We now turn to the extent to which the relationship between class origins and class destination is mediated via the effects of educational level. We begin by examining the manner in which class origin and educational level combine to influence class destination. Model A in Table 5 allows for all three way interactions except O*E*D. Thus it hypothesises that the link between educational credentials and destination class is the same across all origin classes. This model produces a G2 of 625.6 with 43 degrees of freedom. Adding the O*E*D term in Model B brings an improvement in the deviance value of 397.30 for 324 degrees of freedom and comes close to fitting the data. The modest improvement is bought at the cost of decreasing parsimony and there is little support for the hypothesis that the impact of origin on destination varies by educational level. As a consequence we have no reason to expect that educational expansion per se will have contributed to increased social fluidity. In light of these results, when we attempt to assess whether the
models of educational and class origin effects that we have developed proves adequate, we take model A as the reference point.
Table 9 : Model Fits for Origin-Education-Destinations Tables for 1973 and 1994 Model Fits
G2 d.f. ∆ P
A. All three way effects except O*E*D 625.59 432 6.78 0.000 B. All three way effects 397.30 324 5.17 0.033 C. Substitute column effects model for
+ E*D*T 709.89 483 7.42 0.000
D. Substitute AHP + affinity terms +
interactions with time for O*D*T 875.19 559 8.37 0.000 E. Substitute homogeneous column
effects model and AHP + model for E*D*T and O*D*T.
939.45 609 8.85 0.000
In Model C the education-destination model is substituted for the three way interactions E*D*T, however, on this occasion we employ a homogenous column effects model since the interaction with time proves to be insignificant. We retain the O*E*T term because, since we treat D as the dependent variable, we wish to fit these margins exactly. This results in a G2 of 709.79 with 483 degrees of freedom. Compared with model A, this involves an increase in the deviance of 84.3 for a gain of 51 degrees of freedom. The next model substitutes the AHP model, including the affinity terms and interactions terms, but excluding the OAF3 term which is insignificant, for O*D*T and gives a G2 of 875.2 for 559 degrees of freedom. This involves an increase in G2 of 249.6 for a gain of 137 degrees of freedom that is significant but modest. Finally, in Model D we substitute the homogenous column effects model and the AHP model for E*D*T + O*D*T. The outcome is a G2 of 939.5 with 609 degrees of freedom constituting an increase in the deviance level over model A of 313.9 for a gain of 177 degrees of freedom. The model misclassifies
8.9% of cases compared to 6.8% for model A. Overall then our theoretical models perform very well.
At this stage we turn to a comparison of the gross and partial effects as set out in Table 10. As we would expect, the partial education effects are rather similar to their gross counterpart. Fixing the OET values leads the DAF6 term, capturing the increased tendency for third level graduates to enter routine non-manual work to become insignificant. There is also a modest narrowing in the range of column scores among employees. However, the interaction of the DAF4 and DAF5 terms with time remains highly significant and the conclusion that the impact of education declines over time continues to receive support.11
The remaining coefficients relate to the direct effect of class. Viewed from the perspective of the impact of education, these effects can be thought of a ‘residual’ path that captures all the non-educational influences on social fluidity. These include avenues of inter-generational transmission based on inheritance of property and unmeasured variables such as access to networks, discrimination, ability or social skills and, indeed, any factor that results in an association between origin and destination Breen and Luijkx (forthcoming). The extent to which one considers such effects to capture inequalities of opportunity, rather than simply differential outcomes, depends on the degree to which one is persuaded that these effects reflect differences in factors that it is appropriate to reward, such as ability, or differences in
11
This trend has also been found for France, Sweden, Britain and the Netherlands see Breen and Luijck (forthcoming).
preferences as opposed to difference in resources (Herrenstein and Murray, 1994 and Saunders, 1997, Breen and Golthorpe, 1999, 2002),
Comparing gross and net coefficients, and focusing first on the property variables, we find that the AGB and PB coefficients relating to barriers to entry to agriculture and the movement between the petty bourgeoisie and farming classes are largely unaffected by the introductions of controls for education. With the exception of the skilled manual parameter in 1973, the inheritance effects are also unaffected. The parameters that are subject to change are those relating to hierarchy and the SLP terms which capture the additional advantage enjoyed by those from the petty bourgeoisie in gaining access to the service class. However, it is in mediating hierarchy effects that education plays a vital role.
