There are also some excellent studies on social mobility by Richard Breen and Ruud Luijkx in their book “Social Mobility in Europe between 1970 and 2000” (2004). In this book, the authors discuss the perspectives and issues of social mobility in European societies from 11 countries, namely the UK, France, Ireland, West Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, Sweden, Norway, Poland, Hungary and Israel. And the time period is from the early or mid-1970s to the mid or late 1990s. The book contains chapters on each country, written by the author or authors from that country. In each case, the authors base their analyses on data sets from nationally representative surveys. In it, there was an analysis of the influencing factors and trends in social mobility in their countries according to the conditions of each country [101]. In that study, it can be shown that social changes such as globalization (Globalization and happiness), expansion of the service sector (There is a rate of labor force participation in the labor market) and expansion of education (the problem of educational inequality) may have increased and there is less equality of opportunities in countries such as Sweden, France and the Netherlands. A significant number of people in industrialized countries still achieve the same social position as their parents did.
In Switzerland, there are also many researchers interested in the issue of social mobility. Among them, J. Falcon (2013) stands out in his work “Social Mobility in 20 th Century Swetzerland”. She argues that the concept of social mobility is referred to as a phenomenon of moving from one social position to another, either in relation to family background or previous employment (Social stratification, occupational status, group identification, socioeconomic status).
That case is called intergenerational social mobility, which studies the social status from parents to children (Life Chance, Social Justice, Social Equequalities). While the second case, often called intragenerational social mobility or occupational mobility, is a study to investigate the history in the employment activities of individuals in their lives (Life Course). Falcon argues that social mobility can be measured in absolute and relative terms (by measurement method). It is calculated directly from questionnaires. The results will show us the degree of flexibility, the form of mobility, the speed of vertical movement and upward or downward social mobility. And it helps
Maybe you are interested!
-
Concepts and Types of Social Mobility in the State Cadre Team -
State management of tourism in Luang Pra Bang province, Lao People's Democratic Republic - 23 -
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Social Work Activities in Supporting People with Mobility Disabilities -
Training and fostering of cadres and civil servants in Savanakhet province, Lao People's Democratic Republic - 21 -
Theory of Social Work Services and Social Work Services for Migrant Workers in the Non-State Economic Sector
we see whether that society is open or closed [87]. In Falcon's work, in addition to studying social mobility in Switzerland, she also collects and analyzes the views of social mobility researchers around the world, especially researchers in the 20th century.
- Research on types of social mobility
Researchers have different approaches to social mobility, leading to different ways of classifying social mobility. Notably, Sorokin (1927) classified social mobility into 4 types: (1) Horizontal social mobility;
(2) Vertical social mobility; (3) Intergenerational social mobility; (4) Within-generation social mobility.
+ Horizontal social mobility: He believes that horizontal mobility is the movement of an individual or social object from one social group to another at the same level. While explaining horizontal social mobility mainly refers to the movement of individuals from one position to another with equal or less prestige. It can be understood more clearly that horizontal social mobility is a form of social mobility when a person has a change in residence, religion, political party, family, occupation, etc. but their overall social status remains the same. According to Sorokin, some professions such as doctors, engineers and professors may be on the same social ladder, but when an engineer changes his occupation from an engineer to a teacher of engineering, he has moved horizontally from one occupational group to another but he has not changed in the social stratification system. In other words, horizontal social mobility is the process of an individual moving from one social group to another at the same level.
Sorokin states that other manifestations of mobility are the social dimensions, values, means of transport, control over fertility or the way of using money… of the majority in that social group. In addition, the movement of individuals from one job, factory or occupation to another job, factory or occupation of the same type is horizontal mobility if it does not represent any significant change in the vertical direction. But the type of movement within an occupation or the replacement of workers is only horizontal mobility within an occupation [4].
+ Vertical social mobility: According to Sorokin, vertical social mobility is quite active in relatively open societies. He pointed out the general principles of this vertical mobility as follows:
1) There are very few societies in which social classes are completely closed or in which there is no mobility along the three dimensions: economic, political and occupational.
2) There has never been a society in which vertical social mobility and the transition from one social class to another have been freely and resisted.
3) The characteristic and universality of the phenomenon of vertical social mobility, changing from one society to another.
4) The characteristic and universality of the phenomenon of vertical social mobility is that it has three dimensions: economic, political and occupational - fluctuating in the same society in different directions.
