EXPLAINING SOCIAL EXCLUSION - Institut fÃ¼r Soziologie

More documents

Recommendations

Info

International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 98 time dependence of the process without a previous decision about the shape of the function. Time intervals of twelve months were used. An upward mobility transition was defmed äs a transition between two Jobs whereby the second Job has an at least 5% higher level of occupational prestige on the Treiman-Ganzeboom prestige index from 1996. Downward mobility is defmed likewise with the second Job having an at least 5% lower level of prestige on the Treiman-Ganzeboom index. Lateral mobility transitions are defmed äs all other Job changes. Table l (overleaf) shows the results of the event history analysis. Numbers in the table show the percentage-effect that can easily be interpreted (Blossfeld and Rohwer 1995). For example: The risk of a downward social mobility transition is 1068% higher after an unemployment spell. One major result is that spells of unemployment can precede all kinds of social mobility. Unemployment raises the chance of upward, downward and lateral social mobility. After an unemployment spell lateral mobility is more likely than downward mobility, which is more likely than upward mobility. As all three directions of mobility are considerably increased, one can conclude that spells of unemployment mdicate a rather neutral switch in mobility paths. They not only precede a single direction towards downward mobility and they are not necessanly the antecedent of a downward Spiral äs suggested by some versions of exclusion theory. What are the consequences of cumulative unemployment? Is the effect of the cumulated length of unemployment spells more singledirectional than an occasional unemployment spell? The numbers in Table l give a differentiated answer to this question: Upward mobility is less likely (-4%) for persons that are characterised by a long record of unemployment during their career. Employers may use this Information äs a signal to evaluate that these individuals are less competent for a higher position. However, it is not necessarily a predictor for a downward directed career path äs there is no significant effect of cumulative unemployment on downward mobility. A record of long un- Volume 21 Number 4/5/6 2001 99 Time: 0-12mths. Time: 12-24mths. Time: 24-36 mths. Time: 36-48 mths. Time: 48-60 mths. Table 1: Predictors of social mobility, pce-model, percentage-effects Time: more than 60 mths. Unemployment Cumulated duration of unemployment Duration of preceding unemployment spell Current level of prestige lower than prestige level of certificate Unemployment level Development of tertiary sector Formation of companies Ciosure of companies Occupational prestige Labour-entry cohort 1985 Labour force experience Migration to West Germany Employment in public service Woman With child younger than 6 yrs. Woman * with child younger 6 yrs. Upward mobility 0.0003 0.0004 0.0004 0.0002 0.0004 0.0005 735%** -4%* n. s. 4%** n. s. 8.5%* 1%** n.s. -4%** 286%** -3%** n.s. -46%** n.s. n.s. n.s. Downward mobility 0.2193 0.3018 0.3011 0.2564 0.2272 0.3237 1068%** n.s. -5%** -3%** n.s. -6%* n.s. 0.9%** n.s. 44%* -1%** n.s. -64%** n.s. n.s. -31%** Lateral mobility 0.0183 0.0249 0.0216 0.0210 0.0209 0.0228 1307%** n.s. -7%** n.s. -4%* n.s. 0.6%** 0.4%* 1%* -30%* n.s. 23%** -24%** n.s. n.s. n.s.
International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 100 Volume 21 Number 4/5/6 2001 101 Table 1 (continued): Predictors of social mobility, pce-model, percentage-effects Number of preceding employment history spells Log-likelihood Spells Events Upward mobility 21%** Downward mobility n.s. -13315 63185 Lateral mobility 17%** 2431 (480 upward transitions; 638 downward transitions; 1313 lateral transitions) ** = significant on 1%-level; * = significant on 5%-level; n.s. = not significant Special Collaborative Centre 1 86: Hast German Career Study employment can prevent one from getting a better Job, but it is not the start of a downward slope. What happens after a long single unemployment spell in the next Job? Individuais stay longer in their next Job. The figures indicate that people behave in a more risk-averse manner after a spell of long-term unemployment: lateral (-7%) äs well äs downward mobility transitions (-5%) are reduced after single long unemployment spells. What is the effect for your further career by taking a position below the level of qualification of your certificate? Is it the start of a downward slope or can people rebalance resources and positions by moves of counter-mobility? Data suggest the latter: People with a lower level of position in relation to the level of their certificate are more likely to make an upward mobility transition (+4%). They are also less likely to make downward mobility transitions (-3%). Both results indicate a tendency of successful counter-mobility to rebalance resources and positions. Let us now look at structural influences on mobility in the transformation process. What is the effect of a rise in the general unemployment level on individual mobility? The data suggest only a weak effect of the unemployment level on mobility. There is no significant effect on vertical mobility, only lateral mobility is slightly reduced (-4%). Modemisation theory suggests a rise of upward mobility by the enlargement of the tertiary sector. Indeed data support this optimistic picture. The chance of individual upward mobility rises with more positions in the tertiary sector (+8.5%) and the risk of downward mobility is reduced (-6%). A growth of the tertiary sector in Hast Germany is connected by a better opportunity structure for individual mobility. Evolutionary Organisation theory argues that formation and closure of companies influence individual mobility more than the enlargement or shrinkage of established companies. Our data on the East German transformation, which in its initial stage was characterised by high numbers of formation and closure of companies, support these suggestions. The formation of new companies offers opportunities for upward mobility (+1%) and lateral mobility (+0.6%), whereas the closure of companies leads to a rise of downward mobility and lateral mobility. The results of the event-history analysis on the effect of unemployment for mobility with respect to exclusion theory is rather clear cut: Unemployment is a transitory element of mobility paths. Rather than determining the direction of social mobility, it is a rather neutral switch preceding mobility in all directions. The only result that would fit the usual exclusion discourse is that people with a long record of cumulative unemployment are less likely to make upward mobility transitions. In the event history analysis, we also find some hints that individuals may not simply be the victims of unfavourable conditions; they try to actively cope with their position. So, after long-term unemployment spells, they try to hold on to their new Job longer than people without this experience. Results of an optimal matching analysis Before we refute exclusion theory with the empirical results of the event history analysis, let us be cautious and question the method used. Maybe there are limits to the method used that prevent us from discovering exclusionary phenomena: The focus of event-history analysis is
Page 1 and 2: Other Journals from Barmarick Publi
Page 3 and 4: International Journal of Sociology
Page 5: International Journal of Sociology
Page 15: 5 International Journal of Sociolog

EXPLAINING SOCIAL EXCLUSION - Institut fÃ¼r Soziologie

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?