Social mobility. Social mobility: essence, types, factors
PLAN
Introduction
1. The essence of social mobility
2. Forms of social mobility and its consequences
3. Problems of social mobility in Russia in the 20-21st centuries.
Conclusion
Literature
Introduction
An important place in the study of social structure is occupied by questions social mobility population, that is, the transition of a person from one class to another, from one intraclass group to another, social movements between generations. Social movements are massive and become more intense as society develops. Sociologists study the nature of social movements, their direction, intensity; movement between classes, generations, cities and regions. They can be positive and negative character, be encouraged or, conversely, restrained.
In the sociology of social movements, the main stages of a professional career are studied and the social status of parents and children is compared. In our country, for decades, social origin has been placed at the forefront of characterization and biography, and people with worker-peasant roots have been given preference. For example, young people from intelligent families, in order to enter a university, initially went to work for a year or two, get seniority, change social position. Thus, having received a new social status as a worker, they seemed to be cleared of their “defective” social origin. In addition, applicants with work experience received benefits upon admission and were enrolled in the most prestigious specialties with virtually no competition.
The problem of social mobility is also widely studied in Western sociology. Strictly speaking, social mobility is change social status. There is a status - real and imaginary, ascribed. Any person receives a certain status already at birth, depending on his belonging to a certain race, gender, place of birth, and the status of his parents.
In all social systems there are principles of both imaginary and real merit. The more imaginary merits predominate in determining social status, the more rigid the society, the less social mobility (medieval Europe, castes in India). This situation can only be maintained in an extremely simple society, and then only to a certain level. Then it just slows down social development. The fact is that, according to all the laws of genetics, talented and gifted young people are found equally evenly in all social groups of the population.
The more developed a society is, the more dynamic it is, the more the principles of real status and real merit work in its system. Society is interested in this.
1. The essence of social mobility
Talented individuals are undoubtedly born in everyone social layers and social classes. If there are no barriers to social achievement, one can expect greater social mobility, with some individuals quickly rising to higher statuses and others falling into lower statuses. But between layers and classes there are barriers that prevent the free transition of individuals from one status group to another. One of the most important barriers arises from the fact that social classes have subcultures that prepare the children of each class to participate in the class subculture in which they are socialized. An ordinary child from a family of representatives of the creative intelligentsia is less likely to acquire habits and norms that will help him later work as a peasant or worker. The same can be said about the norms that help him in his work as a major leader. Nevertheless, ultimately he can become not only a writer, like his parents, but also a worker or a major leader. It’s just that for advancement from one layer to another or from one social class to another, “the difference in starting opportunities” matters. For example, the sons of a minister and a peasant have different opportunities for obtaining high official status. Therefore, the generally accepted official point of view, which is that to achieve any heights in society you only need to work and have the ability, turns out to be untenable.
The above examples indicate that any social movement does not occur unimpeded, but by overcoming more or less significant barriers. Even moving a person from one place of residence to another presupposes a certain period of adaptation to new conditions.
All social movements of an individual or social group are included in the process of mobility. According to P. Sorokin’s definition, “social mobility is understood as any transition of an individual, or a social object, or a value created or modified through activity, from one social position to another.”
2. Forms of social mobility and its consequences
There are two main types of social mobility: horizontal and vertical. Horizontal social mobility, or movement, means the transition of an individual or social object from a single social group to another located at the same level. The movement of an individual from a Baptist to a Methodist religious group, from one citizenship to another, from one family (both husband and wife) to another during divorce or remarriage, from one factory to another, while maintaining his professional status, - all these are examples of horizontal social mobility. They are also the movements of social objects (radio, car, fashion, the idea of communism, Darwin's theory) within one social layer, like moving from Iowa to California or from a certain place to any other. In all these cases, "movement" can occur without any noticeable changes social status individual or social object in the vertical direction. Vertical social mobility refers to those relationships that arise when an individual or social object moves from one social layer to another. Depending on the direction of movement, there are two types of vertical mobility: ascending and descending, that is, social ascent and social descent. According to the nature of stratification, there are downward and upward currents of economic, political and professional mobility, not to mention other less important types. Updrafts exist in two main forms: penetration an individual from a lower layer to an existing higher layer; or the creation by such individuals of a new group and the penetration of the entire group into a higher layer to a level from already existing groups this layer. Accordingly, downward currents also have two forms: the first consists in the fall of an individual from a higher social position to a lower one, without destroying the original group to which he previously belonged; another form manifests itself in the degradation of the social group as a whole, in the lowering of its rank against the background of other groups or in the destruction of its social unity. In the first case, the fall reminds us of a person falling from a ship, in the second - the immersion of the ship itself with all the passengers on board or the wreck of a ship when it breaks into pieces.