+ Intergenerational social mobility: Intergenerational social mobility is the type of mobility when one generation changes their social status in contrast to the previous generation. This mobility can be upward or downward, for example a person from a lower caste has the financial ability to provide their children with access to higher education, vocational training and skills that enable the next generation to get a job at a higher position. If the father is a shoemaker, but his son after graduating from a certain level of education becomes a clerk, doctor or engineer, this phenomenon is called upward generational mobility or vice versa, downward generational mobility occurs. With economic improvement, people begin to change their lifestyle by abandoning old customs and practicing the types of behavior of those in the higher social ladder. After two or three generations their new position can be recognized.
But the above phenomenon of intergenerational social mobility must have conditions to appear. According to Sorokin, the following conditions affect the rate of social mobility between generations:
1) Differences between parents and their offspring: If a parent occupies an important social position requiring high ability, while his offspring are less able, downward mobility may occur. Conversely, offspring with higher ability than their parents may appear to be upwardly mobile, especially in open societies.
2) Conditions of population change: In developed and developing countries, the lower class population is the majority, larger than the upper class population, which will open up opportunities for upward promotion. Excessive population growth will create new positions in the upper and middle classes, when the growth rate is not large enough to fill the vacancies.
3) Changes in the labor structure: As time changes, the importance of many occupations has been valued higher or lower by society. Some occupations have moved up or down depending on the scarcity of workers who are willing and able to perform the tasks of those occupations. Such changes in the occupational structure also affect the rate of mobility between generations.
+ Social mobility within the same generation: According to Sorokin, social mobility within the same generation is the type of mobility that occurs during the life of a generation. This phenomenon can be divided into two types:
1) The change in position of an individual during his or her lifetime.
2) A brother changes his position but does not change the position of the other brothers. Brother A started his career as a worker. He took a higher education course, vocational training and skills. After 4 years of study, he became an engineer, that is, he moved up and occupied a higher social position than at the beginning of his career. His brother might also have started his career as a salesman and continued to maintain that position throughout his life. Thus, within the same generation, there will be a phenomenon of one brother changing his position and the other not.
According to Inkeles, in his work “Social mobility: Meaning and types of social mobility” (Social mobility: Meaning and types of social mobility, 1965). He divided social mobility into two types: horizontal social mobility and vertical social mobility. Inkeles refers to the movement of a person from one social position to another of the same rank. A man moving from one job to another, but at the same level of prestige or income is called horizontal mobility. In other words, moving from one job to another level of job is called horizontal mobility. And “mobility from one class to another up or down one of the stratification systems can be called vertical mobility (vertical mobility)” [114].
According to Fichter (1972), social mobility was studied in two approaches: the direction of status change and role mobility. According to the direction of status change, he divided it into two types: (1) Horizontal social mobility is the movement back or forward on the same social level, of a group or other similar status. In theory, people in the same social class often interact with each other, because they share the same status standards. Expanding his definition, in large populations, different social "classes" on the same level will often have little social interaction with each other. And the frequent movement of an individual in one "class" to another "class" is horizontal mobility. (2) Vertical social mobility is the movement of a person from one social position to another, from one class to another [40, p. 24].
Next, Tony Bilton and his colleagues in the work “Sociology” (1993) distinguish social mobility in two aspects: (1) Intergenerational mobility (Mobility between generations): That is, a son or daughter has a different status (higher or lower) than that of the parents, for example, a miner's daughter can study to become a teacher, a farmer's child becomes an engineer or a doctor. This is now commonly considered the most important form of social mobility. (2) Intragenerational mobility: He believes that intragenerational social mobility means that a person changes his or her occupational level during his or her working life [38, p. 87]. Similar to Tony Bilton’s view, in Covington’s (1997) work on “Social Mobility”, he argues that intragenerational social mobility is described as the change in social status that occurs during an individual’s lifetime. These changes can move vertically or horizontally, and can be attributed to individual characteristics or opportunities as well as overall social or economic forces [111]. According to him, measuring intragenerational social mobility is done by comparing an individual’s status at multiple points in their lifetime. For example, a person who started his career as a food worker and later became a dentist, and a person who started his career as a lawyer and later became a secretary, are in the same generation. This is how intragenerational social mobility is measured.
