Responsibility for opinions expressed in signed articles rests solely with their authors, and publication does not constitute an endorsement by the ILO.
This article is also available in French, in Revue internationale du Travail 165 (2), and Spanish, in Revista Internacional del Trabajo 145 (2).
1. Introduction
Employability is an issue that affects individuals, businesses and local governments (Hernández Corredor and Beltrán Martínez 2020). Workforce training and employability play a key role in regional development (De Grip and Sauermann 2013; Gennaioli et al. 2013; Di Cataldo and Rodríguez-Pose 2017), strengthen firms’ competitiveness and increase the attractiveness of territories (Tamkin and Hillage 1999). A labour force that is both large and highly skilled, with competencies aligned with employers’ needs, enhances regional competitiveness (Alpek and Tésits 2020). Conversely, gaps in workers’ skills and structural labour-market issues hinder economic growth (European Commission 2014; Alpek and Tésits 2020). As McQuaid (2006) explains, employability has become a key element of labour market policy in most European countries and is crucial for developing a flexible and adaptable workforce (CBI 1999; DfEE 2000, cited by Gore 2005; European Commission 2010).
Generally speaking, employability is defined as a person’s ability to access, retain and progress in a job (Van den Broeck et al. 2014). It refers to an individual’s ability to meet the necessary and sufficient conditions to maintain or regain employment, whether within their current organization or in the wider labour market. The concept has been examined through multiple theoretical approaches and in various disciplines (Suleman 2021). Authors define employability in different ways, emphasizing different aspects of it depending on their field of study – such as medicine, statistics or human resource management – and their political and ideological orientations (Gore 2005; Hofaidhllaoui and Roger 2014, 32). It is a complex concept with many interdependent variables that cannot be studied in isolation (Burland, Mellor and Bates 2023; Hernández Corredor and Beltrán Martínez 2020). As Guilbert et al. (2016, 79) explain, “there is a need to develop a complex model that takes into account the individuals, organizational requirements, and government and educational policies”. Employability requires a broad perspective in which all stakeholders and actors are actively engaged (Basheer 2023). Guilbert et al. (2016) emphasize the need for further research, particularly in relation to how local economic structures are changing. Skills gaps continue to pose challenges, as some jobseekers may lack the skills required by employers (Barrett, Whelan and Sexton 2001), resulting in long-term unemployment (Dibeh, Fakih and Marrouch 2019). As early as 1968, Kain identified spatial skills mismatch as a key driver of unemployment.
Since employability issues vary depending on time, place, personal attributes and social barriers, spatial context must be taken into consideration, as highlighted by the European Commission. Employability should be studied as a “complex mosaic” (Forrier, Sels and Stynen 2009) and a “multidimensional” concept (Rothwell and Arnold 2007), using multidisciplinary approaches (Basheer 2023). In a given territory, a territorial employability ecosystem is needed to ensure that actions and solutions effectively address the real needs and challenges faced by local stakeholders. Coordinating employment policies at the local level is therefore crucial for optimizing employment support services (Dibeh, Fakih and Marrouch 2019). Adam, Atfield and Green (2017) note that in areas with high unemployment, there is often a lack of planning and coordination in the provision of employment support services. However, previous studies on the implementation of public policies indicate that coordination is not straightforward (Torre and Wallet 2014; Niang, Torre and Bourdin 2022) and that intermediaries are often needed to bridge gaps and facilitate implementation (Bourdin and Nadou 2020).
These findings raise the following questions: How are local employability ecosystems structured, and how do their components work together to provide solutions tailored to individuals and local communities? What are their areas of action, and how do they address various barriers to employability while taking into account local contexts? In this study, we explore how local actors coordinate and implement place-based policies to address employability challenges, using a multidimensional, personalized approach tailored to specific local issues. Our work draws on two case studies conducted in two different regions of France: the metropolitan area of Caen in the Normandy region, and the commune of Jouques in the Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur region. Our aim is to identify the key players who address employability issues and to examine their actions at the territorial level. Our aim is not to offer prescriptive or generalizable policy recommendations, but rather, to provide an empirically grounded and situated analysis of how territorial actors concretely organize and coordinate their actions regarding employability. Our approach is interpretative and pragmatic, not programmatic. The types of coordination and responses we observe reflect local compromises reached between actors with different logics, resources and agendas. We do not assume that all actors share the same interests or capacities. On the contrary, we underscore the diversity of power relations and strategic positions across levels and institutions. In this article, we also analyse stakeholders’ roles and their coordination at the territorial level, without focusing on or evaluating the outcomes and impact of their actions on employability.
The following section of this article examines the concept of employability, how it is influenced by local contexts and the challenge of coordinating the actions of various local stakeholders to address employability issues. In section 3, we describe our methodological approach and collection of data. In section 4, we draw on two case studies to analyse how territorial employability ecosystems and coordination across various domains result in actions to improve employability in each region. Finally, section 5 concludes and proposes areas for future research.
2. Territorial employability ecosystems and their coordination
2.1 Towards a broader approach to employability
We define employability as a complex concept – a system comprising several interdependent variables linked to multiple actors (individuals, businesses and the State) (Hernández Corredor and Beltrán Martínez 2020). Employability is influenced and shaped by the interaction of macro-level, meso-level and micro-level factors, as illustrated in figure 1. The micro-level includes various individual variables (human, social, cultural, psychological and professional identity) (Basheer 2023). The meso level includes factors such as employers’ expectations and organizational strategies. The macro level includes government policies, such as access to scholarship programmes, the quality of education, active labour market policies and financial assistance. This multidimensional approach also echoes earlier sociological insights into employment structures and spatial inequalities, as well as more recent critiques of dominant economic paradigms that tend to overemphasize individual responsibility while overlooking systemic and territorial constraints (Fretel 2013; Bidart, Degenne and Grossetti 2018).
Based on an individual-centric approach to employability at the micro level, the importance of skills and human capital – developed through training and experience – is well established (van Der Heijden et al. 2010). Psychological variables, such as individuals’ flexibility, persistence and proactivity in adapting to labour market changes, also play a key role and must be considered in employability support systems. Supporting employability involves helping individuals assess their skills, explore opportunities, access relevant information, set goals and manage their careers. This involves developing their knowing-what, knowing-how and knowing-who (Ball 1997; Bridgstock 2009). Knowing-who, which encompasses social capital and networks, is vital in job searches. These networks – whether physical (former colleagues, alumni or associations) or online – circulate information and advice and sometimes lead to referrals or co-optation (Van den Broeck et al. 2014; Fugate and Ashfort 2003). Local intermediaries also enhance employability by facilitating inter-firm mobility. Silicon Valley is a good case in point, with its strong network promoting local mobility (Saxenian 1990).
Additionally, factors such as self-esteem, self-promotion and a range of skills – both technical and cross-disciplinary – are essential (Lorquet, Orianne and Pichault 2018; McQuaid 2006). Seghir (2024) argues that labour shortages stem not only from skills deficits but also from job unattractiveness and poor structural conditions. This underscores the need to broaden place-based perspectives on employability by taking into account firms’ ability to attract and retain workers, as well as the symbolic value of certain professions, especially within small and medium-sized enterprises.
However, this individual-focused perspective can overlook external constraints. Alongside “professional barriers”, such as a lack of qualifications or experience, social factors must also be addressed. Boisson-Cohen (2016) highlights “peripheral” obstacles like housing, childcare, mobility, transportation, administrative complexity, digital exclusion and employer practices (Retsin 2022). Vulnerable groups, such as low-skilled workers, youth, older adults and women, are particularly at risk of “unemployability” and face the greatest difficulties in accessing sustainable and decent employment (Jolly and Prouet 2016).