The partial H1 to H3 terms in equation 10 have substantially lower values that the corresponding gross coefficients in Table 4. In order to illustrate the magnitude of these differences it is useful to describe our results in terms of odds-ratio and to focus on different levels of odds for hierarchical mobility versus movements involving no mobility. For H1 and H2 these findings are constant across time and the findings are straightforward. We express the odds ratios in terms of the higher likelihood of movements involving no hierarchical change. For mobility involving one step on the hierarchy the introduction of education reduces the odds ratio from 1.12 to 1.08. For two- step movements the comparable figures are 2.16 and 1.47. These net outcomes constitute 96% and 76% respectively of their gross counterparts.
The findings relating to three level movements are complicated by change over time.
Table 10: Partial Origin Destination Parameters for the Origin-Education-Destination Model Parameters Estimate s.e INH1 0.074 0.093 INH1*1987/1994/2000 0.132 0.080 INH2 -0.147 0.084 INH3 0.590 0.126 INH3**1987/1994/2000 -0.227 0.134 INH4 1.125 0.130 INH5 0.940 0.174 H1 -0.080 0.050 H2 -0.310 0.044 H3 -0.694 0.178 H3*1987 0.339 0.226 H3*1994 0.373 0.214 H3*2000 0.529 0.215 SLP 0.549 0.118 AGB -1.644 0.116 PB 0.812 0.088 OAF1 -0.540 0.099 OAF2 0.420 0.139 Column Scores I+II 0.00 III -0.649 0.062 IVa+b -1.255 0.059 Ivc -1.938 0.066 V/VI -1.225 0.048 VIIa -1.635 0.534 VIIb -1.514 0.789 DAF1 0.670 0.064 DAF2 0.253 0.071 DAF3 0.612 0.115 DAF4 0.672 0.226 DAF4*1987 -0.700 0.293 DAF4*1994 -1.424 -0.094 DAF4*2000 -0.943 0.298 DAF5 1.082 0.233 DAF5*1987 -0.804 0.265 DAF5*1994 -1.907 0.265 DAF5*200 -1.354 0.275 DAF6 -1.225 0.094 DAF5*1987 0.227 0.596 DAF5*1994 0.915 0.563 DAF5*2000 0.933 0.567
In Table 11 we set out the gross and partial coefficients for all time periods. In both cases we see a significant reduction in the barrier to such fluidity over time. In the case of the gross values we see a gradual decline in the value of the odds ratio from 7.04 in 1973 to 4.18 in 2000. For the partial coefficients the corresponding figures are 2.96 and 1.74. Thus both gross and net fluidity increase over time and at every point education serves as an important mediator of such fluidity. In the final column we express the net coefficient as a percentage value of its gross counterpart. The range of values observed is extremely narrow, running from 0.38 to 0.42%, with identical values being observed in 1973 and 2000. Thus education plays an increasingly important mediating role as one moves from short-range to long-range fluidity. However there is no evidence that the magnitude of that role increases over time. Presenting our findings slightly differently, we find that expressing the 2000 figure as a percentage of 1994 outcome effectively gives an identical value of 60% for both the gross and the partial cases. Thus over time we observe both a weakening impact of education as it continues to mediate a constant proportion of the declining impact of long-term hierarchy and a reduction in the magnitude of the direct effect of this factor.
One possibility we wish to explore further is that the weakening barrier to long- range fluidity is a consequence not of changing relationships between class origins and education qualifications or between the latter and class destinations, but of the expansion of higher education. This could be the case if the association between origin and destination class is weaker at higher levels of education. Hout (1988: 1388), for example, attributes some of the
increase in social fluidity he observes in the USA to a compositional change arising from the entry of more highly educated cohorts among whom origins and destinations are more weakly related; and Vallet (forthcoming) has reported the same result for France, as have Breen and Jonsson (2003) for Sweden. We have already seen that adding the OED term contributes little in the way of explanatory power. A more specific test of this hypothesis produced no evidence of any interaction between the strength of the H3 term and educational level. Starting with our final AHP model plus terms for allowing for the three way interactions between origins, education and time and education destination and time and adding the interaction between H3 and education and between H3, education and time produces no improvement in the fit of the model. 12
Table 11: Gross and Net Odds Ratios for Long-range Hierarchical Mobility By
Time of Survey
Survey Gross Net Net as a % of
Gross 1973 7.04 2.96 42 1987 5.52 2.11 39 1994 5.39 2.04 38 2000 4.17 1.75 42 2000 as % of 1973 59.2 59.1
Conclusions
In this paper we have sought to examine the consequences of economic growth and, most particularly, the period of unprecedented growth in the second half of the 1990s that led to the ‘Celtic Tiger’ characterisation, for patterns of social mobility in the Republic of Ireland. We also wish to draw out
12
the implications of these findings for recent efforts to reconsider theories of social fluidity. Among economists there is little disagreement on the scale of economic transformation in Ireland. Discussion focuses on the role of specific factors and the extent to which recent achievements constitute the culmination of a long-term process of convergence to European norms or rather involve a significant break with the past. Among sociologists, on the other hand, the predominant view has been that growth has been accompanied by increased income inequality and heightened inequality of opportunity. However, just as detailed empirical analysis of income distribution has shown the polarization argument to be a gross simplification, analysis of mobility trends reveals a strikingly different picture
Social mobility in the period 1973-2000 took place in the context of a significant upgrading of the class structure. While the transformation of the class structure was a gradual process, the shift from large-scale unemployment throughout the 1980s to labour shortages in the 1990s was a dramatic one. In terms of absolute mobility, one of the striking consequences of such changes was increased access to the service class across the spectrum of class origins. Alongside such upward mobility we also observed significant flows from the propertied classes to the white-collar classes. The vast bulk of the change in social mobility patterns over time was accounted for by changes in absolute mobility, as Ireland converged towards a European norm from a traditionally low level of mobility. In terms of social fluidity, we observe a reduction in barriers to long-range mobility and increased flows from the propertied classes to the white-collar classes. Thus, the general
picture is quite the opposite of one characterised by blocked mobility and marginalization. These changes combined with a dramatic reduction in the unemployment rate, unprecedented increases in employment and a shift from large-scale emigration to significant inward migration constituted a profound transformation of the society.
