Intergenerational social mobility during industrialization : A micro-level study of a transforming community in southern Sweden 1830-1968

This article studies class attainment and mobility in a long-term perspective, covering the entire transition from a preindustrial to a mature industrial society. Using longitudinal individual-level data men in a community of southern Sweden we test different hypotheses linking changing social mobility and attainment to the industrialization process. While we find a continuous increase in absolute mobility, relative mobility did not increase until the post-world war II period. By looking at attainment into different segments of the middle class and elite, we also clearly see the increasing role played by formal education and meritocracy for the opportunities of people from low class origin to advance socially. However, this development was more connected with the maturing of industrial society than with industrialization as such. Introduction The long-term development of social mobility has been a major research issue for a long time within both sociology and economics. A key interest has revolved around the extent to which social mobility regimes differ between countries at different levels of development or with a different institutional structure, and whether these patterns changed during and after industrialization (see, e.g., Bourdieu, Ferrie and Kesztenbaum 2009; Breen 2008; Breen and Jonsson 2007; Erikson 1983; Erikson and Goldthorpe 1985, 1992; Ferrie 2005; Ganzeboom, Luijkx and Treiman 1989; Ganzeboom, Treiman and Ultee 1991; Grusky and Hauser 1984; Hout and DiPrete 2006; Lipset and Bendix 1959; Long and Ferrie 2007; Treiman 1970; Van Leeuwen and Maas 2010). In turn, these questions are also related to issues of social stratification more generally, and the extent to which these patterns are dependent on economic development (see, e.g., Treiman 1976). It is crucial to distinguish between absolute mobility and relative mobility. Whereas absolute mobility does not seem to have changed to any considerable extent during industrialization, there appear to be considerable differences in mobility rates across industrial societies (Van Leeuwen and Maas 2010). At the same time, Erikson and Goldthorpe (1992) did not find big differences in rates of relative mobility between countries at different levels of development, and their conclusion of the “constant flux” has also been supported by a number of studies, but refuted by others (see, e.g., Breen 2008; Hout and DiPrete 2006). While most empirical studies have relied on aggregated mobility tables from contexts at different levels of development (e.g., Erikson and Goldthorpe 1992; Featherman, Jones and Hauser 1975; Ganzeboom, Luijkx and Treiman 1989) or historical data from marriage certificates or population registers covering only the onset of industrialization (e.g., Dribe and Lundh 2009, 2010; Dribe and Svensson 2008; Maas and Van Leeuwen 2002, 2004; Maas and Zijdeman 2010; Van Bavel, Peeters and Matthijs 1998; Zijdeman 2009), few studies have examined this issue from a longitudinal perspective, covering the entire period from a preindustrial to a post-industrial society, thereby enabling a more careful control of the setting and of confounding factors (see, however, Van Leeuwen and Maas 1996). The aim of this article is to study socioeconomic attainment and mobility in a confined geographic area over a period of more than 150 years. More specifically, using longitudinal individual-level data from two parishes in southern Sweden, we study how patterns of intergenerational social mobility and class attainment changed from the early 1800s until about 1970. This enables an examination of an uninterrupted time period in which Sweden transformed from a preindustrial to a mature industrial society. We thereby contribute to what is arguably one of the most central topics in social stratification research, namely how structural changes in the labor market, brought about by industrialization, affected mechanisms of social mobility and attainment. In addition to more traditional analyses of mobility and attainment, we also look at middle class/elite attainment by sector, to find indications of a change from ascription to own achievement as the dominant determinant of socioeconomic status. Theoretical background and previous research Industrialization brought about overwhelming changes in the structure of the labor market, with a massive growth in occupations within both the manufacturing and service sectors (Erikson 1983, Schön 2000). Across the Western world, the growing importance of the industrial sector occurred simultaneously as the share employed in agriculture declined. Hence, the process of industrialization, almost by definition, implied a considerable degree of occupational mobility, as new positions were generated alongside the disappearance of those previously occupied by individuals belonging to older generations (c.f. Lipset and Bendix 1959). However, while changing employment from