2.2 The effect of local contexts and spatial skills mismatches on employability
Some researchers have studied employability in relation to territorial contexts, linking it to companies’ human resource strategies as well as to regional and local policies on training and employment (McQuaid 2006; Guilbert et al. 2016). According to McArdle et al. (2007), employability involves achieving maximum congruence between supply and demand to meet job requirements. The term “interactive employability” (Gazier 2017, 4) refers to an individual’s ability to secure meaningful employment, shaped by the interaction between individual characteristics and the labour market. This concept highlights the interplay between individual capabilities, the local environment and labour market conditions. A disconnection between these elements can lead to spatial skills mismatch – i.e. a misalignment between the local labour force and business needs – compounded by insufficient employment support. Research shows that spatial skills mismatch increases the risk of long-term unemployment (L’Horty and Sari 2019; Dibeh, Fakih and Marrouch 2019). For low-skilled jobseekers with non-qualifying work experience, the risk is especially high (Houston 2006; Brunello, Rückert and Wruuck 2024). It is therefore essential to consider “skills mismatch” when defining employability (Houston 2006), as it can result in underemployment of the local workforce (Gobillon, Selod and Zenou 2007), stemming from a misalignment between human capital and labour market needs (Basheer 2023). Given the heterogeneity of local labour markets and regional variations in employer expectations regarding qualifications and experience, employability issues differ across regions (Mallik et al. 2014). Local authorities therefore have a strong interest in promoting employability and reducing skills mismatches to prevent rising structural unemployment. One approach is to develop vocational training programmes tailored to local labour market needs. Promoting the employability of the local workforce enables individuals to improve their skills, adapt to change and become more productive (Muffels and Luijkx 2008; OECD 2017; Seghir 2024).
Another factor that exacerbates labour market imbalances is labour shortages. At a given time and place, the number of job vacancies – each with specific pay and working conditions – may exceed the number of people willing to fill them. Labour shortages are both widely debated and difficult to measure accurately, as employer-reported hiring difficulties may reflect poor working conditions more than a genuine scarcity of qualified candidates (Seghir 2024). This highlights the need to address employment issues more broadly, using placed-based approaches that assess the actual causes and duration of such shortages. Possible solutions include improving communication about local job vacancies and providing training opportunities in relevant sectors.
Finally, as Adam, Atfield and Green (2017) note, spatial variations in labour market dynamics affect the success of public policies. According to L’Horty and Sari (2019), a long commute to work can result in high travel costs, especially in areas with limited public transport. Inadequate transport infrastructure in rural areas and underserved suburbs remains a significant barrier to employment. Job searches involving distant workplaces can become prohibitively expensive (Cavaco and Lesueur 2004), thereby creating spatial inequalities in access to work. In response, public bodies have introduced mobility programmes and subsidies for low-income individuals. Community-led initiatives, such as car-sharing, are also emerging (Fransen et al. 2019).
2.3 Towards a territorial employability ecosystem: A place-based policy approach
To better meet the needs of local labour markets (Lindsay and Mailand 2009), place-based policies are essential. The strength of local approaches lies in the contribution of non-governmental actors, who provide crucial support in addressing complex employability challenges (Lindsay and Mailand 2009). These policies are necessary because people – especially those with low employability – are less mobile than spatial equilibrium models suggest (Partridge et al. 2017; Fugate and Ashforth 2003). Physical distance from employment agencies, as well as the high financial and time costs of job searching relative to potential wages (Brueckner and Zenou 2003; L’Horty and Sari 2019; Gobillon and Selod 2021), present additional barriers. Distance from employment centres reduces access to job information (Rogers 1997), while proximity to agencies increases the likelihood of finding work (Détang-Dessendre and Gaigné 2009).
Moreover, critiques of mobility-based models and metropolitan-centric development strategies (Grossetti 2008) emphasize the need for more grounded, plural territorial approaches. The mobility of talent and firms proposed in Florida’s creative class theory1 remains inapplicable in structurally fragile or less centralized regions (Martin-Brelot et al. 2010; Bidart, Degenne and Grossetti 2020). While few studies examine how employment policies vary in effectiveness, regional disparities raise questions about their role in reducing inequalities (Filippetti, Guy and Iammarino 2019). Local labour market policies are most effective in preventing skilled workers from leaving and should be tailored to the area in question (Crisp and Powell 2017). Partnerships with local services allow for more personalized and effective responses to employability issues and spatial skills mismatches (Adam, Atfield and Green 2017). The support offered by local organizations – i.e. those based in the area – is more personalized and tailored to the specific socio-economic characteristics of the locality and its businesses. It reaches people who are far from the labour market and from public employment services (Pillon, Remillon and Tuchszirer 2019).
Stakeholder coordination is crucial for implementing these policies (Morisson and Doussineau 2019). Employability depends on a collaborative ecosystem involving education, social expectations and policy (Basheer 2023). Coordinated action among stakeholders (Bourdin 2024) allows for optimal local support (Green, Adam and Hasluck 2010), provided there is a shared understanding of regional labour market needs. This coordination connects various domains – health, housing and mobility – to address the complexity of employability (Adam, Atfield and Green 2017) and helps avoid duplication of initiatives. Therefore, the presence of pivotal actors – brokers or place-based intermediaries – is key to effectively implementing local projects and public policies (Halevy, Halali and Zlatev 2019; Niang, Torre and Bourdin 2022; Bourdin and Nadou 2020; Bourdin and Jacquet 2025). This coordination ensures that employment actors operating at different levels intervene in a consistent and complementary way. It promotes convergence among the different labour market intermediaries towards a common interest, while taking into account the socio-economic specificities of each territory – such as the type of jobseekers and employment opportunities available and the existing employment network (Pillon, Remillon and Tuchszirer 2019).
3. Methodological approach and research sites
3.1 Methodology and study area
To analyse these practices and actions, we conducted a qualitative study. The methodology enabled us to understand and interpret how actors define employability, the actions and practices they engage in, and their perceptions (Mohajan 2018).
In France, as in many regions across Europe, the region (NUTS 22) is administratively responsible for providing guidance, training and employment services to working-age residents. To further develop the region and address the specific challenges faced by its inhabitants and businesses, the regional government funds and implements training initiatives in collaboration with key employment stakeholders (OECD 2017). Various initiatives involving multiple actors have been launched in France to enhance local employment. Therefore, we chose to focus on this place-based policy at the regional level for our first case study. Specifically, we conducted a case study of the Caen metropolitan area, located in the Normandy region, to examine the actions of the local employment system at a more localized level.
To compare this regional case study with another territorial level, we chose a second case study at the municipal level, focusing on Jouques, located in the Provence-Alpes-Côte-d’Azur region. The municipality we selected is part of a national programme aimed at creating jobs across various territories, known as the “Zero Long-Term Unemployment Territories” pilot programme. Although the levels examined in the two case studies differ, we observed coordination and similarities between the actors involved in each ecosystem. Comparing the two case studies enabled us to empirically illustrate how local actors coordinate within a territorial employability ecosystem and the areas in which they intervene to maintain and enhance employability.
3.2 Collection and processing of data
In the case study conducted in the Caen metropolitan area of the Normandy region, we collected primary data through 79 semi-structured interviews (each lasting between 17 and 70 minutes) with 25 actors in the territorial employability ecosystem, 7 elected officials from the region and municipalities, 11 businesses and 36 jobseekers from the Caen metropolitan area. For the case study in Provence-Alpes-Côte-d’Azur, we conducted 80 semi-structured interviews (each lasting between 30 and 120 minutes) with 22 actors in the territorial employability ecosystem, 5 actors from other territories, 9 business managers, 16 employees, 3 former employees and 25 jobseekers between December 2017 and October 2021. The stakeholders from the two case studies and their roles are presented in the tables in the supplementary online appendix. Interview guidelines were developed for each category of stakeholder to specifically examine the support offered to jobseekers and their roles and contributions within the territorial employability ecosystem. The aim of the interviews with jobseekers was to identify their needs and preferences, as well as their perceptions of the job search process and the support provided.
