activities of the beneficiaries in rural areas, through the coordination with the supply of other federal programs on the subject. Notwithstanding, the effects of this line of work have been limited, among other factors, because of difficulties in the interinstitutional coordination, as well as because of the reduced coverage of and budget for labor and productivity programs (Yaschine, 2018).

More recent studies that analyzed a longer period of exposure to the program (Kugler and Rojas, 2018; Parker and Vogl, 2018) documented impacts of greater magnitude on the indicators of labor insertion of rural youths (labor participation, hours worked, labor income and transmission from informal to formal employment), although these studies did not estimate the impact on intergenerational occupational mobility.<sup>12</sup> Based on this research background, it has become relevant to analyze intergenerational occupational mobility 20 years after the introduction of PROSPERA and to include a cohort of youths that have reached a more advanced age and whom may experience more definitive results in labor outcomes. It is reasonable to suggest that it is possible to obtain more favorable results in this long-term study, compared to those performed a decade ago, although, as is detailed in section IV, the characteristics of the sample limit the scope of the analysis.

# **III. Conceptual framework of the studies on intergenerational social mobility**

The technical approach we used is based on other intergenerational social mobility studies, which focus primarily on analyzing the degree and characteristics of the association between the social origins of individuals and their destinations.<sup>13</sup> Its emphasis lies in investigating the existing level of equality of opportunities, as well as the different factors and mechanisms explaining the intergenerational transmission of socioeconomic advantages and disadvantages in societies (Ganzeboom, Treiman and Ultee, 1991). In research, this translates into the analysis of the association between the ascribed characteristics and the attainments in different dimensions of welfare (Ganzeboom, Treiman and Ultee, 1991).

In sociology, studies on intergenerational mobility have focused their analysis primarily on the occupational area, in accordance with the argument that the division of labor is one of the central axes of social stratification and social inequality (Ganzeboom and Treiman, 1996) and that labor compensation largely determines the economic opportunities of individuals and, therefore, their access to well-being (Hauser and Warren, 2001). Thus, the occupational structure is seen as a summary of the structure of distribution of resources and opportunities in a society (Solís, 2005). The research on intergenerational occupational mobility enables, through its emphasis on labor, an approach to analyze the transmission of socioeconomic status between generations.

> 12 Acevedo, Ortega and Székely (2018) found a positive correlation between exposure to the program and the probability of being employed, being formally employed and having a higher salary, although they make no estimations on the impact.

> 13 The social origins refer to a person’s conditions and circumstances of their early life and the closest point in time is envisaged as his or her social destination (Hout, 2015).

9