Such changes cannot be explained by reductions in income inequality nor by any policies purposively directed at reduction of class inequalities. Instead policy has been directed towards opening up of labour, goods and capital markets, reduced taxation and educational expansion. Welfare policy, while improving the real incomes of the less advantaged, has favoured those with higher incomes. There is no evidence of a trend towards greater meritocracy. The advantages enjoyed by propertied groups in terms of social mobility are substantial and have remained undiminished over time. The association between class-origins and education shows no sign of reduction. That between education and destination has declined and there is no evidence of a weaker association between origins-and destinations at higher levels of education of a kind that would lead expansion of participation per se to promote increased social fluidity. The most significant mediating role of education arises in relation barriers to movement across the class hierarchy. Education plays an increasingly important role as one proceeds from short- range to long-range mobility, however, its importance as a mediator remains constant over time. The evidence we have observed for the impact of education is consistent with findings from a number of recent studies. 13 It is
13
also consistent with the argument developed by Jackson et al (forthcoming) that, while with the expansion of education the absence of qualifications sends a clear negative signal, overall qualifications may provide less information to employers whether as means of certifying or signalling.
Throughout the course of the economic boom Ireland has remained a highly unequal society in terms of the distribution of income and there is no evidence of a movement towards a more meritocratic society in terms of changes in the causal processes represented by the O-E-D triangle. However, contrary to the assumptions and predictions of many Irish sociologists, economic growth and, in particular, the economic boom of recent years has been associated with substantial social mobility and with increased equality of opportunity. Ireland therefore fits into the pattern observed by Breen and Luijkx (forthcoming) of a widespread tendency towards increased social fluidity. However, as they have noted, this trend is not systematically related to trends in economic inequality or growth. A reduction in inequality of opportunity has been achieved in Ireland without a reduction in key inequalities. As with explaining the economic boom in Ireland, it is easier to rule out certain interpretations than to provide precise accounts of the mechanisms underlying increased social fluidity. Breen and Luijkx (forthcoming) suggest that the most plausible model connecting trends in economic growth and social fluidity is one in which a time trend drives both elements but in which there is no direct link between the two. However, while there is no necessary relationship between the two variables, the pattern of change over time in Ireland suggest that both long-term factors, associated with the upgrading of the class structure, and short-term factors
reflected in the tightness of the labour market have played a role. It appears that that faced with a situation where an increasing number of candidates are found above the minimum threshold and, in recent years with an unprecedented tightness in the labour market employers have shown a tendency to resort to criteria other than education. Of course such criteria have always played a significant role in determining social fluidity, however over time it appears that employers have applied them in manner that discriminates less against those from less favoured class origins and promotes increased long-range social fluidity. Thus while the changes observed in Ireland have not taken the form of increased meritocracy in the sense associated with the liberal theory of industrialism of an ‘education based meritocracy, an increased emphasis on other criteria or signals that are deemed to be performance relevant may have contributed to a reduction in specific barriers to social fluidity.
The Irish case provides further support for the argument of Breen and Luijkx (forthcoming) for reconsidering the balance that mobility research has struck between social fluidity and absolute mobility and encouraging increased attention to the detailed evolution of businesses and firms and the jobs that constitute classes. It also provides striking support for their argument that in circumstances where policies in advanced industrial societies have shown an increasing tendency to diverge increased social fluidity may arise as a consequence of highly variable economic and social policies.