Our empirical approach adheres to the principles of contradictory intersubjectivity and the mirror effect, which are essential when the research object involves ecosystem analysis (Fuchs and De Jaegher 2009). These principles enable the collection, aggregation, comparison and cross-analysis of the various viewpoints held by different actors. Additionally, we complemented our analysis with participant observation conducted during meetings of the operational body responsible for coordinating employment and vocational training policies at the local level. In both case studies, in order to triangulate the data, we also collected and analysed secondary sources, including various internal documents that provided information on the socio-economic and demographic characteristics of the territories, their policies and existing employability schemes, as well as data taken from the websites of local employment partners. The variety of sources ensured data triangulation and enhanced the validity of the research. The data were subjected to thematic content analysis, following both manual and computerized coding using NVivo.
4. Results
4.1 The territorial employability ecosystem includes various actors and services from different domains
To understand how the local stakeholders in our two case studies address the complexity of employability issues, we proposed creating a territorial employability ecosystem (figure 2) based on the entrepreneurial ecosystem framework. Wurth, Stam and Spigel (2022) provide a comprehensive overview of entrepreneurial ecosystem research, highlighting the importance of interdependencies among actors and factors within a territory. This perspective informs our understanding of territorial employability ecosystems as complex, multi-actor systems that require coordinated efforts across various domains to improve employability outcomes. We defined it as a set of interconnected employment actors (such as businesses, associations, employment agencies and universities) and processes that promote employability through a place-based approach, including training, orientation, self-discovery and job exploration, job-search and job-interview support. A territorial employability ecosystem comprises different domains (each composed of various actors) operating across different levels (national, regional and municipal).
The territorial employability ecosystem
Source: Authors.
4.1.1 The socio-cultural domain
The socio-cultural domain includes any initiatives and actions aimed at helping people develop their “knowing-how” and “knowing-who” (Bridgstock 2009; Van den Broeck et al. 2014). It involves providing individuals with the tools they need to adapt to changes in the labour market, such as finding their bearings, receiving training and applying for jobs. It also encompasses social inclusion and building networks for job searching. In the two territories studied, associations and public employment service structures offer personalized and collective support services to help jobseekers develop autonomy, enabling them to become active participants in their employability. They support jobseekers in enhancing their “knowing-how” and “knowing-who” so that they can present their skills and career goals to local employers seeking new applicants in an effective way. In Normandy, the public employment service, France Travail, has introduced “My Professional Potential”, a tool that helps individuals assess the labour market, their skills and job-related training options. It also holds workshops to help individuals develop their skills profiles in order to present their portfolios to employers and improve their chances of being hired. In Normandy, Accompagnement Normand de Cadres en Recherche d’Emploi (ANCRE), an association that assists executives with their job searches and career goals, offers professional and personal assessments. This helps individuals identify their skills, motivations and interests, enabling them to develop their career goals, mobilize their networks and find opportunities that match their skills.
In Jouques, France Travail also provides training to jobseekers and acts as a liaison, keeping them informed of and engaged in new opportunities and initiatives.
There are still things you can do to improve your professional image and boost your self-confidence, so you can do things like that. (First project manager, Jouques)
4.1.2 The labour market domain
The labour market domain includes helping businesses identify their labour needs, developing training and services tailored to individuals and aligned with company requirements, and promoting local training to raise jobseekers’ awareness of and participation in training programmes (Bakker 2015). We note the efforts made by actors to identify companies’ skills needs through studies, which then lead to the development of training courses that respond to local labour market expectations. Training programmes are designed based on needs assessments conducted by professionals, according to employment area and sector of activity, as well as through consultations with various stakeholders.
If the region is commissioning this training programme, it’s because it has identified a local need; they are basing their decision on a territorial assessment. (Agence Nationale pour la Formation Professionnelle des Adultes, Normandy)
In both territories, understanding the skills of jobseekers and the needs of businesses and the region, and aligning them, are central to the practices of the ecosystem’s actors. Developing partnerships with local businesses, institutional actors and, more broadly, other regional stakeholders appears to be a key lever for implementing these practices. The actors interviewed emphasized the importance of building partnerships with businesses to improve job discovery through organized workplace visits and work experience. In Jouques, regular updates about job opportunities at the French Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission, the largest employer in the area, are shared.
The Centre d’Animation, de Ressources et d’Information sur la Formation-Observatoire Régional Emploi-Formation (CARIF-OREF), a network that exists in every region of France, was established with the decentralization of public policies related to employability in the 1980s. It has three main missions: (i) to observe and conduct studies and forecasts on labour market data (including the need for digital skills, professions in data and artificial intelligence, and the transformation of jobs and skills due to the ecological transition); (ii) to provide information on stakeholders, and economic data (through webinars, reports and studies); and (iii) to professionalize employment and train actors by building their knowledge of existing systems and providing better support services. In Normandy, the CARIF-OREF brings together professional sectors, local authorities and other employment and training partners on a quarterly basis to discuss current issues, schemes and initiatives (Lima 2016). These meetings enable participants to share feedback on their activities and coordinate potential new initiatives.
4.1.3 The human capital domain
The human capital domain encompasses the development of work-related training and internships (including immersive placements aimed at discovering occupations) through partnerships with the business world, public employment services and training organizations (Akos, Hutson and Leonard 2022). It involves enhancing business managers’ capacity to recruit workers and manage their employees’ skills and careers, as well as strengthening relationships with universities and vocational training institutions (Filippetti, Guy and Iammarino 2019; Okolie, Nwosu and Mlanga 2019). This domain refers to a business’s ability to fulfil its role as an employer and is linked to the concept of “employerability”, which is defined as a business’s ability to successfully create and manage employment. This concept emerged from discussions and debates on employability and emphasizes that responsibility for employability should be shared between individuals and businesses. Noël and Schmidt (2022) argue that “employerability does not exist without employability” – i.e. without businesses assuming their responsibility as inclusive employers. This implies a shift in paradigms and in the practices of businesses, which should no longer expect ideal candidates but instead train and support recruitable candidates with potential (Borello 2018; Urasadettan and Schmidt 2023). With corporate social responsibility, and in the context of organizational transformation and restructuring, employability is becoming a strategic and imperative issue for socially responsible human resources (HR) departments, through practices such as training, skills management and career management (Noël and Schmidt 2022). Accordingly, businesses receive support – for example, in Normandy, where a public organization offers assistance to businesses with limited resources. This public organization supports businesses that request assistance and connects them with actors that can meet their needs (such as professional training and employment management) (Ministère du Travail, du Plein Emploi et de l’Insertion 2022). Workshops for businesses on the management of bridge jobs and the transferability of skills are also held (Gazier 2017).
This organization arranges meetings for businesses that do not have large HR departments […] in order to guide and support them. (Caen Normandie Développement)
4.1.4 The economic development and place branding domain
The economic development of a territory plays a crucial role in enhancing employability within the region. In terms of economic development and territorial marketing, the objective is to implement policies that enhance territorial attractiveness by: (i) attracting individuals with skills and knowledge that align with job offers; and/or (ii) attracting companies whose human capital needs match the local workforce. This involves helping new employees find housing and accommodation, improving mobility and transportation and addressing other related issues. In this respect, Johnson, Ercolani and Mackie (2017) highlight the importance of the geographical and financial accessibility of public transport, which plays a key role in enabling unemployed people to access companies seeking their skills.