Cases of individual penetration into higher strata or falling from a high social level to a low one are familiar and understandable. They don't need explanation. The second form of social ascension, descent, rise and fall of groups should be considered in more detail.
Next historical examples can serve as illustrations. Historians of the caste society of India tell us that the Brahmin caste has always been in the position of undisputed superiority, which it has occupied for the last two thousand years. In the distant past, the castes of warriors, rulers and kshatriyas were not ranked below the brahmanas, but, as it turns out, they became the highest caste only after a long struggle. If this hypothesis is correct, then the advancement of the rank of the Brahmin caste through all other levels is an example of the second type of social ascent. Before the adoption of Christianity by Constantine the Great, the status of a Christian bishop or Christian minister of worship was low among other social ranks of the Roman Empire. Over the next few centuries, the social position and rank of the Christian church as a whole rose. As a consequence of this rise, members of the clergy and, especially, the highest church dignitaries also rose to the highest strata of medieval society. Conversely, the decline in the authority of the Christian Church in the last two centuries has led to a relative decline in the social ranks of the higher clergy among other ranks modern society. The prestige of the pope or cardinal is still high, but it is undoubtedly lower than it was in the Middle Ages 3 . Another example is a group of legalists in France. Appearing in the 12th century, this group quickly grew in social importance and position. Very soon, in the form of the judicial aristocracy, they reached the position of the nobility. In the 17th and especially in the 18th centuries, the group as a whole began to “descend” and finally disappeared completely in the conflagration of the Great French Revolution. The same thing happened during the rise of the agrarian bourgeoisie in the Middle Ages, the privileged Sixth Corps, merchant guilds, and the aristocracy of many royal courts. To occupy a high position in the court of the Romanovs, Habsburgs or Hohenzollerns before the revolution meant having the highest social rank. The "fall" of dynasties led to the "social decline" of the ranks associated with them. The Bolsheviks in Russia before the revolution did not have any particularly recognized high position. During the revolution, this group overcame a huge social distance and took the highest position in Russian society. As a result, all its members as a whole were raised to the status previously occupied by the royal aristocracy. Similar phenomena are observed from the perspective of pure economic stratification. Thus, before the advent of the era of “oil” or “automobile”, being a famous industrialist in these areas did not mean being an industrial and financial tycoon. The wide distribution of industries made them the most important industrial areas. Accordingly, to be a leading industrialist - an oilman or a motorist - means to be one of the most influential leaders in industry and finance. All of these examples illustrate a second collective form of upward and downward currents in social mobility.
From a quantitative point of view, it is necessary to distinguish between the intensity and universality of vertical mobility. Under intensity refers to the vertical social distance or the number of layers - economic, professional or political - traversed by an individual in his upward or downward movement over a certain period of time. If, for example, a certain individual rises in a year from the position of a person with an annual income of $500 to a position with an income of $50,000, and another during the same period rises from the same starting position to a level of $1,000, then in the first case the intensity of economic recovery will be 50 times greater than in the second. For a corresponding change, the intensity of vertical mobility can be measured in the field of political and professional stratification.
Under universality vertical mobility refers to the number of individuals who have changed their social position in a vertical direction over a certain period of time. The absolute number of such individuals gives absolute universality vertical mobility in the structure of a given population of the country; the proportion of such individuals to the entire population gives relative universality vertical mobility.
Finally, combining the intensity and relative universality of vertical mobility in a certain social sphere(say, in economics), you can get the aggregate indicator of vertical economic mobility of a given society. Comparing, therefore, one society with another or the same society in different periods of its development, it is possible to discover in which of them or in which period the aggregate mobility is higher. The same can be said about the aggregate indicator of political and professional vertical mobility.
3. Problems of social mobility in Russia in the 20-21st centuries.
The process of transition from an economy based on an administrative-bureaucratic way of managing social production and distribution to an economy based on market relations, and from the monopoly power of the party nomenklatura to representative democracy is extremely painful and slow. Strategic and tactical miscalculations in the radical transformation of social relations are aggravated by the peculiarities of the economic potential created in the USSR with its structural asymmetry, monopolism, technological backwardness, etc.
