Intergenerational educational mobility in European societies: Before and After the Crisis

Social mobility studies traditionally investigate how the social status of parents affects the social status of their children. Assuming that occupation is a good indicator of social status, social mobility refers to occupational mobility – and typically to the degree of (im)mobility – by comparing a father’s occupation to that of his son.1 These studies tend to follow a normative approach: a high degree of social mobility is ‘good’; strong immobility is ‘bad’. The less parental status influences children’s social chances, the better for society. Whether it is a good thing or a bad thing, the fact is that countries tend to be judged, international comparison is crucial and countries are ranked according to the opportunities for social mobility, which is a sign of an open society. The seminal book by Erikson and Goldthorpe (1992) is basic reference for all research in social mobility, for at least two reasons. On the one hand, they study class mobility, based on the so-called ‘EGP’ class schema – following the initials of three authors: Erikson, Goldthorpe and Portocarero (1979). In their view, the EGP class schema combines the approaches taken by Marx (based on ownership) and Weber (based on marketability). In other words, class positions involve all goods and resources that stem from education, income, wealth or network connections. On the other hand, absolute and relative mobility are separated in the analysis, the latter being free of the effect of change in the class structure. This is called social fluidity and it is the chief indicator of the openness of society. Nevertheless, the investigation by Erikson and Goldthorpe (1992) is comparative in nature, and Hungarian data are also analysed. A follow-up project led to an edited volume by Breen (2004), containing a range of country studies that analyse social fluidity and apply the same class schema for the purpose.