.9% respectively for Germany as a whole. In the same year, job-related training in the fields of IT and management only made up 9.2% of the total number of courses in Berlin (Germany as a whole: 8.1%).

The majority of these language courses offered by VHS are German language courses. While no data exists on Berlin specifically, 68% of language courses offered by VHS in Germany as a whole in 2019 were German language courses. Of these, 53% were offered within integration courses financed by the Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge (“Federal Office for Migration and Refugees”). These integration courses are sometimes compulsory for migrants who do not speak basic German. Both the Job Centers (if the migrant receives social assistance) and the Landesamt für Einwanderung (“Berlin Immigration Office”) can place migrants under the obligation to participate.

However, while many migrants use VHS German language courses for integration into the German society, VHS in Berlin do not currently offer guidance on labour market integration. One of the striking observations in Figure 4.12 is the job market counselling offered by VHS in Hessen compared to other German federal states, with Berlin, Bremen, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Sachsen and Sachsen-Anhalt not offering labour market guidance at all. While limited in scope, such offers exist in VHS in other German federal states. Most noteworthy, in the federal state of Hessen, more than 35 000 people received job market counselling in VHS. These counselling efforts in Hessen are partly financed by the Hessischer Weiterbildungspakt (“Hessen covenant on further education”), an initiative by the federal state of Hessen to strengthen its CET system. Based on existing projects, the VHS in Frankfurt am Main, Wiesbaden and Groß-Gerau developed a best-practice guide on CET and professional guidance. One example on labour market guidance offered to migrants is described in more detail in Box 4.8.

Two main reasons exist why Berlin does not offer labour market related guidance within its VHS. First, Berlin strictly distinguishes between general adult education and job-market related training and education, with each falling under the competence of different ministries. Second, as shown in Table 4.2, the CET guidance landscape in Berlin is already numerous and scattered.

The MoBiBe (“Mobile counselling on education and careers for refugees”) initiative has started to fill this gap by targeting newly-arrived refugees in strategic locations. MoBiBe, initiated by SenIAS in 2015 in response to the arrival of a large number of asylum seekers, strategically positions its mobile units near sites that host or teach refugees, including the VHS. To give mobile units visibility, MoBiBe staff members also introduce their counselling services during German language courses (Senatsverwaltung für Integration, 2015[26]).

While promising, operations of MoBiBe are still relatively limited and could be scaled up to include all migrants. In total, MoBiBe held 8 447 counselling sessions in 2019, with 5 552 individuals receiving counselling. In comparison, the job market counselling offered by VHS in Hessen reached 35 077 individuals in the same year (Figure 4.12). Hessen’s total population in 2019 stood at 6.3 million, compared to 3.6 million in Berlin. The share of population with a migration background is on a similar level in the two federal states (Berlin: 33.1% in 2019; Hessen: 34.4% in 2019). While generally open to other migrant groups, MoBiBe currently tailors its counselling services mostly to refugees. This is reflected in the country of origin of individuals receiving counselling. In 2019, the majority of individuals receiving counselling were Syrians (20.4%), Iranians (12.4%) and Afghans (9.6%) (Senatsverwaltung für Integration Arbeit und Soziales, 2020[27]). A natural option to scale up the promising work of MoBiBe is to extend it to people with a migration background that are not recent refugees.

Berlin has an active social economy that supports and complements adult learning measures by the PES, the federal government, and the federal state government. The OECD defines the social economy as the set of organisations and associations that are driven by “values of solidarity, the primacy of people over capital, and democratic and participative governance” (OECD, 2021[28]). Experiences from across the OECD show that social economy initiatives can reinforce local development approaches by national, regional and local governments (OECD, 2020[29]). In Berlin, some initiatives in the field of CET complement the government measures discussed throughout the previous sections of this chapter. Two of them, the Grundbildungszentrum Berlin (“Berlin Centre for Basic Education”) and the ReDI School of Digital Integration are discussed in more detail in the following.

The Berlin Centre for Basic Education targets functionally illiterate adults. A 2018 study by the University of Hamburg showed that 12.1% all adults in Germany struggle to extract the meaning from a basic text and/or are not able to write such texts. Among these adults, 62% were part of the labour force, 53% were native German speakers and 78% had completed at least mandatory schooling. While no statistics on adult illiteracy exist for Berlin explicitly, its relatively low labour force participation rate, its large share of foreign-born individuals and its relatively large share of early school leavers suggests that the share of adults who fall into the category of functionally illiterate adults could be even higher than the German average. The Berlin Centre for Basic Education targets these functionally illiterate adults by serving as a point of first contact, offering guidance events and individual counselling. Its Grundbildungs-Atlas (“basic education atlas”) is a compilation of all Berlin learning and consulting offers and is available both offline and online (Berlin Centre for Basic Education, 2019[30]). The Berlin Centre for Basic Education is a cooperation of two NGOs that focus on basic education and adult literacy. The SenBJF provides financial support.

