printAre International Stratification Scales Misrepresenting Russian Social Structure?
Sokolov M.M.
Cand. Sci. (Sociol.), Prof. at European University at Saint Petersburg, St. Petersburg, Russia msokolov@eu.spb.ru
Sokolov M.M. Are International Stratification Scales Misrepresenting Russian Social Structure?. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2020. No 8. P. 14-26
This article attempts to evaluate the applicability of international stratification scales having the widest currency (EGP, ISEI, CAMSIS, Treiman, E.O. Wright’s schema) to the Russian case. More specifically, I evaluate (1) the performance of scales in predicting income, educational attainment, lifestyle and consumption patterns; (2) the presence of interaction closure and intergenerational reproduction of membership in the groups identified by the scales. Empirically, the paper relies on the results of a representative survey of population of Saint Petersburg (N = 3200; June, 2019). General conclusion is that occupational scales (ISEI, Treiman, CAMSIS) explain essentially the same variance as an individual’s educational level, while Wright explains the same variance as income level. The EGP scale arguably produces the best result, although its predictive abilities are not going beyond that of a combination of “raw” socio-demographic variables (age, education, income). In the second part of the paper, I try to identify the aspects of the Russia’s social structure responsible for the shortcomings of the international scales. The major “suspect” is the relative independence of income (and occupational prestige closely related to it) from membership in status groups defined through their education, lifestyle, and interaction closure. Membership in status groups, but possibly not for that in income strata, are likely to be reproduced inter-generationally.
Бессуднов А.Р. Социально-профессиональный статус в современной России // Мир России. 2009. Т. 18. № 2. С. 89–115. [Bessudnov A. (2009) Occupational Status in Contemporary Russia. Mir Rossii [Universe of Russia]. Vol. 18. No. 2: 89–115 (In Russ.)]
Ощепков А.Ю. Неравенство в заработках: роль профессий: препринт WP3/2011/03 [Текст]. М.: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 2011. [Oschepkov A. (2011) Income Inequality: the Role of Occupation. Working paper WP3/2011/03. Moscow: Izd. dom Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki. (In Russ.)]
Тихонова Н.Е. Социальная структура России: теории и реальность. М.: Новый хронограф; Ин-т социологии РАН, 2014. [Tikhonova N. (2014) Social Structure of Russia: Theories and Reality. Moscow: Novyj khronograf; In-t sotsiologii RAN. (In Russ.)]
Тарусин М.А. Реальная Россия: социальная стратификация современного российского общества. М.: Ин-т общественного проектирования: Эксперт, 2006. [Tarusin M.A. (2006) Real Russia: Social Stratification of Contemporary Russian Society. Moscow: In-t obshchestvennogo proektirovaniya: Expert. (In Russ.)]
Blau P.M., Duncan O.D. (1967) The American Occupational Structure. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Bihagen E., Lambert P. (2018) Can Class and Status Really Be Disentangled? Research in Social Stratification and Mobility. Vol. 58: 1–10. DOI: 10.1016/j.rssm.2018.08.001.
Bourdieu P. (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. London: Routledge; Kegan Paul.
Chan T.W., Goldthorpe J.H. (2007) Class and Status: The Conceptual Distinction and its Empirical Relevance. American Sociological Review. Vol. 72. No. 4: 512–532. DOI: 10.1177/000312240707200402.
Chan T.W., Goldthorpe J.H. (2004) Is there a Status Order in Contemporary British Society? Evidence from the Occupational Structure of Friendship. European Sociological Review. Vol. 20. No. 5: 383–401.
Flemmen M.P., Jarness V., Rosenlund L. (2019) Class and Status: on the Misconstrual of the Conceptual Distinction and a neo-Bourdieusian Alternative. The British Journal of Sociology. Vol. 70. No. 3: 816–866. DOI: 10.1111/1468-4446.12508.
Ganzeboom H.B.G., De Graaf P.M., Treiman D.J. (1992) A Standard International Socio-Economic Index of Occupational Status. Social Science Research. Vol. 21. No. 1: 1–56. DOI: 10.1016/0049-089X(92)90017-B.
Ganzeboom H.B.G., Treiman D.J. (1996) Internationally Comparable Measures of Occupational Status for the 1988 International Standard Classification of Occupations. Social Science Research. Vol. 25. No. 3: 201–239. DOI: 10.1006/ssre.1996.0010.
Goldthorpe J.H. (1996) Class Analysis and the Reorientation of Class Theory: the Case of Persisting Differentials in Educational Attainment. The British Journal of Sociology. Vol. 46. No. 2: 481–505.
Goldthorpe J.H., McKnight A. (2006) The Economic Basis of Social Class. In: Morgan S.L., Grusky D.B., Fields G.S. (eds) Mobility and Inequality: Frontiers of Research in Sociology and Economics. Stanford: Stanford University Press: 109–136.
Grusky D. (2005) Foundations of a neo-Durkheimian Class Analysis. In: Wright E.O. (ed.) Approaches to Class Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 51–81. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511488900.
Laumann E.O., Guttman L. (1966) The Relative Associational Contiguity of Occupations in an Urban Setting. American Sociological Review. Vol. 31. No. 2: 169–178.
Sokolov M. (2019) Cultural Capital and Social Revolution: Arts Consumption in a Major Russian City, 1991– 2017. Poetics. Vol. 72: 1–16. DOI: 10.1016/j.poetic.2018.10.005.
Weber M. (1978) Economy and Society. Part 1. Berkeley: University of California Press: 299–307.
Weeden K.A., Grusky D.B. (2005) The Case for a New Class Map. American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 111. No. 1: 141–212. DOI: 10.1086/428815.
Weeden K.A., Grusky D.B. (2012) The Three Worlds of Inequality. American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 117. No. 6: 1723–1785. DOI: 10.1086/665035.
Wright E.O., Costello C., Hachen D., Sprague J. (1982) The American Class Structure. American Sociological Review. Vol. 47. No. 3: 709–726.
Wright E.O. (1989) The Comparative Project on Class Structure and Class Consciousness: An Overview. Acta Sociologica. Vol. 32. No. 1: 3–22. DOI: 10.1177/000169938903200101.