All this was reflected in the social stratification of Russian society in the transition period. To analyze it and understand its features, it is necessary to consider the social structure of the Soviet period. In Soviet scientific literature, in accordance with the requirements of official ideology, a view was affirmed from the position of a three-member structure: two friendly classes (the worker and the collective farm peasantry), as well as a social stratum - the people's intelligentsia. Moreover, in this layer, representatives of the party and state elite, a rural teacher, and a library worker seemed to be on equal terms.
This approach veiled the existing differentiation of society and created the illusion of society moving towards social equality.
Of course, in real life this was far from the case; Soviet society was hierarchized, and in a very specific way. According to Western and many Russian sociologists, it was not so much a social-class society as an estate-caste society. The dominance of state property has turned the overwhelming mass of the population into hired workers of the state, alienated from this property.
The decisive role in the location of groups on the social ladder was played by their political potential, determined by their place in the party-state hierarchy.
The highest level in Soviet society was occupied by the party-state nomenklatura, which united the highest layers of the party, state, economic and military bureaucracy. Not being formally the owner of national wealth, it had a monopoly and uncontrolled right to its use and distribution. The nomenklatura has endowed itself with a wide range of benefits and benefits. It was essentially a closed class-type layer, not interested in growing numbers; its share was small - 1.5 - 2% of the country's population.
A step lower was the layer that served the nomenklatura, workers engaged in the field of ideology, the party press, as well as the scientific elite, prominent artists.
The next step was occupied by a layer that was, to one degree or another, involved in the function of distribution and use of national wealth. These included government officials who distributed scarce social benefits, heads of enterprises, collective farms, state farms, workers in logistics, trade, the service sector, etc.
It is hardly legitimate to classify these layers as the middle class, since they did not have the economic and political independence characteristic of this class.
Of interest is the analysis of the multidimensional social structure of Soviet society in the 40s and 50s, given by the American sociologist A. Inkels (1974). He views it as a pyramid, including 9 strata.
At the top is the ruling elite (party-state nomenklatura, senior military officials).
In second place is the highest layer of the intelligentsia (prominent figures of literature and art, scientists). Possessing significant privileges, they did not have the power that the upper stratum had.
Quite high - third place was given to the “aristocracy of the working class”. These are Stakhanovites, “lighthouses”, shock workers of the five-year plans. This layer also had great privileges and high prestige in society. It was he who personified “decorative” democracy: his representatives were deputies of the Supreme Soviets of the country and republics, members of the CPSU Central Committee (but were not part of the party nomenklatura).
Fifth place was occupied by “white collar workers” (small managers and office workers who, as a rule, did not have a higher education).
The sixth layer is “prosperous peasants” who worked on advanced collective farms, where special working conditions were created. In order to form “exemplary” farms, they were allocated additional state financial, material and technical resources, which made it possible to ensure higher labor productivity and living standards.
In seventh place were workers of medium and low qualifications. The size of this group was quite large.
Eighth place was occupied by the “poorest strata of the peasantry” (and these constituted the majority). And finally, at the bottom of the social ladder there were prisoners who were deprived of almost all rights. This layer was very significant and consisted of several million people.
It must be admitted that the presented hierarchical structure of Soviet society is very close to the reality that existed.
Studying the social structure of Soviet society in the second half of the 80s, domestic sociologists T. I. Zaslavskaya and R. V. Ryvkina identified 12 groups. Along with the workers (this layer is represented by three differentiated groups), the collective farm peasantry, the scientific, technical and humanitarian intelligentsia, they distinguish the following groups: political leaders of society, senior officials of the apparatus political management, responsible workers in trade and consumer services, a group of organized crime, etc. As we can see, this is far from the classic “three-member” structure; a multidimensional model is used here. Of course, this division is very arbitrary; the real social structure “goes into the shadows”, since, for example, a huge layer of real production relations turns out to be illegal, hidden in informal connections and decisions.
In the context of a radical transformation of Russian society, profound changes are taking place in its social stratification, which have a number of characteristic features.
Firstly, there is a total marginalization of Russian society. Give it an assessment and also predict it social consequences is possible only based on the totality of specific processes and conditions in which this phenomenon operates.