In addition, many other researchers such as Richard Shaefer in his work "Sociology" (Sociology, 2005) have divided it into 2 types: Social mobility
vertical and horizontal social mobility. He gives the example that a pilot who becomes a police officer is moving from one social position to another within the same hierarchy. All professions have the same level of prestige. Sociologists call this movement horizontal mobility. Vertical social mobility is the movement of a person from one social position to another, from one class to another. When studying horizontal social mobility, there is a comparison between intergenerational mobility and intragenerational mobility [34, p. 307]. According to him, intergenerational mobility is related to changes in the social position of children compared to their parents. According to him, in the study of intergenerational mobility, there are two aspects: upward or downward intergenerational mobility. For example, a welder whose father is a doctor is a classic example of intergenerational downward mobility. A movie star whose parents are both factory workers illustrates intergenerational upward mobility [34]. Intragenerational or intragenerational social mobility involves changes in social status during a person's adult life. For example, a woman who starts out in the paid workforce as a teacher's assistant and then becomes the administrator of a district high school has undergone an intragenerational upward mobility. Another example is a man who becomes a taxi driver after his accounting firm goes bankrupt and undergoes an intragenerational downward mobility [34].
According to American sociologist Roney Stark, there is another division. He studies two main types: Structural mobility and Exchange mobility [40, p.26].
Most researchers agree that sociological analysis should focus on vertical rather than horizontal mobility. The amount of vertical mobility in a society is a key indicator of its “openness,” indicating that individuals are born into lower strata on the socio-economic ladder.
Inheriting Sorikon's research, according to Lipset and Bendix (1960), “as societies become more open, liberal scholars expect to find increasing total mobility (especially upward mobility), and more equal opportunities for people from all traditional societies to move between classes” [89, pp.1-2]. In addition, many
Research has proceeded since Pitirim Sorokin's pioneering work on social mobility, with some studies by David Glass (1949), Blau and Dunken (1967), Erikson and Goldthrope (1993) and Featherman and Hauser (1978) well known in this field.
- Empirical research on social mobility
Social stratification and social mobility in the process of social development are topics that attract the attention of many scientists as well as policy makers and practitioners at home and abroad. However, there are only a few theoretical studies on social mobility, most researchers are more interested in empirical research, especially in European countries. The following are some empirical studies from research works and typical articles reflecting the reality of social mobility today.
The United States is a country with strong development in sociology. In particular, there are many empirical studies on the issue of social stratification in general and social mobility in particular: Starting from the study of Brissenden, Paul (1955) on "Labor mobility and employee benefits". According to the author's research results, horizontal social mobility, also known as horizontal mobility, can be caused by many factors. An individual may feel that his current position cannot meet his personal needs and choose to look for another position, although it is a similar position. They may consider geographically, not interested in an industry or profession, and social networks can play a role in promoting horizontal mobility. In addition, health and physical limitations can cause individuals to have internal changes. Even a person's dissatisfaction with the pace at which advancement is possible in their current environment may lead them to seek a lateral move (lateral mobility) into a similar position in another industry or occupation. But in reality, the tendency of a group of people to move cannot be determined by immediate benefits. Instead, benefits that are truly appealing to an individual's personal preferences may play a stronger role. Long-term benefits, investment opportunities, social interaction, and enterprise growth are some of the benefits that may or may not be incentives. At least, those benefits are provided by workers' incentives to move [60].
An empirical study of intergenerational mobility. Starting with the study of “Status attainment,” mechanisms in the process of intergenerational mobility have also been studied (Blau and Duncan (1967); Sewell and Hauser (1975). Using analysis and modeling of individual life, parental resources, child education, and child occupational status in first and current jobs. Other factors, such as family structure, number of siblings, rural origin, cognitive ability, and other flu, are also included as potential mediators in the transmission of advantage across generations. This line of research has found that education is a key factor in both reproductive mobility and advancement (Hout and DiPrete (2006)). Education is the main means of reproduction because advantaged parents can afford more education for their children, thereby paying for the labor market. But education also is the primary means of transportation. Because factors other than parental resources account for much of the variance in educational attainment, it frees individuals from their social origins.
Grusky DB's study of “American social mobility in the 19th and 20th centuries” (1986) provides new evidence on the effects of an advanced economy on the rates, patterns, and sources of social mobility for Americans, especially men. The data in this study were drawn from manuscripts and censuses in nine communities in the nineteenth century, and from occupational changes in a generational survey in the twentieth century. In each data set, occupational titles were assigned to a common classification, so that comparisons could be made with a degree of confidence and precision. The study found that rates of social mobility in the twentieth century were twice as high as those in the nineteenth century. In addition, the study showed that changes over the two centuries were mainly diagonal. These trends include: 1) an emerging convergence in the mobility opportunities of semi-skilled and unskilled workers; 2) an increase in the exchange between owners and manual workers; and 3) a significant decline in the mobility opportunities of primary occupations. Changes on the main diagonal may arise from the growth of universal values over the past century, while downward trends on the diagonal may proceed from class-specific changes in wages, skills, or prestige. It is argued that these trends will reduce the impact on the potential