In Caen, to address external barriers to employability linked to the local economy, the metropolitan authority, through the Caen Normandie Développement agency, helps businesses expand their activities and thus create job opportunities. It assists with the recruitment and integration of new employees from other regions and departments. It also undertakes initiatives to promote the creation and commercial development of businesses and attract investors – such as business incubators, coworking spaces and third places3 – to Normandy. The agency also maintains a website that offer practical guidance on accommodation, travel and transport, as well as leisure and recreational activities, in the region. Moreover, it has established partnerships and organizes promotional events – such as trade fairs – in other regions, including Paris, to showcase businesses based in the Caen metropolitan area.
Caen la mer has launched a promotional campaign to raise the profile of our region beyond its borders. (Caen Normandie Développement)
In Jouques, economic development is primarily driven by an enterprise, which has an economic and a social dimension, established under the “Enterprise for Employment Purposes” (EBE) initiative. The enterprise offers useful activities for local residents, reinstates previously discontinued activities and offers them at solidarity prices4 to ensure accessibility. Effective communication about the EBE is crucial for encouraging the development of activities and supporting job creation. A company website has been created, and information about organized events is shared on social networks. At the national level, the National Fund promotes the initiative through professional networks, raising awareness and broadening its reach.
4.1.5 The financing domain
The financing domain involves developing partnerships at various levels to mobilize funding for training and employment, as well as improving the management of funding needs. It also includes strengthening financial measures to support and train young people, older individuals and those living far from employment centres (Gazier 2017).
Our study underscores the range of partnerships established at different administrative levels – State, region, department and municipality – to finance and implement training programmes and cover operating costs. In France, the Skills Investment Plan is a national initiative that is deployed regionally through the Regional Skills Investment Pacts. For example, both regional authorities and the national government offer courses to combat illiteracy, as well as training aimed at developing digital skills for everyday life, job searches and professional activities. These programmes are also supported by the European Union through the European Social Fund.
On a smaller scale, the metropolitan area of Caen is helping to fund “joint employment schemes shared by several municipalities” (Caen Normandie Développement).
In Jouques, the EBE combines public and private funding to cover both employee training and operational costs. The training is designed to develop skills that are relevant to the EBE’s activities as well as to employees’ future integration into the traditional labour market. For example, the EBE was able to cover the cost of driving lessons for employees who wished to obtain licences.
4.1.6 The policy domain
The policy domain involves reinforcing the actions of public bodies and institutions, in consultation with all actors in the ecosystem – such as companies, professional associations, trade unions and communities – across various levels (local, regional, national and supranational). It also includes establishing support programmes to enhance employability (Adam, Atfield and Green 2017), empowering local authorities, moving towards more decentralized employment policies that better reflect local labour market specificities and creating regulatory framework incentives for businesses.
The results demonstrate that organizations and institutions are intensifying their efforts to implement employability programmes. The French Government introduced a recovery plan to counter the negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on economic activity and employment. Funding has been allocated to promote youth employability and to reinforce the use of existing employment and training assistance measures, such as work-based learning, the Youth Guarantee5 and free employment services.6
Consultation is key to mobilizing the diverse skills of various actors and ensuring the success of projects. Employability policies are shifting towards territorial and partnership-based approaches, reflecting an ecosystemic, partnership-oriented and territorially-governed approach to employability. For example, in Normandy, skills training courses are provided by various actors. Short training courses are funded by France Travail – the employment-training coordinator for the Normandy region – while the region hold administrative responsibility for vocational training. This responsibility was transferred to the region under the law on decentralization (Bourdin and Torre 2022). The region therefore issues calls for projects or bids, inviting partners to submit proposals.
If we identify a problem shared by several businesses, we can set up a collaborative working group and work together on that issue, with each of us drawing on our respective areas of expertise. (Employment-training coordinator for the Normandy region)
In Jouques, the Government is the main contributor to the “Zero Long-Term Unemployment Territories” pilot programme. Under Law No. 2020-1577 of 14 December 2020 on strengthening inclusion in employment through economic activity and on the “Zero Long-Term Unemployment Territories” pilot programme, the State’s contribution was set at 102 per cent of the national minimum income per full-time equivalent for the period between July 2021 and July 2022. The Regional Directorate for the Economy, Employment, Labour and Social Cohesion is a key partner in the programme, both in terms of regional involvement and financial support. It plays a central role in linking the various administrative levels participating in the programme and in managing the relationship between the State and the territories within this public policy framework.
4.1.7 The supporting actors domain
The supporting actors domain refers to the role that local support workers play in creating new partnerships to promote individuals’ employability. It involves local employment services – whether public or NGO-run – that deliver national, regional or intercommunal training and employment programmes (Pillon, Remillon and Tuchszirer 2019). These services work with various partners to support local jobseekers through employability management tools, career development guidance and enhanced job-search techniques, including digital literacy training. Our findings show how these local supporting actors intervene at a more immediate and personalized level to assist jobseekers.
In Normandy, employment units – structures linked to various employment sectors – assist jobseekers, particularly those facing difficulties. They assist individuals with their job search and access to training. Acting as mediators, they direct applicants to relevant resources based on their needs and constraints. They help jobseekers prepare their CVs, find training courses and locate job offers by directing them to national and regional websites that list opportunities aligned with their profiles. They also provide interview preparation support and access to computers for local jobseekers. In addition, employment units display job offers from local businesses and provide information on available training courses, especially for occupations in high demand.
In Jouques, the Inter-Municipal Employment Commission – an association independent of the municipality – helps jobseekers prepare their CVs and identify job opportunities in their field. All employment actors in the area, particularly the municipal social action centre, the municipal employment office and various employment partners,7 coordinate to provide social assistance and employment support within the territory. Although employment partners are less involved in the pilot programme, they help to address specific issues as they arise. They play a crucial role in the ecosystem by addressing the various challenges faced by jobseekers and facilitating cross-collaboration – particularly with public employment services – to ensure comprehensive information sharing on jobseekers’ situations, including urgent cases.
If France Travail encounters difficulties in supporting people with disabilities, it can turn to us for guidance. (Cap emploi, Jouques)
In both territories, national employment service agents visit local jobseekers to provide support. For example, Mission locale8 helps implement measures such as the Youth Guarantee scheme and driving-licence grants to improve young people’s employability, and it ensures regular visits from agents who travel to meet young people where they live. The jobseekers interviewed reported being satisfied with the follow-up and the services offered by the job centres. Proximity is an added value and a significant benefit for them.
There is a local employment service that is always on hand to advise us. (Jobseeker 11, Normandy)
4.2 Coordination of territorial employability ecosystem actors by territorial intermediaries
Our findings show that employment policies and actions are coordinated across different levels, together with their financing, to deliver solutions tailored to the needs of both jobseekers and businesses. This coordination is based on a comprehensive and personalized approach to employability (Pillon, Remillon and Tuchszirer 2019).
In Normandy, the employment units attached to intercommunal authorities help create links between the territorial employability ecosystem domains. These units act as territorial intermediaries and supporting actors (Bourdin and Nadou 2020; Bourdin and Jacquet 2025). The employment unit associated with the metropolitan area of Caen is particularly proactive in putting forward proposals. Using its knowledge of local players and issues, it regularly runs pilot projects and addresses various barriers to employability. For example, in partnership with Mission locale, it organizes local mobility workshops to help remove obstacles to mobility. It also refers jobseekers to relevant actors based on their specific needs and challenges, helps them find training courses and job vacancies and prepares them for interviews. In collaboration with the national employment unit, France Travail, it organizes meetings between jobseekers and companies through job recruitment events or job fairs. It has also developed and offers a regionally funded digital skills training programme, in collaboration with a training centre and a social centre. From this perspective, the local employment unit in Normandy can serve as an “intermediary”, according to the typology developed by Bourdin and Nadou (2020). It can also take on the roles of “facilitator” or “matchmaker” (Halevy, Halali and Zlatev 2019), or even that of an “orchestra conductor”, fostering dialogue between the various partners (Pillon, Remillon and Tuchszirer 2019).
