1

Individual continuities, social mobility and cumulative inequalities along the life course

The example of Germany

Steffen Hillmert

University of Tübingen

2

Overview

• (1) Primarily descriptive information on occupational mobility in Germany and its change over time

-> Long-term inter-cohort comparisons

• (2) Developments along the life course

-> Also: Conceptual links between analyses of intra-generational mobility and...

…analyses of co-variation/determination

...analyses of (changes in) distributions

3

In particular: Cumulative (dis-)advantage and mobility

• General idea: Small differences in the beginning lead to larger differences later on („Matthew effect“, cf. Merton et al.)

• Mechanisms: Accumulation of resources etc.

• Here: specific perspective of describing intra-cohort developments of social inequality

• Links with conventional perspectives of analysis?

• -> Depends on definitions/measurement concepts...

4

Cumulative (dis-)advantage and mobility

• (1) Collective polarisation: (cross-sectional) intra-cohort differentiation increases over time (-> distribution aspect)

• (2) Social closure: status changes become increasingly difficult over time -> decreasing mobility rates (-> mobility aspect)

 • (3) Individual-level accumulation: (longitudinal) intra-cohort

differentiation increases over time (-> mobility and distribution aspect)

 -> Intra-generational mobility is one dimension of (2), (partly) a necessary consequence of (1) and directly influences (3)

5

Theory

Institutional factors that favour cumulative disadvantage:

• stratified educational/training systems which transfer social inequality to the labour market

• labour markets which highly rewards individual success (def. 1), but also

• labour markets which support continuity in employment careers (def. 2, 3)

6

Germany since Word War II: Hypotheses

• Relatively stable systems of education and occupation

-> small changes in overall inequality along the life course and across cohorts (1)

• Clear hierarchical differentiation by origin (esp. through education) (2)

• Continuous individual accumulation/high risks of long-term exclusion (3)

•  One "case" -> theoretical references / historical changes...

7

Data

• German Life History Study, retrospective surveys of selected birth cohorts

• Here: West Germany only• (More continuous) men's careers only

Birth cohort Data collection in...

n(Men) Transition to labor market during historical period...

Important historical events/trends

1919-21 1985-86 546 1930s/40s World War II1929-31 1981-83 333 1940/50s Immediate Post-war period

Two German states‘Economic miracle’Educational expansionOil crisisMass unemployment German unification and beyond

1939-41 1981-83 354 1950/60s1949-51 1981-83 344 1960/70s1954-56 1989 506 1970s1959-61 1989 456 1970/80s1964 1998-99 663 1980s1971 1998-99 595 1980/90s

8

Data

9

Data

• Very different observation windows...

• ...two strategies:

-> (I) Inter-cohort comparisons of early careers (all cohorts)/

short-term developments along the life course

In particular: Transition-rate models (right-censored data)

-> (II) Long-term developments along the life course

(combined data on 1919-21 and 1929-31 birth cohorts only)

10

Data

• Main dependent variable: occupational status represented by occupational prestige measured according to Treiman (SIOPS)

• a measure which is readily available for all cohorts

• Independent variables: age and social origin (and education)

11

(I) Inter-cohort comparisons

12

Occupational status

Range of occupational status (mean +/- 1 std) at the beginning of careers, by cohort

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1919-21 1929-31 1939-41 1949-51 1954-56 1959-61 1964 1971

Light-coloured bars: First occupation, dark-coloured bars: Occupation at age 30

13

Mobility rates in early careers

Relative mobility rates (odds ratios) by cohort

(1919-21 = 1)

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1,2

1,4

1919

-21

1929

-31

1939

-41

1949

-51

1954

-56

1959

-61

1964

1971

1919

-21

1929

-31

1939

-41

1949

-51

1954

-56

1959

-61

1964

1971

Upward mobility Downward mobility

14

Inter-generational mobility

Proportion (percentages) of men who had a lower status than their fathers at first job, by cohort

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1919-21 1929-31 1939-41 1949-51 1954-56 1959-61 1964 1971

15

Counter mobility

Men’s relative chances of upward mobility (odds ratios) when having lower status than father, by cohort

0

1

2

3

4

1919-21 1929-31 1939-41 1949-51 1954-56 1959-61 1964 1971

16

A simple path model of the labour-market entry process

Father’s occupation

First occupation

Occupation at age 30

Education

17

A simple path model of the labour-market entry process

• Results of inter-cohort comparisons:

• Degree of overall structuration (i.e., prediction of occupational status at the beginning of careers and later on) remains high

• No clear trend across cohorts

• But: marked fluctuations from one cohort to another

18

(II) Long-term developments along the life course

• 1919-21 and 1929-31 only (combined)

• The three definitions of cumulative advantage...

19

(1) Collective polarisation

Mean occupational status (and +/- 1 std), by age

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51

Mean + 1 std

Mean

Mean - 1 std

20

(1) Collective polarisation

Range of status (as mean deviations +/- 0.5 std) from the overall mean), by social origin and age

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51

Low origin

Low origin

High origin

High origin

21

(2) Individual-level mobility / Social closure

Upward mobility: Relative mobility rates (odds ratios), by age and social origin

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1,2

1,4

25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59

High origin

Low origin

22

(2) Individual-level mobility / Social closure

Downward mobility: Relative mobility rates (odds ratios), by age and social origin

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1,2

1,4

25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59

Low origin

High origin

23

Inter- and intra-cohort mobility

Proportion of men who have a lower status than their fathers, by social origin and age

0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51

High origin

All

Low origin

24

(3) Individual accumulation

Dispersion in accumulated status (as deviations from the mean), by age and social origin (Mean accumulated status and +/- 0.5 std)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51

Mean + 1 std

Mean

Mean - 1 std

25

(3) Individual accumulation

Dispersion in accumulated status (as deviations from the mean), by age and social origin (Mean accumulated status and +/- 0.5 std)

-200

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51

High origin

High origin

High origin

Low origin

Low origin

Low origin

26

Summary

• (1) Little change in the status distributions at any given point in time (i.e., no collective (cross-sectional) polarisation)

• (2) Clearly decreasing rates of mobility with age: change of individual occupational increasingly unlikely

-> status order becomes consolidated

• (3) Individual-level accumulation: Steadily cumulating advantage and disadvantage

• + Clear stratification of attained occupational status by social origin, which persists (or even increases) throughout the careers

27

Conclusions

• Pattern typical for an institutional system characterised by a differentiated educational system and a qualification-based labour market ("insider/outsider")

• Makes it likely that the impact of social origin is transferred to the labour market through education and has a long-lasting effect on employment careers

• Historical trends are less clear

• Members of any single cohort have been affected by very specific and changing conditions

28

Conclusions

-> Pay more attention to conceptual questions:

• (Necessary) links between hypotheses from different perspectives

• (Typical) empirical associations

29

Further developments

• Look at a longer sequence of cohorts including younger cohorts

• Use inter-national comparisons as a reference

• Compare with income trajectories