The Berlin Centre for Basic Education’s promising “alpha label” initiative raises awareness of (functional) illiteracy among adults and could be scaled up across Berlin. The alpha label is a label for institutions and organisation in Berlin. It signals that the services provided within a specific building or facility are accessible to adults with low-literacy. Obtaining the label requires staff training and equipping buildings and facilities with easy-to-read signs. Box 4.9 describes the alpha label in more detail. The alpha label reduces the stigma of illiteracy by teaching staff of public institutions and social economy organisations how to guide adults with low literacy towards existing education and training offers. It thereby promotes basic education in Berlin and serves as a valuable tool to approach segments of the population that are otherwise difficult to reach.

The ReDI School of Digital Integration targets refugees and teaches course participants advanced coding and programming skills. ReDI School offers a range of course options in coding and programming to refugees free of charge. These courses include courses on frontend web development, data science, software development as well as more software specific courses on Salesforce or Azure. Its offers are open to a wide range of refugees. It specifically caters some of its coding offers to women within its digital women programme, which provides childcare during the duration of courses and also offers interpretation in the classroom to encourage participation among women who do not speak English or German. Consequently, women make up 60% of its course participants. Further offers also include programmes for children aged 9 and above and youth aged 17 and above. Seventy-five percent of those graduating from ReDI Digital Career Program, its core module, currently have paid jobs, mostly in the technology industry. Box 4.10 provides more information on ReDI School’s business model.

The government of Berlin could ensure that the core business of the ReDI School is scaled up to include all migrants. So far, the ReDI School explicitly focusses on migrants who migrated to Berlin for humanitarian reasons and have obtained refugee status. The main reason for the limited focus are capacity and financial constraints. Berlin’s SenIAS could ensure that the ReDI School’s core business, i.e. the ReDI Digital Career Program, is sufficiently funded such that migrants who came for economic or family reasons can also join its courses.

Not requiring German skills to participate is a reason for the success of the ReDI School. Next to the minimum amount of bureaucracy required to join ReDI School’s courses, digital skill training does not require German language skills. The ReDI School further directs its students to the BA for German language courses, which they can take in parallel.

Similar projects across the OECD combine vocational training with language training. Cities and regions of Sweden in particular have started implementing programmes that combine vocational and language training for migrants. Box 4.11 provides an overview of two promising initiatives.

Berlin’s VHS could implement such dual education approaches, but would have to be more open to integrate work-related courses into their curricula. Due to its importance in the provision of German language courses, the VHS are in a good position to expand its offers to combine these language courses with vocational training for migrants and refugees. Implementing such new programmes would explicitly call for increased cooperation with the BA to find suitable vocational training options and with employers’ associations to arrange internships and work placements.


[16] Bayerischen Staatsministeriums für Familie, A. (2021), “Bayerischer Bildungsscheck”, https://www.stmas.bayern.de/arbeit/bildungsscheck/#sec1 (accessed on 4 January 2022).

[30] Berlin Centre for Basic Education (2019), “Das Berliner Grund-Bildungs-Zentrum: Fortschritt und Stand”.

[8] Brunello, G. et al. (2020), Financing Constraints and Employers’ Investment in Training, http://www.iza.org.

[22] Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales (2021), Das Bundesprogramm “Aufbau von Weiterbildungsverbünden”, https://www.bmas.de/DE/Arbeit/Aus-und-Weiterbildung/Weiterbildungsrepublik/Weiterbildungsverbuende/weiterbildungsverbuende-art.html (accessed on 6 January 2022).

[23] Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände (2021), Den Strukturwandel der deutschen Wirtschaft klug und nachhaltig gestalten-gemeinsame Verantwortung von Wirtschaft, Sozialpartnern und Politik.

[5] de la Roca, J. and D. Puga (2017), “Learning by Working in Big Cities”, The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 84/1, pp. 106-142, https://doi.org/10.1093/RESTUD/RDW031.

[7] DIE and Bertelsmann Stiftung (2018), “Deutscher Weiterbildungsatlas. Teilnahme und Angebot in Kreisen und kreisfreien Städten”.

[12] Dohmen, D. and M. Cordes (2019), Kosten der Weiterbildung in Deutschland-Verteilung der Finanzlasten auf Unternehmen, Privatpersonen, öffentliche Hand, https://www.fibs.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/Literatur/FiBS-Forum_061_Kosten_Weiterbildung.pdf (accessed on 15 December 2021).

[4] Eisermann, M., F. Janik and T. Kruppe (2014), “Participation in adult education: The reasons for inconsistent participation rates in different sources of data”, Zeitschrift fur Erziehungswissenschaft, Vol. 17/3, pp. 473-495, https://doi.org/10.1007/S11618-014-0561-Y.

[2] European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (2015), “Job-related adult learning and continuing vocational training in Europe a statistical picture”.

[14] Greater London Authority (2022), Skills Roadmap for London.

