The problem of youth unemployment in the European Union is not new, but in December 2013 youth unemployment rates were historically high, at 23.2% in the EU-28 and 23.8% in the Euro area (Council of the European Union, 2014:1). Youth unemployment is important social issue in Latvia also (Grinevica, Kovalevs, 2015; Grineviča, Rivža, 2015; Grineviča, Rivža, Kovaļevs, 2015; OECD, 2015; Pīgozne, 2014; Starineca, Voronchuk, 2015). Limited employment possibilities and threat of unemployment, job dissatisfaction or loss of paid job are the main ‘push factors’ which can facilitate youth engagement in entrepreneurial activity (Rastrigina, 2010). Entrepreneurship could be perceived as one of the solutions to tackle youth unemployment (Council of the European Union, 2014; OECD, 2015; Wochowska, 2015).

Sense of initiative and entrepreneurship is one of eight key competences defined within the European Reference Framework (European Communities, 2007). It refers to an individual’s ability to turn ideas into action and includes creativity, innovation and risk taking, as well as the ability to plan and manage projects in order to achieve objectives (European Communities, 2007:11). In scientific literature entrepreneurship has been defined as a process (Neck, Greene, 2011); method (Neck, Greene, 2011); individual's different qualities, skills, abilities and traits (Flora, 2006); behaviour (Chell, 2007); combination of individual's behaviour and different qualities (Gibb, 2007). According to Oganisjana (2010), entrepreneurship is a multi-component and multi-category dynamic system and it should be considered holistically. She defined entrepreneurship  as “a dynamic system of individual's causally interrelated personality traits, motivation, cognition, needs, emotions, abilities, learning, skills and behaviour, on the basis of which an individual or a group of individuals interact with the context for identifying, generating and realizing opportunities into new values” (Oganisjana, 2010:54).

The important role of formal, non-formal and informal learning in promoting youth entrepreneurship and employability is widely recognised (Council of the European Union, 2014; European Commission, 2014; Pīgozne, 2014; SALTO-YOUTH, 2012; Wochowska, 2015).  The Council of the European Union (2014) has invited the member states “to recognise the importance of entrepreneurial education from an early age and highlight the role of non-formal and informal learning to ensure a holistic approach to the personal development of young people and facilitate their successful integration into the labour market” (p. 4). The three main pillars of supporting youth entrepreneurship and self-employment in Europe are defined as follows: fostering a more entrepreneurial mindset, attitudes and culture; providing information, advice, coaching and mentoring; removing practical barriers and easing access to credit (Eurofound, 2015:43).

 The research questions are:

• Which are the most popular and the less popular non-formal and informal learning methods, forms, and initiatives to promote youth entrepreneurship and employability in Latvia?
• Are there any differences between different youth groups depending on the respondents’ gender, education level, the number of foreign languages spoken, employment status and non-formal and informal learning experience of young people concerning the methods, forms, and initiatives mentioned above?

• Chell, E. (2007). Social enterprise and entrepreneurship: Towards a convergent theory of the entrepreneurial process. International Small Business Journal, 25(1), 5–26. • Council of the European Union (2014). Conclusions on promoting youth entrepreneurship to foster social inclusion of young people. Education, Youth, Culture and Sport Council meeting, Brussels, 20 May 2014. • Eurofound (2015). Youth entrepreneurship in Europe: Values, attitudes, policies. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. • European Commission (2014). Developing the creative and innovative potential of young people through non-formal learning in ways that are relevant to employability. Expert Group Report. • European Communities (2007). Key competences for lifelong learning. European reference framework. Luxembourg: Office for official publications of the European Communities. • Flora, C. (2006). Are entrepreneurs born or made? Rural Development News, 28 (4), 1–7. • Gibb, A.A. (2007). Enterprise in education. Educating tomorrow's entrepreneurs. Pentti Mankinen 2007, 1-19. • Grinevica, L., Kovalevs, R. (2015). Integration of young people into the Latvian labour market. Economics & Business, 27(1), 64-68. • Grineviča, L., Rivža, B. (2015). Legal framework of youth unemployment and entrepreneurship regulation in Latvia. Regional Formation & Development Studies, 15, 56-64. • Grineviča, L., Rivža, B., Kovaļevs, R. (2015). Youth social inclusion trends in the Latvian labour market. Socialiniai tyrimai / Social Research, 1(37), 57-66. • Neck, H.M., Greene, P.G. (2011) Entrepreneurship education: Known worlds and new frontiers. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(1), 55–70. • OECD (2015). Entrepreneurship support for the unemployed in Latvia. Rapid policy assessments of inclusive entrepreneurship policies and programmes. Report. • Oganisjana, K. (2010). The development of students’ enterprise in study process. Summary of PhD Thesis. Riga: University of Latvia. • Pīgozne, T. (2014). Adult learning resources to diminish youth unemployment. The report was elaborated within the project "Implementation of the European agenda for adult learning" (Grant decision No 2012-3753/001-001). • Rastrigina, O. (2010). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2008 Latvia Report. • SALTO-YOUTH (2012). Recognition of youth work and non-formal and informal learning within the field of youth current European developments. Report. • Starineca, O., Voronchuk. I. (2015). Peculiarities of young specialists on labour market: Case of Latvia. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 2(4), 198-208. • Wochowska, M. (2015). Non-formal learning and the acquisition of skills ‒ How does the EU support youth employment? Comparative Economic Research, 18(2), 161-179.