Testing the universality of historical occupational stratification structures across time and space

In this paper we report on the estimation of a variety of ‘HIS-CAM’ scales of occupational stratification. The scales are estimated from marriage records collected over the period 18001938 in six countries: Britain, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden. A dataset of approximately 400,000 marriages is collated, from which the occupation of the groom, bride, and parents of the groom and bride are given HISCO codes. The analysis proceeds by conducting 'RC-II' association models on cross-tabulations of child-to-parent occupations. These models may be estimated at a ‘universal’ level (a single occupational scale on the entire dataset), but they may also be estimated on subsets of data from different time periods and/or countries (a series of ‘specific’ occupational scales, for different countries). We find that specific occupational scale estimations are statistically favoured, and offer some revealing insights into the structure of occupational stratification in the period. Nevertheless, we also find evidence that universal occupational stratification scales are substantively parsimonious, insofar as they do a fair job of incorporating most, if not all, of the important differences in occupational stratification positions.

[1]  R. Breen Social mobility in Europe , 2004 .

[2]  Steve Rytina IS OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY DECLINING IN THE UNITED STATES? , 2000 .

[3]  Harry B. G. Ganzeboom,et al.  Internationally Comparable Measures of Occupational Status for the 1988 International Standard Classification of Occupations , 1996 .

[4]  D. Treiman Occupational Prestige in Comparative Perspective , 1977 .

[5]  David Vincent,et al.  Literacy and Popular Culture: England 1750-1914 , 1989 .

[6]  Marco H. D. van Leeuwen,et al.  HISCO: Historical International Standard Classification of Occupations , 2002 .

[7]  K. Prandy,et al.  Marriage, Social Distance and the Social Space: , 2003 .

[8]  Andrew Miles,et al.  Building European Society: Occupational Change and Social Mobility in Europe 1840-1940 , 1993 .

[9]  Manfred Max Bergman,et al.  Specificity and Universality in Occupation-based Social Classifications , 2005 .

[10]  M. Kalmijn,et al.  Intermarriage and homogamy: causes, patterns, trends. , 1998, Annual review of sociology.

[11]  K. Prandy,et al.  Social Reproduction and Mobility in Britain and Ireland in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries , 2000 .

[12]  K. Prandy The Revised Cambridge Scale of Occupations , 1990 .

[13]  Jeroen K. Vermunt,et al.  'EM: A general program for the analysis of categorical data 1 , 1997 .

[14]  Social Mobility in Nineteenth- and Early Twentieth-Century England , 1999 .

[15]  Robert Blackburn,et al.  Social Stratification and Occupations , 1982 .

[16]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[17]  R. Schumacher,et al.  “We Have No Proletariat”: Social Stratification and Occupational Homogamy in Industrial Switzerland, Winterthur 1909/10–1928 , 2005, International Review for Social History.

[18]  I. Maas,et al.  Endogamy and Social Class in History: An Overview , 2005, International Review of Social History.

[19]  L. A. Goodman Simple Models for the Analysis of Association in Cross-Classifications Having Ordered Categories , 1979 .

[20]  W. Bottero,et al.  Stratification: Social Division and Inequality , 2005 .

[21]  I. Maas,et al.  Total and Relative Endogamy by Social Origin: A First International Comparison of Changes in Marriage Choices during the Nineteenth Century , 2005, International Review of Social History.