[24] Huntemann, H. et al. (2019), Volkshochschul-Statistik – 58. Folge, Berichtsjahr 2019, https://doi.org/10.3278/85/0025w.

[20] Institute for Employment Research (2021), Nur jeder zehnte Betrieb nutzt die Weiterbildungsförderung der Bundesagentur für Arbeit, https://www.iab-forum.de/nur-jeder-zehnte-betrieb-nutzt-die-weiterbildungsfoerderung-der-bundesagentur-fuer-arbeit/ (accessed on 6 January 2022).

[10] KfW Research (2018), Regionale Gesichter des Mittelstands: ein Bundeslandvergleich, https://isb.rlp.de/fileadmin/user_upload/tt_news/2018/20180314_KfW-Mittelstandsatlas_2018.pdf (accessed on 17 December 2021).

[15] OECD (2022), Career guidance for low-qualified workers in Germany (forthcoming).

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

[9] OECD (2021), Incentives for SMEs to Invest in Skills: Lessons from European Good Practices, Getting Skills Right, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/1eb16dc7-en.

[17] OECD (2021), Job retention schemes during the COVID-19 lockdown and beyond - OECD, https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/view/?ref=135_135415-6bardplc5q&title=Job-retention-schemes-during-the-COVID-19-lockdown-and-beyond (accessed on 4 January 2022).

[28] OECD (2021), Social Economy - OCDE, https://www.oecd.org/fr/cfe/leed/social-economy.htm (accessed on 14 January 2022).

[32] OECD (2021), “STOCKHOLM, Sweden - The YFI and SFX Programmes to Support Migrants - Key facts Content and mode of delivery”, https://www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/OECD-Adult-Learning-Stockholm-YFIandSFX.pdf (accessed on 18 January 2022).

[29] OECD (2020), Regional Strategies for the Social Economy - Examples from France, Spain, Sweden and Poland, http://www.oecd.org.

[11] OECD (2019), OECD Employment Outlook 2019: The Future of Work, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9ee00155-en.

[6] Peters, J. (2020), “Dynamic agglomeration economies and learning by working in specialised regions”, https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbz022.

[13] Senatsverwaltung für Bildung, J. (2021), Erwachsenenbildungsgesetz vom Parlament beschlossen: Historischer Tag für Lebenslanges Lernen in Berlin, https://www.berlin.de/sen/bjf/service/presse/pressearchiv-2021/pressemitteilung.1087304.php (accessed on 5 January 2022).

[18] Senatsverwaltung für Integration Arbeit und Soziales (2021), “Weiterbildungsprämie in der Kurzarbeit”, https://www.berlin.de/sen/arbeit/weiterbildung/weiterbildungspraemie-kug/ (accessed on 4 January 2022).

[27] Senatsverwaltung für Integration Arbeit und Soziales (2020), Beratungs-Monitor 2019, https://www.berlin.arbeitundleben.de/cms/upload/bildung_und_digitalisierung/Beratungs-Monitor_2019.pdf (accessed on 7 January 2022).

[3] Senatsverwaltung für Integration, A. (2019), “Senatorin Breitenbach: Solo-Selbstständige arbeiten oft prekär und schlecht bezahlt”, https://www.berlin.de/sen/ias/presse/pressemitteilungen/2019/pressemitteilung.842457.php (accessed on 20 December 2021).

[26] Senatsverwaltung für Integration, A. (2015), “Fachkonzept zur mobilen Bildungsberatung für geflüchtete Menschen in Berlin (MoBiBe)”.

[21] Urban Innovative Actions Initiative (2021), Urban Growth-GSIP Vantaa - Growth and Social investment Pacts for Local Companies in the City of Vantaa, https://uia-initiative.eu/en/uia-cities/vantaa (accessed on 6 January 2022).

[25] Volkshochschule Frankfurt am Main (2020), Praxisordner Beratung - Themen, Vorgehensweisen, Erfahrungen, https://vhs.frankfurt.de/VHSFFM/media/Aktuelles-Teaser/Projekte/VHSffm_Bildungsberatung_Praxisordner2020.pdf (accessed on 14 December 2021).

[19] Waff (2021), Weiterbildungsförderung für Ein-Personen-Unternehmen (EPU), https://www.waff.at/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/waff_infoblatt_epu_2021_lay1.pdf (accessed on 17 January 2022).

[31] Yrkesväg Värmland (2021), Project presentation on Yrkesväg Värmland, https://www.lansstyrelsen.se/download/18.712ccfbf17c1177f38c216c7/1634624186151/Yrkesv%C3%A4g%20V%C3%A4rmland%20English.pdf (accessed on 18 January 2022).

Metadata, Legal and Rights

This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Extracts from publications may be subject to additional disclaimers, which are set out in the complete version of the publication, available at the link provided.

© OECD 2022

The use of this work, whether digital or print, is governed by the Terms and Conditions to be found at https://www.oecd.org/termsandconditions.