In Jouques, our interviews also highlighted the role of local non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the public employment unit associated with the intercommunity, both of which act as territorial intermediaries. They support jobseekers by helping them prepare their CVs and by increasing the visibility of available job offers. The jobseekers interviewed reported being satisfied with the follow-up and other services provided by these NGOs. These NGOs serve as a link – or “mediator” – within the ecosystem, helping to address the various difficulties essential for improving employability (Lindsay and Mailand 2009; Dibeh, Fakih and Marrouch 2019). Through collaboration, particularly with public employment services, they are able to provide comprehensive information on jobseekers’ circumstances, including the urgency of their needs. Coordination between policies was initiated through a stakeholders’ meeting and a presentation of the competences they could share:
We had a meeting at one point where we outlined what the [local plan for integration and employment] offered, what Mission locale offered, what the [Solidarités nouvelles face au chômage] offered, what Pôle emploi services offered, and what the project offered, and we all agreed to listen to each other and understand what everyone has to offer. (First project leader, Jouques)
In both our case studies the actions carried out and coordinated by the territorial intermediaries were undertaken following the identification of people’s needs, business challenges (especially in the Normandy case) and the specific characteristics of the territory (e.g. rural) and its ecosystem actors (e.g. small firms). The proximity of these intermediaries is an added value. By understanding the underlying issues and stakeholders, they offer services tailored to employment problems and obstacles (Pillon, Remillon and Tuchszirer 2019). Table 1 summarizes the actions carried out in the seven areas to provide solutions tailored to people’s needs, while figure 3 summarizes the role of territorial intermediaries as coordinators of multiple actors across various levels and domains.
Actions proposed to address employment needs
| Needs | Actions and actors | Domains |
| To inform people experiencing long-term unemployment of their rights and integration opportunities To overcome difficulties in job searches |
Mobilization of actors for the dissemination of information Support in finding employment |
Socio-cultural |
| To fill gaps between firms’ needs and people’s skills To help unemployed people find vacant positions |
Partnerships between the employment-oriented businesses and local employers Identifying skills needs and developing training programmes tailored to company and individual needs |
Labour market |
| To develop employees’ skills | Development of training within businesses to enable employees to improve their skills and maintain employment | Human capital |
| To develop company activities to create employment in the territory Difficulties in finding accommodation and childcare To make the territory more attractive |
Development of business and activities; business support Communication of the advantages and strengths of the territory in terms of activities, services offered and business opportunities |
Economic development and place branding |
| To finance actions to improve employability | Private funding Regional and governmental funding (e.g. for training programmes) |
Financing |
| To conduct initiatives and coordinate projects To provide intensive support to people facing difficulties |
Creation of an institutional link between the State, territories and actors (i.e. territorial intermediaries) Governmental programmes for young people and those facing difficulties |
Policy |
| To mobilize a group of local actors to provide comprehensive territorial support for jobseekers | Mobilization of institutional actors, municipal and extra-municipal commissions, as well as volunteers | Supporting actors |
5. Conclusion and discussion
The literature highlights employability as a complex, multi-dimensional concept influenced by various stakeholders. Developing employability requires a comprehensive, tailored approach that takes into account individual, business and territorial characteristics. A territorial employability ecosystem operating at the local and neighbourhood levels is essential to address so-called “peripheral” employment barriers. While the local scale is central, such an ecosystem is inherently multi-scalar, engaging stakeholders across local, regional, national and supranational levels, and requiring coordination to align actions. These formal and informal networks help reduce spatial skills mismatches and better align labour supply with the employment needs of the territory.
Using case studies from two French regions, we analysed the measures implemented by various actors within a territorial employability ecosystem and how their efforts were coordinated. We combined management science literature on employability with regional studies. Drawing on semi-structured interviews and documentation from employability stakeholders, we outlined the domains of a territorial employability ecosystem aimed at addressing employability challenges. Our findings reveal that targeted interventions are crucial, given the ecosystem’s inherent complexity. Ecosystem coherence results from the interplay between actions in each domain and the quality of their interconnections. For instance, training opportunities (human capital domain) have greater impact when combined with mobility support (economic development domain), individualized counselling (supporting actors domain) and employer partnerships (labour market domain).
In both our case studies, the territorial employability ecosystem did not stem from a unified vision but from negotiated arrangements shaped by varied interests, resources and leadership styles. This research contributes to understanding how coordination is built in practice and what its localized effects are. Echoing Schwandt and Gates (2021), we do not evaluate policies according to normative standards, but rather explore how value and meaning are generated, distributed and legitimized across governance levels.
In the debate between place-based and people-centred policies (McCann and Rodríguez-Pose 2011; Todes and Turok 2018), we initially argued that place-based approaches appeared more effective for addressing employability and spatial skills mismatches. However, our findings highlight the need to move beyond this binary. A complementary and integrated framework – such as McCann’s “people in places policies” (2023) – seems particularly promising. This approach simultaneously values territorial dimensions – mobilizing local networks, actors and resources – and human dimensions, providing tailored support based on individual employability needs. Our case studies reflect this hybrid logic, where territorial actors and intermediaries collaborate to deliver individualized, contextualized solutions.
It is precisely through coordinated action among companies, governments, NGOs, public services and others – facilitated by territorial intermediaries – that effective, holistic responses to employability challenges are implemented. These intermediaries ensure coherence across domains and strengthen synergies between actions. They connect labour demand identification, training provision and social inclusion strategies to ensure that no element of employability is treated in isolation. Their deep knowledge of local issues and actors enables them to coordinate initiatives across sectors (Aoun and Retsin 2024). Thus, a “people in places” perspective (McCann 2023, 21) offers a way to transcend the limitations of purely place-based or people-centred approaches. For local policies to be effective, they must be part of a multi-stakeholder coordination strategy.
Nonetheless, our research reveals several tensions and limitations. First, regional ecosystems may compete to attract public funding or economic opportunities, which risks creating unequal territorial development. Unequal distribution of financial and institutional resources can reinforce, rather than reduce, disparities. Competition may also arise over access to skilled labour or innovation funding. Second, beyond spatial mismatches, other structural forms of discrimination – gender, age, origin, disability and digital illiteracy – persist and remain insufficiently addressed by current employability schemes. While place-based actions may alleviate some of these inequalities, they do not systematically eliminate them. Third, territorial employability ecosystems are not free from power asymmetries. Our findings confirm that dominant actors, notably France Travail, often overshadow smaller organizations and local authorities, limiting shared governance and reducing sensitivity to local contexts. Leadership – specifically, who makes the decisions – is central to both the fairness and effectiveness of these initiatives. Moreover, the interests of public authorities, private actors and civil society organizations often diverge. Although united by their stated goal of reducing unemployment, their strategies and priorities frequently conflict. Funding is a particular source of friction, as each governance level tends to defend its budgetary autonomy, leading to rivalry rather than collaboration. Finally, the electoral dimension of employability policies must be acknowledged. Policymakers may be reluctant to invest in long-term, high-cost initiatives targeting low-skilled or vulnerable populations if these groups are less politically engaged or considered electorally marginal. This political economy of employability, especially under increasingly constrained public budgets, deserves closer attention (Bourdin 2024).