For example, marginalization caused by the mass transition from lower to higher strata of society, i.e., upward mobility (although it has certain costs), can generally be assessed positively.
Marginalization, which is characterized by a transition to the lower strata (with downward mobility), if it is also long-term and widespread, leads to severe social consequences.
In our society we see both upward and downward mobility. But what is alarming is that the latter has acquired a “landslide” character. Particular attention should be paid to the growing layer of marginalized people, knocked out of their socio-cultural environment and turned into a lumpen layer (beggars, homeless people, tramps, etc.).
The next feature is the blocking of the process of formation of the middle class. During the Soviet period in Russia there was a significant segment of the population that represented a potential middle class (intelligentsia, office workers, highly skilled workers). However, the transformation of these layers into the middle class does not occur; there is no process of “class crystallization.”
The fact is that it is these layers that have descended (and this process continues) into the lower class, being on the verge of poverty or below it. First of all, this applies to the intelligentsia. Here we are faced with a phenomenon that can be called the phenomenon of the “new poor”, an exceptional phenomenon that has probably not been encountered in any society in the history of civilization. Both in pre-revolutionary Russia and in developing countries of any region of the modern world, not to mention, of course, about developed countries, it had and still has a fairly high prestige in society, its financial situation (even in poor countries) is at the proper level, allowing lead a decent lifestyle.
Today in Russia the share of contributions to science, education, healthcare, and culture in the budget is catastrophically decreasing. Salaries of scientific, scientific and pedagogical personnel, medical workers, cultural workers are increasingly lagging behind the national average, not providing a subsistence level, but for certain categories a physiological minimum. And since almost all of our intelligentsia are “budgetary,” impoverishment is inevitably approaching them.
There is a reduction in scientific workers, many specialists move to commercial structures (a huge share of which are trade intermediaries) and are disqualified. The prestige of education in society is falling. The consequence may be a violation of the necessary reproduction of the social structure of society.
A similar situation found itself in the layer of highly skilled workers associated with advanced technologies and employed primarily in the military-industrial complex.
As a result, the lower class in Russian society currently constitutes approximately 70% of the population.
There is a growth of the upper class (compared to the upper class of Soviet society). It consists of several groups. Firstly, these are large entrepreneurs, owners of capital different types(financial, commercial, industrial). Secondly, these are government officials related to state material and financial resources, their distribution and transfer to private hands, as well as overseeing the activities of parastatal and private enterprises and institutions.
It should be emphasized that a significant part of this layer in Russia consists of representatives of the former nomenklatura, who have retained their places in government government structures.
The majority of apparatchiks today realize that the market is economically inevitable; moreover, they are interested in the emergence of a market. But we're talking about not about the “European” market with unconditional private property, but about the “Asian” market - with truncated reformed private property, where the main right (the right of disposal) would remain in the hands of the bureaucracy.
Thirdly, these are the heads of state and semi-state (JSC) enterprises (“director corps”), in conditions of lack of control both from below and from above, assign themselves extremely high salaries, bonuses and take advantage of the privatization and corporatization of enterprises.
Finally, these are representatives of criminal structures that are closely intertwined with business ones (or collect “tribute” from them), and are also increasingly intertwined with government structures.
We can highlight another feature of the stratification of Russian society - social polarization, which is based on property stratification, which continues to deepen.
Ratio wages The 10% of the highest paid and 10% of the lowest paid Russians was 16:1 in 1992, and in 1993 it was already 26:1. For comparison: in 1989 this ratio in the USSR was 4:1, in the USA - 6:1, in Latin American countries - 12:1. According to official data, the richest 20% of Russians appropriate 43% of total cash income, the poorest 20% - 7%.
There are several options for dividing Russians by level of material security.
According to them, at the top there is a narrow layer of the super-rich (3-5%), then a layer of the averagely wealthy (7% according to these calculations and 12-15% according to others), finally, the poor (25% and 40%, respectively) and the poor ( 65% and 40% respectively).
The consequence of property polarization is inevitably social and political confrontation in the country, increasing social tension. If this trend continues, it could lead to deep social upheaval.
Particular attention should be paid to the characteristics of the working class and peasantry. They now represent an extremely heterogeneous mass, not only according to traditional criteria (qualifications, education, industry, etc.), but also according to their form of ownership and income.
