IS SOCIAL MOBILITY INCREASING OR DECREASING IN U.K? WHY?

IS SOCIAL MOBILITY INCREASING OR DECREASING IN U.K? WHY?

            One of the critical factors which can be approached in any society to ensuring both the children from poor backgrounds as well as those from stable backgrounds succeed equally is ensuring social mobility in the society. Social mobility is essential in creating a fairer society, maximizing productivity and promoting social cohesion. This is because in a fair society success is subject to rewards of individual hard work and not connected in any way to the inheritance advantage. In a socially mobile setting, productivity level is also high because the best pool of talents is utilized hence ensuring that talents are applied and utilized in sectors where they have greatest impacts. Socially mobile societies are also more cohesive even as they allow access to opportunities equally by all; an act that minimizes conflicts while maximizing trust in the entire society.

In the recent decades, attention has been considerably paid to the social mobility, specifically in the UK and several other first world countries. The political class has also recognized the benefits of building socially mobile societies which treat all the citizens equally. Availability of data has also made it easy for researchers to have new perspectives and understanding on the topic (King, 2014). A seminal study was undertaken by Blanden, Gregg, and Machin in 2015 shed light on the declining social mobility rate in the UK for people who had been born between 1940 and 1970. However, one decade on, a number of changes have been observed in the UK; Political leadership changes have been witnessed, the great recession of 2007-2008 and the consequent government austerity, emergence of online and digital technologies, globalization impacts, and the current vote to withdraw from European Union (Blanden, Gregg &Machin, 2015). Under such and other similar contexts, this paper examines the changes in social mobility state of UK in the last 20 years and driving forces towards those changes.

Social mobility simply entails breaking the factor of people’s parental backgrounds as a determinant of individual opportunities of realizing full potential in their lives in regard to income and occupation. It makes it easier and fair for all the people in society to have access to opportunities equally regardless of their backgrounds. First, social mobility is measured through social class, examining whether children fall in the same or different social classes to those belonging to their parents (Archer, 2015). Under this category, children are ranked according to factors such as level of education required for one to occupy certain positions before being judged on social mobility perspectives. The second category compares the income of the parents to that of their children when they are at adult level.

Mobility in society can be understood in varied ways; the first way entailing the “life chances”, and which can be gauged by a number of outcomes like the level of education and justice outcomes. However, the research on justice has indicated less focus on social mobility and therefore considered less developed. Education on the other side has been a good example in demonstrating social mobility. In this paper, the focus will be mainly on social class and income as measures of social mobility (Deary, Taylor, Hart, Wilson, Smith, Blane & Starr, 2015, p.455). Income is preferably chosen because it’s a tangible indicator, can be easily measured and gives clearer relationships to the quality of life aspects. Social class, on the other hand, gives a clear view of salary, education levels and job prestige which are essential factors in any occupation.

In the UK, researchers have concentrated much on cohort studies from three stages, 1946, 1958 and 1970 and then the additional cohort of 2000. Children who were born after 2000 are still young to have crossed the threshold into the labor market, what makes it hard to measure social mobility for the generation born in last few years. However, other factors such as education levels, access to information and income inequality can be used in determining mobility level.

Some research studies have indicated that the rapid increase in income inequality observed in the UK at the beginning of the year 1979 was an indication that societies had become more meritocratic and the poor people had the chances of becoming rich provided they could work hard (Lipset & Bendix, 2016). Contrary to these few research studies, the rest of the studies were all against it, indicating a decline in social mobility degree over the decades. The children who had been born in poor backgrounds were less likely to come out of such poor conditions and attain their potential goals than the case before.

The decline in social mobility can be demonstrated by making a comparison between two sons born in 1958, hence leaving school in early 1970’s and where their parents had disparities in income level, With the parents of one getting an income which is twice that of the other.  The results indicated that the son from rich background would be earning 17.5% on average more than the poor son in their early thirties (Loury, Modood & Teles, 2015). As a backup,  another set of comparable boys from similar backgrounds but born in 1970’s and left school late 1980’s indicated an increase in advantage by the rich son to 25%.

In the UK, education has been the key contributing factor to intergenerational social mobility. The question has however remained to be, what role has education played in the current social mobility decline in the UK over the past 20 years? This research has highlighted the relationship between the attainment of higher education by a child and the income of his or her family to have grown stronger (Shaw &Thomas, 2016, p.209). This is an implication that the university participation expansion currently has had more benefits to children from rich families than those from poor families.

When we consider the two educational performance stages: staying at school after the compulsory age of leaving the school, 16 years; and attaining the higher education level since it also entails schooling and not income, a third cohort can be added to the 1958 and 1970 ones; Those children who attained their 16 in the era of 1990’s. And that gives a clear picture of how social mobility may fluctuate for a more recent birth group (Tiffin, Pearce & Parker, 2015, p.870).