Our conceptual proposal and findings provide a foundation for future research. Future studies could focus on the territorial governance of territorial employability ecosystems. Quantitative methods might be employed to assess whether local public policies effectively align job supply with demand. Future research could evaluate the performance of territorial employability ecosystems using measurable indicators such as employment rates, job retention, access to training and the quality of matches between jobseekers and employers. This would require longitudinal data and regional comparisons to assess outcomes more accurately. The concept of territorial intermediaries could also be used to examine the central role of actors such as local authorities within these ecosystems. Social network analysis could clarify how influence, coordination and resource flows are structured.
Our findings also underline the importance of sustained coordination and long-term collaboration among stakeholders, which are key to building what Crespo-Febvay and Loubès (2019, 97) call “collective competence” that fosters social innovation. Effective coordination is necessary to define a common vision among actors with differing interests and to establish a shared language (Marcandella and Mazzilli 2020). These processes are inherently political, involving ongoing negotiations of leadership, legitimacy and accountability. Sustaining collaboration depends not only on institutional capacity but also on political will and the mobilization of public support.
A final, underexplored dimension of spatial skills mismatch, revealed through our interviews, concerns the need to enhance the value of occupations with low appeal despite high demand – such as jobs in industry, construction, social work and the non-profit sector. This issue is particularly pressing for small and medium-sized enterprises, which often struggle to attract applicants and to project a strong employer image. A well-functioning territorial employability ecosystem can help identify and promote these roles, supporting companies, territorial development, and individual employability alike.
Notes
- Florida’s creative class theory claims that cities grow by attracting creative, mobile talent, who in turn attract innovative firms. ⮭
- NUTS (Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics) is the European Union’s standard territorial classification for statistical and regional policy purposes. NUTS 2 refers to the level of “basic regions” commonly used for the implementation of regional policies. ⮭
- Third places are intermediate social spaces – neither home nor the workplace – that foster social interaction and community life, such as cafés, libraries and coworking spaces. Rooted in a longstanding French tradition, they are becoming increasingly institutionalized both locally and nationally (Tehel, Pasquier and de Guibert 2024). ⮭
- Solidarity prices are reduced or flexible prices designed to ensure access to people with limited financial resources. ⮭
- The Youth Guarantee is a support scheme for young people not in education, employment or training between the ages of 16 and 25, which helps them to become autonomous and secure employment and/or training. ⮭
- The Emploi Francs scheme offers financial assistance to employers who hire young people living in disadvantaged urban areas, known as priority neighbourhoods. ⮭
- These include the Union des entreprises de proximité (U2P), the Comité de bassin d’emploi (CBE) and Cap emploi, an organization that helps people with disabilities find employment. ⮭
- Mission locale is a national structure that provides guidance and advice to young people between the ages of 16 and 25, helping them integrate into society and/or the workforce. ⮭
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the Cœur de Nacre community of municipalities for their collaboration in this study, as well as all the individuals who participated in our research. We would also like to thank all the actors involved in the “Zero Long-Term Unemployment” pilot programme for their work, and in particular to those in Jouques, who generously opened their doors to us over many years.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
References
Adam, Duncan, Gaby Atfield, and Anne E. Green. 2017. “What Works? Policies for Employability in Cities”. Urban Studies 54 (5): 1162–1177. http://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015625021.
Akos, Patrick, Bryant Hutson, and A. Joshua Leonard. 2022. “The Relationship between Work Study and Career Development for Undergraduate Students”. Journal of Career Development 49 (5): 1097–1107. http://doi.org/10.1177/08948453211012787.
Alpek, Levente, and Robert Tésits. 2020. “Measuring Regional Differences in Employability in Hungary”. Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy 13 (2): 329–347. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12061-019-09306-6.
Aoun, Clara. 2021. “Le développement de l’employabilité sur le territoire. Visions prospectives sur les métiers en tension : cas des services à la personne”. PhD thesis, Normandie Université.
Aoun, Clara, and Camille Retsin. 2024. “Approches territorialisées de l’accompagnement dans l’emploi”. Revue d’Économie Régionale & Urbaine 3 (June): 421–442. http://doi.org/10.3917/reru.243.0421.
Bakker, Bas B. 2015. “Employment and the Great Recession: The Role of Real Wages”. IMF Working Paper No. WP/15/229. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
Ball, Ben. 1997. “Career Management Competences: The Individual Perspective”. Career Development International 2 (2): 74–79. http://doi.org/10.1108/13620439710163653.
Barrett, Alan, Christopher T. Whelan, and J. J. Sexton. 2001. “Employability” and its Relevance for the Management of the Live Register. Dublin: The Economic and Social Research Institute.
Basheer, Hanady. 2023. “Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Towards the Evolution of Sustainable Graduate Employability Ecosystem: A Contemporary Perspective for Higher Education Stakeholders in the UAE”. PhD thesis, University of Bath.
Bidart, Claire, Alain Degenne, and Michel Grossetti. 2018. “Personal Networks Typologies: A Structural Approach”. Social Networks 54 (July): 1–11. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2017.11.003.
Bidart, Claire, Alain Degenne, and Michel Grossetti. 2020. Living in Networks: The Dynamics of Social Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boisson-Cohen, Marine. 2016. “Lever les freins périphériques à l’emploi des jeunes: priorités et leviers”. Paper presented at Concertation pour l’insertion professionnelle des jeunes, Paris, December 2016.
Borello, Jean-Marc. 2018. Donnons-nous les moyens de l’inclusion. Paris: Ministère du Travail et des Solidarités.
Bourdin, Sébastien. 2024. “The Interplay of Politics and Space: How Elected Politicians Shape Place-Based Policies and Outcomes”. The Geographical Journal 190 (4): Article No. e12591. http://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12591.
Bourdin, Sébastien, and Nicolas Jacquet. 2025. “The Contribution of European Cities and Regions to the Circular Economy: An Analysis of Territorial Strategies”. Regional Studies 59 (1): Article No. 2563888. http://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2025.2563888.
Bourdin, Sébastien, and Fabien Nadou. 2020. “The Role of a Local Authority as a Stakeholder Encouraging the Development of Biogas: A Study on Territorial Intermediation”. Journal of Environmental Management 258 (March): Article No. 110009. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.110009.
Bourdin, Sébastien, and André Torre. 2022. “The Territorial Big Bang: Which Assessment about the Territorial Reform in France?” In Handbook on Labour Markets in Transition: Promoting Resilience in a World in Flux, edited by Thomas Perrin, 27–44. London: Routledge.
Bridgstock, Ruth. 2009. “The Graduate Attributes We’ve Overlooked: Enhancing Graduate Employability through Career Management Skills”. Higher Education Research & Development 28 (1): 31–44. http://doi.org/10.1080/07294360802444347.
Brueckner, Jan K., and Yves Zenou. 2003. “Space and Unemployment: The Labor-Market Effects of Spatial Mismatch”. Journal of Labor Economics 21 (1): 242–262. http://doi.org/10.1086/344129.
Brunello, Giorgio, Désirée Rückert, and Patricia Wruuck. 2024. “Adult Learning: The Employers’ Provision of Retraining and Re-Skilling”. In Handbook on Labour Markets in Transition, edited by Stéphane Carcillo and Stefano Scarpetta, 424–441. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Burland, Karen, Liz Mellor, and Christine Bates. 2023. “Employability Ecosystems in Music: (Re)Navigating a Life in Music (in Precarious Times)”. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 22 (1): 26–44. http://doi.org/10.1177/14740222221125629.
Cavaco, Sandra, and Jean-Yves Lesueur. 2004. “Contraintes spatiales et durée de chômage”. Revue française d’économie 18 (3): 229–257. http://doi.org/10.3406/rfeco.2004.1533.