In the working class there is a deep differentiation associated with the attitude towards one or another form of ownership - state, joint, cooperative, joint-stock, individual, etc. Between the corresponding layers of the working class, differences in income, labor productivity, economic and political interests etc. If the interests of workers employed in state enterprises, consist primarily of increasing tariffs, providing financial support from the state, then the interests of workers of non-state enterprises are in reducing taxes, expanding freedom of economic activity, legal support for it, etc.
The position of the peasantry also changed. Along with collective farm property, joint-stock, individual and other forms of ownership arose. Transformation processes in agriculture have proven to be extremely complex. An attempt to blindly copy Western experience in terms of massive replacement of collective farms with private farms failed because it was initially voluntaristic and did not take into account the deep specifics Russian conditions. Material and technical equipment Agriculture, infrastructure development, opportunity state support farms, legal insecurity, and finally, the mentality of the people - taking into account all these components is a necessary condition effective reforms and neglecting them cannot but give a negative result.
At the same time, for example, the level of government support for agriculture is constantly falling. If before 1985 it was 12-15%, then in 1991 - 1993. - 7-10%. For comparison: government subsidies in farmers' income during this period in the EU countries amounted to 49%, the USA - 30%, Japan - 66%, Finland - 71%.
The peasantry as a whole is now considered to be the conservative part of society (which is confirmed by the voting results). But if we are faced with resistance from “social material,” the reasonable solution is not to blame the people, not to use forceful methods, but to look for errors in the strategy and tactics of transformation.
Thus, if we depict the stratification of modern Russian society graphically, it will represent a pyramid with a powerful base represented by the lower class.
Such a profile cannot but cause concern. If the bulk of the population is the lower class, if the middle class stabilizing society is thinned, the consequence will be an increase in social tension with the forecast of resulting in an open struggle for the redistribution of wealth and power. The pyramid may topple over.
Russia is now in a transitional state, at a sharp turning point. Spontaneously evolving process stratification poses a threat to the stability of society. It is necessary, using the expression of T. Parsons, for an “external invasion” of power into the emerging system of rational placement of social positions with all the ensuing consequences, when the natural profile of stratification becomes the key to both the stability and progressive development of society.
Conclusion
Analysis hierarchical structure society shows that it is not frozen, it constantly fluctuates and moves both horizontally and vertically. When we talk about a social group or individual changing their social position, we are dealing with social mobility. It can be horizontal (the concept of social movement is used) if there is a transition to other professional or other groups of equal status. Vertical (upward) mobility means the transition of an individual or group to a higher social position with greater prestige, income, and power.
Downward mobility is also possible, involving movement to lower hierarchical positions.
During periods of revolutions and social cataclysms, a radical change in the social structure occurs, a radical replacement of the upper layer with the overthrow of the former elite, the emergence of new classes and social groups, and mass group mobility.
During stable periods, social mobility increases during periods of economic restructuring. At the same time, an important “social elevator” that ensures vertical mobility is education, the role of which increases in the conditions of transition from industrial society to informational.
Social mobility is a fairly reliable indicator of the level of “openness” or “closedness” of a society. A striking example of a “closed” society is the caste system in India. A high degree of closedness is characteristic of feudal society. On the contrary, bourgeois-democratic societies, being open, are characterized by a high level of social mobility. However, it should be noted that here, too, vertical social mobility is not absolutely free and the transition from one social layer to another, higher one, is not carried out without resistance.
Social mobility places an individual in the need to adapt to a new sociocultural environment. This process can be quite difficult. A person who has lost the sociocultural world familiar to him, but has failed to perceive the norms and values of the new group, finds himself, as it were, on the verge of two cultures, becoming a marginalized person. This is also typical for migrants, both ethnic and territorial. In such conditions, a person experiences discomfort and stress. Mass marginality gives rise to serious social problems. As a rule, it distinguishes societies at sharp turning points in history. This is precisely the period Russia is currently experiencing.
Literature
1. Romanenko L.M. Civil society (sociological dictionary-reference book). M., 1995.
2. Osipov G.V. and others. Sociology. M., 1995.
3. Smelser N.J. Sociology. M., 1994.
4. Golenkova Z.T., Viktyuk V.V., Gridchin Yu.V., Chernykh A.I., Romanenko L.M. Becoming civil society and social stratification // Socis. 1996. No. 6.