It is frequently asserted that there is little social mobility in Britain. In 2011, the ‘social mobility tsar’ Alan Milburn stated: “Tragically, despite everything we live in a nation where, perpetually, in case you’re born in a poor family, you as well die poor”. This recommendation of aggregate fixed status is extremely distant from reality. There was social mobility insurgency in the twentieth century as working class population shriveled and the cushy jobs increased. That prompted an increase in total mobility because more chances for job opportunities had been left on the top level. It was an assurance that moving from the working class to middle class had been enhanced as the middle class had extended.

Be that as it may, sociologists began to draw their attention to relative mobility, which alludes to ease the gap between those classes. Unlike outright mobility, relative mobility is a zero-whole diversion. For an individual to climb up the ladder, another person must be drawn down. The greater part of scholastic confirmation on social mobility in the UK demonstrates that since 1960s relative mobility has remained very steady, or has increased by a very small margin. One dataset recommended that relative mobility has declined and a few examinations drawing on it have gotten significantly more consideration than whatever remains of the writing. Beginning in 2011, the business analyst Jo Blanden and partners distributed a progression of papers looking at the inter-generational income portability utilizing two British associates, one conceived in 1958, the other conceived in 1970. They revealed “sharp falls in cross-age mobility of monetary status between the companions” and theorized this was because of the white collar classes profiting by the extension of advanced education in the second 50% of the twentieth century.

This prompted a scholarly level-headed discussion and Blanden et al’s previous conclusions on social mobility was challenged by a few ensuing investigations. Goldthorpe and Jackson found that relative mobility for the two groups remained “basically steady” after the war. When Goldthorpe and Mills considered the information from 1972 and 2005, they found that social mobility had not declined. Many similar conclusions were drawn by Lipset & Bendix, (2016), Deary et al. (2013), Loury, Modood & Teles (2015) and others. A few scientists found out that relative mobility had really enhanced to some extent, for example, Heath and Payne (2014) and Shaw &Thomas (2016). All would have concurred with John Goldthorpe, who expressed unequivocally in his latest article that “no decrease in portability, either supreme or relative, happened in the late twentieth century”. The explanations behind the difference between Blanden et al’s contemplates and the rest spin around specialized parts of information examination, yet it is almost certain that the claims that (relative) social mobility has declined to depend on a considerably small group of the confirmation that the less skeptical view that versatility has been unfaltering or rising.

In any case, debates on social mobility have a tendency to overlook the bigger assemblage of proof. For instance, in 2013 the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission straight affirmed that “we realize that the connection amongst parental and child income appears to have strengthened between the group conceived in 1958 and 1970, proposing a decrease in mobility.” The reference for this claim was, as normal in such reports, as the one for Blanden et al’s. No place in its 348 pages was there any reference to the works of John Goldthorpe, Geoff Payne, Peter Saunders, Yaojun Li, Fiona Devine, Stephen Gorard, Michelle Jackson or Colin Mills (Shaw &Thomas, 2016, p.209).

In UK social mobility has been driven by several factors and which has made it evolve differently in a different time span. The three key drivers of social mobility in the UK are the economic opportunities, capabilities development and then the access to quality education and jobs.

However, far as these three factors have been considered to be the primary drivers, there still exist other factors which contribute indirectly and impact social mobility as well these factors include health outcomes, infrastructure,  home environment and public housing  (Tiffin, Pearce & Parker, 2015, p.870). Studies have termed these underlying factors to be relatively important especially for the least advantaged backgrounds because basic living standards are very important if children are expected to take advantage of education and employment opportunities. Parental education is equally important to factor also.

Considering economic opportunities as a primary driver of social mobility in the UK, we get to realize the fact that, availability of good jobs is a must if people are expected to improve their social status. Therefore, job creation in a country’s economy becomes very essential for social mobility. Not all growth will promote fair opportunities, however. Opportunities which impacts social mobility include the jobs created, income levels of the jobs created, the job security and then the geographic distribution of such opportunities.

As it was indicated earlier on in this paper, social mobility for the generation which was entering the job market began to decline in the 1980s, a trend which can be explained in consideration to the economic opportunities over the period. The decades which followed after the Second World War experienced a boom in employment opportunities in the UK, which in turn triggered a rapid social mobility improvement (Loury, Modood & Teles, 2015). The period was characterized by significant changes in the existing economy, where well-paying jobs and professional were created. Similarly, following these changes, wage growth also doubled. But by the time it hit the mid-1960s, the growth pace began to slow down, and disparities across the regions in regard to economic growth started to open up.