CBI (Confederation of British Industry). 1999. Making Employability Work: An Agenda for Action. London.
Crespo-Febvay, Anne-Valérie, and Anne Loubès. 2019. “Le dialogue interentreprises comme levier d’innovation responsable”. Innovations 59 (2): 75–102. http://doi.org/10.3917/inno.059.0075.
Crisp, Richard, and Ryan Powell. 2017. “Young People and UK Labour Market Policy: A Critique of ‘Employability’ as a Tool for Understanding Youth Unemployment”. Urban Studies 54 (8): 1784–1807. http://doi.org/10.1177/0042098016637567.
De Grip, Andries, and Jan Sauermann. 2013. “The Effect of Training on Productivity: The Transfer of On-the-Job Training from the Perspective of Economics”. Educational Research Review 8 (January): 28–36. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.05.005.
Détang-Dessendre, Cécile, and Carl Gaigné. 2009. “Unemployment Duration, City Size, and the Tightness of the Labor Market”. Regional Science and Urban Economics 39 (3): 266–276. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2009.01.003.
DfEE (Department for Education and Employment). 2000. UK Employment Action Plan 2000. London.
Di Cataldo, Marco, and Andrés Rodríguez-Pose. 2017. “What Drives Employment Growth and Social Inclusion in the Regions of the European Union?” Regional Studies 51 (12): 1840–1859. http://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2016.1255320.
Dibeh, Ghassan, Ali Fakih, and Walid Marrouch. 2019. “Employment and Skill Mismatch among Youth in Lebanon”. International Journal of Manpower 40 (8): 1438–1457. http://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-02-2018-0073.
European Commission. 2010. “An Agenda for New Skills and Jobs: A European Contribution towards Full Employment”. COM(2010) 682 final. Strasbourg.
European Commission. 2014. Employment and Social Developments in Europe 2014. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Filippetti, Andrea, Frederick Guy, and Simona Iammarino. 2019. “Regional Disparities in the Effect of Training on Employment”. Regional Studies 53 (2): 217–230. http://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2018.1455177.
Forrier, Anneleen, Luc Sels, and Dave Stynen. 2009. “Career Mobility at the Intersection between Agent and Structure: A Conceptual Model”. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 82 (4): 739–759. http://doi.org/10.1348/096317909X470933.
Fransen, Koos, Kobe Boussauw, Greta Deruyter, and Philippe De Maeyer. 2019. “The Relationship between Transport Disadvantage and Employability: Predicting Long-Term Unemployment Based on Job Seekers’ Access to Suitable Job Openings in Flanders, Belgium”. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 125 (July): 268–279. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.01.023.
Fretel, Anne. 2013. “La notion d’accompagnement dans les dispositifs de la politique d’emploi : entre centralité et indétermination”. Revue française de socio-économie 11 (1): 55–79. http://doi.org/10.3917/rfse.011.0055.
Fuchs, Thomas, and Hanne De Jaegher. 2009. “Enactive Intersubjectivity: Participatory Sense-Making and Mutual Incorporation”. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 8 (4): 465–486. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-009-9136-4.
Fugate, Mel, and Blake E. Ashforth. 2003. “Employability: The Construct, its Dimensions, and Applications”. Academy of Management Proceedings 2003 (1): J1–J6. http://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2003.13792496.
Gazier, Bernard. 2017. “Employability: The Complexity of a Policy Notion”. In Employability: From Theory to Practice, edited by Patricia Weinert, Michele Baukens, Patrick Bollérot, Marina Pineschi-Gapenne and Ulrich Walwei, 3–24. London: Routledge.
Gennaioli, Nicola, Rafael La Porta, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, and Andrei Shleifer. 2013. “Human Capital and Regional Development”. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 128 (1): 105–164. http://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjs050.
Gobillon, Laurent, and Harris Selod. 2021. “Spatial Mismatch, Poverty, and Vulnerable Populations”. In Handbook of Regional Science, 2nd ed., edited by Manfred M. Fischer and Peter Nijkamp, 573–588. Berlin: Springer.
Gobillon, Laurent, Harris Selod, and Yves Zenou. 2007. “The Mechanisms of Spatial Mismatch”. Urban Studies 44 (12): 2401–2427. http://doi.org/10.1080/00420980701540937.
Gore, Tony. 2005. “Extending Employability or Solving Employers’ Recruitment Problems? Demand-Led Approaches as an Instrument of Labour Market Policy”. Urban Studies 42 (2): 341–353. http://doi.org/10.1080/0042098042000316182.
Green, Anne E., Duncan Adam, and Chris Hasluck. 2010. “Evaluation of Phase 1 City Strategy”. Research Report No. 639. Norwich: Department for Work and Pensions.
Grossetti, Michel. 2008. “Proximities and Embedding Effects”. European Planning Studies 16 (5): 629–642. http://doi.org/10.1080/09654310802049133.
Guilbert, Laure, Jean-Luc Bernaud, Brice Gouvernet, and Jérôme Rossier. 2016. “Employability: Review and Research Prospects”. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance 16 (1): 69–89. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10775-015-9288-4.
Halevy, Nir, Eliran Halali, and Julian J. Zlatev. 2019. “Brokerage and Brokering: An Integrative Review and Organizing Framework for Third Party Influence”. Academy of Management Annals 13 (1): 215–239. http://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2017.0024.
Hernández Corredor, Luisa Fernanda, and Ronald Sneyder Beltrán Martínez. 2020. “Employability as a Complex Problem”. Ingeniería Solidaria 16 (2): 1–21. http://doi.org/10.16925/2357-6014.2020.02.01.
Hofaidhllaoui, Mahrane, and Roger Alain. 2014. “Favoriser le développement de l’employabilité: un enjeu pour les individus et pour les organisations”. Revue de gestion des ressources humaines 93 (3): 32–53. http://doi.org/10.3917/grhu.093.0032.
Houston, Donald. 2006. “Employability, Skills Mismatch and Spatial Mismatch in Metropolitan Labour Markets”. In Employability and Local Labour Markets, 1st ed., edited by Ronald W. McQuaid, Anne E. Green and Mike Danson, 29–51. London: Routledge.
Jolly, Cécile, and Emmanuelle Prouet. 2016. “L’avenir du travail: quelles redéfinitions de l’emploi, des statuts et des protections”. Document de travail nº. 2016-4. Paris: France Stratégie.
Johnson, Daniel, Marco Ercolani, and Peter Mackie. 2017. “Econometric Analysis of the Link between Public Transport Accessibility and Employment”. Transport Policy 60 (November): 1–9. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.08.001.
Kain, John F. 1968. “Housing Segregation, Negro Employment, and Metropolitan Decentralization”. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 82 (2), 175–197. http://doi.org/10.2307/1885893.
L’Horty, Yannick, and Florent Sari. 2019. “The Role of Spatial and Skill Mismatches: Explaining Long-Term Unemployment in Paris”. Regional Studies 53 (2): 283–296. http://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2018.1462480.
Lima, Léa. 2016. “Crise des catégories, catégories de la crise : ‘les métiers en tension’ dans les politiques de l’emploi”. Paper presented at the 15th Journées internationales de sociologie du travail (JIST 2016), Athens, 11–13 May 2016.
Lindsay, Colin, and Mikkel Mailand. 2009. “Delivering Employability in a Vanguard ‘Active’ Welfare State: The Case of Greater Copenhagen in Denmark”. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 27 (6): 1040–1055. http://doi.org/10.1068/c0856.
Lorquet, Nadège, Jean-François Orianne, and François Pichault. 2018. “Who Takes Care of Non-Standard Career Paths? The Role of Labour Market Intermediaries”. European Journal of Industrial Relations 24 (3): 279–295. http://doi.org/10.1177/0959680117740425.