5. Komarov M.S. Introduction to sociology: Textbook for higher institutions. – M.: Nauka, 1994.
6. Prigozhin A.I. Modern sociology of organizations. – M.: Interpraks, 1995.
7. Frolov S.S. Sociology. Textbook for higher educational institutions. – M.: Nauka, 1994.
8. Zborovsky G.E., Orlov G.P. Sociology. Textbook for humanitarian universities. – M.: Interprax, 1995. – 344s.
9.Fundamentals of sociology. Lecture course. Responsible editor Dr. Phil. Sciences A.G. Efendiev. – M.: Society “Knowledge” of Russia, 1993. – 384 p.
Social mobility- any transition of an individual or social object from one social position to another. Social objects - fashion, television, etc.
There are two types of social mobility: horizontal and vertical. Horizontal social mobility is the transition of an individual from one social group to another located at the same level. Vertical is the movement of an individual or social object from one layer to another.
Mobility happens ascending(social uplift), or descending ↓
It happens the same way voluntary(voluntary movement of individuals within the social hierarchy), or structural social mobility, which is dictated by certain changes in the economy or structural social changes.
The systematic study of social mobility, primarily vertical, began in America in the 50s of the last century.
Factors of social mobility:
2) Social system
3) Advanced technology
4) Wars and revolutions
5) Different birth rates in different countries
6) Education system
7) Conscious effort of the individual
Social mobility can lead to alienation and social instability in society.
/////////The term social mobility was introduced by P.A. Sorokin in 1927
Social m-t - a change by an individual or a group of persons of the place occupied in the social structure, or a movement from one social stratum to another.
Vertical. m-th - movement from one stratum (estate, class) to another.
Rising - social rise, upward movement (promotion in position).
Descending - social descent, downward movement (demotion).
Horizon m-t - the transition of an individual from one social network. group to another, located at the same level (moving from Orthodox to Catholic religious group, from one citizenship to another). Such movements occur without noticeable changes in social life. position in the vertical direction. Geographical - moving from one place to another while maintaining the same status (international and interregional tourism, moving from city to village and back). Migration is movement from one place to another with a change in status (a person moved to a city for permanent place residence and changed profession).
Intergenerational motherhood - a comparative change in social status among different generations (the son of a worker becomes president). Intragenerational m-th (social career) - a change in status within one generation (a turner becomes an engineer, then a workshop manager, then a plant director). On the vertical. and horizon factors are influenced by gender, age, birth rate, death rate, and population density.
In general, factors of social mobility can be divided into: 1) micro-level - directly social. the individual’s environment, as well as his total life resource. 2) macro level - the state of the economy, the level of scientific and technological development, the nature of politics. regime, prevailing stratification system, character natural conditions etc.
Sometimes organized and structural structures are distinguished. Organiz. m-t - the movement of people or entire groups up, down or horizontally is controlled by the state with the consent of the people themselves or without their consent. Struct. m-th - change in page National economy. It occurs beyond the will and consciousness of individual individuals. Social channels M-ti: army, church, education, marriage, politics. and prof. organizations.
The concept of social mobility: essence, types, parameters and channels of social circulation?
Social mobility is a change by individuals or groups in their position, place, social status in the structure of society.
The theory of social mobility, developed by P. Sorokin, is based on the idea of society as a social space, the elementary particle of which is the individual. The position of a person in social space defined:
1) his attitude towards the social groups with which he interacts;
2) the relationship of groups to each other within the population;
3) the relationship of this population to other populations included in humanity. Individuals have the ability to move within social space.
Depending on the possibility (impossibility or difficulty) of social movements, P. Sorokin identifies two types of social structures :
1) closed, in which social movements are impossible or difficult (the class or caste nature of the social structure of society prevents movements);
2) open, characteristic of modern class society. In open social structures, social mobility takes place - a set of social movements of people in society associated with changes in their status.
Types (types) of mobility :
1) vertical – movement of an individual or group along the “social ladder” up (upward mobility) or down (downward mobility) (the first may be associated with advanced training, appointment to a higher position, receiving a higher income, the second with dismissal, bankruptcy, etc.) d.);
2) horizontal – change in social status to an equivalent one (moving from one city to another, moving from one enterprise to another without changing position and salary level, etc.);
3) intergenerational, when children achieve a different status than their parents, for example, the parents have the status of workers, and their son, having received higher education, became an engineer;
4) intragenerational, when a person (or age group) changes his social status one or more times throughout his life (a poor person became rich - his status increased, then went bankrupt - his status decreased);
5) interclass, when an individual or group makes inter-class movements (there was a peasant - he became a worker, there was a worker - he became an entrepreneur);
6) intraclass – increase or decrease in social status within the same class (was a small entrepreneur - became a banker);
7) individual;
8) group, etc.