the agricultural to the industrial sector implied occupational mobility, the transformation of an unskilled farm worker into an unskilled industrial worker cannot immediately be interpreted as class mobility. In the analysis of class mobility, a distinction has usually been made between absolute mobility and relative mobility (e.g., Featherman, Jones and Hauser 1975). While absolute mobility may increase simply because the social structure changes, relative mobility is measured net of such structural changes. Whereas an abundance of empirical studies, on several contexts, have shown increasing rates of absolute mobility during industrialization (Erikson 1983, Grusky and Hauser 1984), its influence on relative mobility remains widely debated. Erikson and Goldthorpe (1992) did not find big differences in rates of relative mobility between countries at different levels of development, and similar findings have been made by others (see Hout and DiPrete 2006; Van Leeuwen and Maas 2010; Xie and Killewald 2010). The differences in levels of relative mobility between countries have been argued to mainly be a result of unique characteristics of each country, and not systematically related to the level of economic development, industrialization, etc. Several studies, however, have observed a slow increase of social mobility in industrialized nations, and also identified various economic and political determinants of relative mobility (e.g., Breen 2008; Breen and Jonsson 2007; Featherman and Hauser 1978; Ganzeboom, Luijkx and Treiman 1989; Grusky 1986). Despite this, the overall conclusion remains that while the degree of openness varies across developed countries, the basic patterns of relative mobility over time are basically the same (Hout and DiPrete 2006). It should also be noted than most of the studies finding clear trends in relative mobility over time, look at the development of the past 50 years or so, and not since the beginning of industrialization. In preindustrial societies, the importance of land for individual socioeconomic status made inheritance and thus parental landholding of prime importance for status attainment (see, e.g., Dribe and Svensson 2008). Similarly, in artisan occupations, sons often followed in their fathers’ footsteps. Despite the strong intergenerational transmission of status, this does not mean that mobility was absent. Instead, studies of preindustrial societies have typically found considerable social mobility, but mainly downwards (e.g., Dribe and Svensson 2008; Lundh 1999). This is believed to be linked primarily to the difficulty of reproducing high social status in rural contexts because of the connection to a rather fixed supply of land (cf. Clark 2007; Mendels 2000). Overwhelming structural change, such as the industrialization process, typically implies an increase in the rates of intergenerational absolute mobility. As contexts stabilize, intergenerational mobility is, however, expected to slow down. A crucial question for this article is whether the contextual changes during industrialization led to increased upward absolute mobility, at least in the short term? One of the mechanisms underlying such a claim is the emergence of a “new” middle class. A new managerial and administrative class, and qualified technical and professional staff, typically emerged with the rise of big companies and government institutions, implying increased opportunities outside the traditional sectors. Artisans emphasized the commercial dimension of their activities, and the whole trade sector, from the most modest shops to the new big department stores, grew impressively in size and diversity (Van de Putte, Oris, and Matthijs, 2009). In this way, industrialization may have evoked the rise of a new middle class already at an early stage. This evolution, however, is often counteracted by other developments, particularly in the early-industrial period (Kaeble 1981, 1985). Firstly, the old middle class – the petty bourgeoisie of small industrialists and artisans – experienced unstable conditions (Ericsson, 1993). As a result, the absolute number of available middle class positions may have decreased. Secondly, particularly the early stages of industrialization produced an increasing share of lower class positions within, for example, the iron, textile and mining industries. In this case, the relative number of persons reaching middle class positions decreased. Finally, the agricultural decline, typically occurring in the late nineteenth century in many European countries, may have had an impact on social mobility. Unable to remain within agriculture, sons and daughters of unskilled farm workers or farmers turned to the newly available industrial positions for employment. While white-collar occupations may have been on the rise even in industrializing provincial towns, previous research suggests that the strength of the process should not be overestimated during early industrialization (see, e.g., Maas and Van Leeuwen, 2002). The changing mobility patterns during i