Mallik, Girijasankar, Parikshit K. Basu, John Hicks, and Richard Sappey. 2014. “Do the Determinants of Employability and Earnings Returns Produce Similar Outcomes in Metropolitan and Regional Labour Markets? The Case of New South Wales, Australia”. Regional Studies 48 (10): 1706–1718. http://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.812780.
Marcandella, Élise, and Ingrid Mazzilli. 2020. “Quels sont les défis de la collaboration intersectorielle orientée vers l’émergence de territoires inclusifs”. Paper presented at the 31st congrès de l’AGRH, Tours, France.
Martin-Brelot, Hélène, Michel Grossetti, Denis Eckert, Olga Gritsai, and Zoltán Kovács. 2010. “The Spatial Mobility of the ‘Creative Class’: A European Perspective”. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 34 (4): 854–870. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00960.x.
McArdle, Sarah, Lea Waters, Jon P. Briscoe, and Douglas T. (Tim) Hall. 2007. “Employability during Unemployment: Adaptability, Career Identity and Human and Social Capital”. Journal of Vocational Behavior 71 (2): 247–264. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.06.003.
McCann, Philip. 2023. “How Have Place-Based Policies Evolved to Date and What Are They for Now?” Background paper presented at the OECD-EC High-Level Workshop Series “Place-Based Policies for the Future”, Workshop 1, Paris, 14 April 2023.
McCann, Philip, and Andrés Rodríguez-Pose. 2011. “Why and When Development Policy Should Be Place-Based”. In OECD Regional Outlook 2011: Building Resilient Regions for Stronger Economies, 203–211. Paris: OECD.
McQuaid, Ronald W. 2006. “Job Search Success and Employability in Local Labor Markets”. Annals of Regional Science 40 (3): 407–421. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-006-0065-7.
Ministère du Travail, du Plein Emploi et de l’Insertion. 2022. “Construire de nouvelles relations aux entreprises dans le cadre de parcours d’inclusion”. Guide de capitalisation nº 6. Paris.
Mohajan, Haradhan Kumar. 2018. “Qualitative Research Methodology in Social Sciences and Related Subjects”. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People 7 (1): 23–48. http://doi.org/10.26458/jedep.v7i1.571.
Morisson, Arnault, and Mathieu Doussineau. 2019. “Regional Innovation Governance and Place-Based Policies: Design, Implementation and Implications”. Regional Studies, Regional Science 6 (1): 101–116. http://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2019.1578257.
Muffels, Ruud, and Ruud Luijkx. 2008. “Labour Market Mobility and Employment Security of Male Employees in Europe: ‘Trade-Off’ or ‘Flexicurity’?” Work, Employment and Society 22 (2): 221–242. http://doi.org/10.1177/0950017008089102.
Niang, Amadou, André Torre, and Sébastien Bourdin. 2022. “Territorial Governance and Actors’ Coordination in a Local Project of Anaerobic Digestion: A Social Network Analysis”. European Planning Studies 30 (7): 1251–1270. http://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2021.1891208.
Noël, Florent, and Géraldine Schmidt. 2022. “Employability as a Managerial Imperative?” In Employability and Industrial Mutations: Between Individual Trajectories and Organizational Strategic Planning, edited by Florent Noël and Géraldine Schmidt, 19–32. London: ISTE Ltd.
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2017. “Future of Work and Skills”. Paper presented at the 2nd Meeting of the G20 Employment Working Group, Hamburg, 15-17 February 2017.
Okolie, Ugochukwu Chinonso, Hyginus Emeka Nwosu, and Sunday Mlanga. 2019. “Graduate Employability: How the Higher Education Institutions Can Meet the Demand of the Labour Market”. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning 9 (4): 620–636. http://doi.org/10.1108/HESWBL-09-2018-0089.
Partridge, Mark D., Dan S. Rickman, M. Rose Olfert, and Ying Tan. 2017. “When Spatial Equilibrium Fails: Is Place-Based Policy Second Best?” In Place-Based Economic Development and the New EU Cohesion Policy, edited by Philip McCann and Attila Varga, 63–85. London: Routledge.
Pillon, Jean-Marie, Delphine Remillon, and Carole Tuchszirer. 2019. “Les territoires pluriels des intermédiaires du marché du travail”. La Revue de l’IRES 98 (2): 29–57. http://doi.org/10.3917/rdli.098.0029.
Retsin, Camille. 2022. “Analyse du processus d’institutionnalisation d’une expérimentation pour l’emploi: le cas de ‘Territoires zéro chômeur de longue durée’ à Jouques”. PhD thesis, Aix-Marseille Université.
Rogers, Cynthia L. 1997. “Job Search and Unemployment Duration: Implications for the Spatial Mismatch Hypothesis”. Journal of Urban Economics 42 (1): 109–132. http://doi.org/10.1006/juec.1996.2017.
Rothwell, Andrew, and John Arnold. 2007. “Self-Perceived Employability: Development and Validation of a Scale”. Personnel Review 36 (1): 23–41. http://doi.org/10.1108/00483480710716704.
Saxenian, AnnaLee. 1990. “Regional Networks and the Resurgence of Silicon Valley”. California Management Review 33 (1): 89–112. http://doi.org/10.2307/41166640.
Schwandt, Thomas A., and Emily F. Gates. 2021. Evaluating and Valuing in Social Research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Seghir, Majda. 2024. “The Evidence Gap in Labour Shortage Assessments”. Intereconomics 59 (3): 143–145. http://doi.org/10.2478/ie-2024-0030.
Suleman, Fátima. 2021. “Revisiting the Concept of Employability through Economic Theories: Contributions, Limitations and Policy Implications”. Higher Education Quarterly 75 (4): 548–561. http://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12320.
Tamkin, Penny, and James Hillage. 1999. Employability and Employers: The Missing Piece of the Jigsaw. Brighton: The Institute for Employment Studies.
Todes, Alison, and Ivan Turok. 2018. “Spatial Inequalities and Policies in South Africa: Place-Based or People-Centred?” Progress in Planning 123 (July): 1–31. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2017.03.001.
Tehel, Amélie, Romain Pasquier, and Armelle de Guibert. 2024. “Tiers-lieux et politiques de solidarité en France: la quête contrariée du pouvoir d’agir”. Lien social et Politiques 91, 181–197.
Torre, André, and Frédéric Wallet. 2014. “Introduction: The Role of Proximity Relations in Regional and Territorial Development Processes”. In Regional Development and Proximity Relations, edited by André Torre and Frédéric Wallet, 1–44. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Urasadettan, Jennifer, and Céline Schmidt. 2023. “L’appropriation de la fonction d’employeur associatif: proposition d’une typologie”. Revue française de gestion 313 (6): 37–58.
Van den Broeck, Anja, Nele De Cuyper, Elfi Baillien, Els Vanbelle, Dorien Vanhercke, and Hans De Witte. 2014. “Perception of Organization’s Value Support and Perceived Employability: Insights from Self-Determination Theory”. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 25 (13): 1904–1918. http://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.860385.
van der Heijden, Beatrice I. J. M., Esther van der Schoot, Dora Scholarios, Izabela Marzec, Nikos Bozionelos, Olga Epitropaki, Piotr Jêdrzejowicz, Peter Knauth, Aslaug Mikkelsen, and Claudia van der Heijde. 2010. “Employability Management Needs Analysis for the ICT Sector in Europe: The Case of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises”. Journal of CENTRUM Cathedra 3 (2): 182–200.
Wurth, Bernd, Erik Stam, and Ben Spigel. 2022. “Toward an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Research Program”. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 46 (3): 729–778. http://doi.org/10.1177/1042258721998948.