Since 1980, employment opportunities have registered further deterioration in the UK up to date; the case worsening after the country was hit by the financial crisis of 2007-2008. This is an implication that those who were born in the mid-1980s have not witnessed growth in their wages, putting them in the limelight as the first ones in modern times to be earning less than their parents. The financial crisis of 2007-08 also played a critical role to widen the downward pressure on wages in the UK as it hit the country harder as compared to any other country in Europe except Greece. The gap on income inequality has since then increased and widened the geographical disparities as well (Tiffin, Pearce & Parker, 2015, p.870). This pressure has, in turn, affected the social mobility. Hollowing out of labor market has also been witnessed in the UK, with the medium skilled employment opportunities falling by a margin of 10% since the year 2002 while the highly skilled job opportunities increasing. The decline in the middle rungs on job ladder has therefore made it hard for a low skilled laborer to access the high skilled jobs. This has increased the disparities further.

Touching on the individual development capabilities, which rather refers to the broad cognitive skills of an individual on one side and non-cognitive skills on the other side, they are skills which must nurture through the formal education system as well as in modern community settings. Evidence shows the importance of these skills in improving career success which in turn touches on social mobility. To comprehend the connection between these capabilities and social mobility in the UK, education attainment (different stages, right from pre-school to university) in both the rich and poor background children was considered (Blanden, Gregg &Machin, 2015).

Education gaps registered a swift decline between the 60s and 70s, a trend which was linked with the decline in income mobility during the period. Research studies indicated inequalities in regard to higher education over the period. Concisely, children from poor backgrounds indicated a five times fewer chances of completing their university degree compared to those from rich families. This gap has fluctuated from time to time up to date where the gaps still remain large at all the major milestones (Tiffin, Pearce & Parker, 2015, p.870). This has been the main reason behind social mobility decline rates in the UK. These gaps in education are associated with the differences in support for children development especially outside the school, and which varies depending on the socio-economic backgrounds. I regard to this point, research studies have shown that over the holidays, students from the low-income backgrounds undergo a decline in their reading skills while those from able backgrounds experience modern gains as their parents are able to sponsor education tours and things of the sort.

The access to opportunities is the final primary factor influencing social mobility in the UK. Access issues come up when people have same abilities but preference is first given to the children from rich backgrounds. Factors which necessitate access opportunities include the networks which are established by the social circles of the family, differences in information access on the basis of poor and rich and then the discrimination on the basis of class, wealth and race. Although access to opportunities has indicated an improvement over time, there still some traces of barriers especially on the access to higher education (Loury, Modood & Teles, 2015). This is because much of the improvements especially in the sector of education have majored on low ranks of education. Rich parents have the ability to establish a glass floor for their children by spending a lot to make sure that their children can access the top universities in the UK. This has been a key barrier to mobility in the UK since the denial of education chances for the poor children have limited their bargains even in the job market as they lack skills.

In conclusion, the average social mobility in the UK has decreased over time. This is as a result of the increased income disparities which has affected both the economic and education opportunities. The significant obstacles to social mobility in the UK remain to be real wage growths which have stagnated and the increasing income inequality. Large education gaps have also remained with entrenched privilege on the higher education opportunities where students from poor backgrounds still have limited chances of attending university. The access to job and education opportunities is still an ongoing issue of concern with evidence of opportunity hoarding via networks, information access asymmetries, and social bias. Without resolute efforts, mobility in the UK is likely to deteriorate further following the trends currently shaping the future of labor market. These trends include the rise in disruptive technologies, new working ways, demographic changes, and globalization.

References

Brooks, R. and Waters, J., 2013. Social networks and educational mobility: the experiences of      UK students. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 8(1), pp.143-157.

King, M.A., 2014. An index of inequality: with applications to horizontal equity and social           mobility.

Archer, M.S., 2015. Making our way through the world: Human reflexivity and social mobility.     Cambridge University Press.

Deary, I.J., Taylor, M.D., Hart, C.L., Wilson, V., Smith, G.D., Blane, D. and Starr, J.M., 2015.    Intergenerational social mobility and mid-life status attainment: Influences of childhood       intelligence, childhood social factors, and education. Intelligence, 33(5), pp.455-472.

Lipset, S.M. and Bendix, R., 2016. Social mobility in industrial society. Transaction Publishers.

Loury, G.C., Modood, T. and Teles, S.M. eds., 2015. Ethnicity, social mobility, and public            policy: Comparing the USA and UK. Cambridge University Press.

Shaw, S. and Thomas, C., 2016. Discussion note: Social and cultural dimensions of air travel        demand: Hyper-mobility in the UK?. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(2), pp.209-215.

Tiffin, P.A., Pearce, M.S. and Parker, L., 2015. Social mobility over the lifecourse and self-          reported mental health at age 50: prospective cohort study. Journal of Epidemiology &        Community Health, 59(10), pp.870-872.