According to P.A. Sorokin, there are no impassable boundaries between strata, but there is a certain asymmetry between ascent and descent. Climbing the social ladder is voluntary, as a rule, and is often carried out not freely, but with the overcoming of certain barriers or the fulfillment of certain conditions that the upper stratum imposes on the social objects making this transition. The descent is usually forced.
Social mobility is measured by indicators:
· mobility distance (the number of steps or levels to which social objects managed to rise or fall);
·volume of mobility (the number of objects that moved vertically along the social ladder over a certain period of time).
The degree of social mobility is an indicator of the level of development of society; the higher this level, the more social levels and positions society presents to social objects for their movements.
For Russia and modern industrial countries it is typical high level social mobility and the construction of new stratification concepts.
The study of social mobility is carried out using two systems of indicators. In the first, the individual is the unit of account. The main indicators are the volume of mobility (absolute and relative, aggregate and differentiated) and the degree of mobility. The volume of mobility shows the number of individuals who have moved vertically up the social ladder over a certain period of time. The degree of mobility is determined by two factors: the range of mobility (the number of statuses in a given society) and the conditions that allow people to move. Thus, maximum mobility is always observed in society during the period of any social and economic transformations (the era of Peter the Great, Soviet society in the 30s, Russian society in the 90s). The degree of mobility also depends on the historical type of stratification (caste, estate, class).
In the second, the unit of reference is status. In this case, the volume of mobility (the number of people who changed their status) describes its direction. The measure of mobility is the mobility step (distance), which shows the number of steps an individual has moved in the vertical direction. It can be intergenerational and intragenerational (“social career”), interclass and intraclass.
Let us highlight the factors that determine social mobility in society: historical type stratification, the state of the economy, the degree of its development, the social situation in the country, ideology, traditions, religion, education, upbringing, family, place of residence, individual characteristics person (talent, abilities).
The following can be distinguished general patterns social mobility:
1. during periods of serious changes in society, groups with an accelerated model of mobility appear (“red directors” in the 30s). The factor of origin (place of birth, social status of the family) plays a lesser role;
2. general direction intergenerational mobility of youth - from the group of manual workers to the group of workers mental work;
3. the higher the social status of the parents, the more often the profession is inherited, and vice versa.
The concept of marginality serves to designate borderliness, intermediateness in relation to any social community: class, national or cultural.
This phenomenon became the subject of analysis in the West. Marginality has come to mean the socio-psychological consequences that arise when it is impossible for migrants or immigrants: national minorities, the unemployed to adapt (adapt to new living conditions, primarily the conditions and demands of the urban lifestyle - urbanization).
A person can no longer live in accordance with the rural norms of behavior learned during the first socialization. But he is not ready to live and, fully and according to the rules of urban culture, sees only the heights of urban culture, or its negative sides. This is how a marginal situation arises. Old values and norms seem to be rejected, but there is no corresponding introduction to new conditions, to a new subculture.
Thus, the loss of subjective belonging to a group, a social community without subsequent entry into another group leads to the loss of subjective self-identification - self-identification, the emergence special type personality - marginal.
Marginal, marginal personality is an individual:
A) who has lost his former social status;
B) deprived of the opportunity to engage in usual activities;
C) and, in addition, who turned out to be unable to adapt to the new socio-cultural environment of the country within which he formally exists;
D) his behavior is extreme
he is either very passive,
·or very aggressive, capable of unpredictable actions.
The term social mobility was introduced by P.A. Sorokin in his work in 1927. Social mobility implies any transition of an individual or group from one social position to another. The main characteristics of social mobility are: direction, variety and focus. Depending on the different combination of these characteristics, there are the following types and types of mobility. The main types of social mobility are: 1) intergenerational(intergenerational, intergenerational) is a change in the position in the social space of an individual compared to the status of the parents; 2) intragenerational(intragenerational) is a comparison of positions occupied by the same individual at different moments working life. The main types of mobility are:- vertical(in the 70s, “interclass transitions”) - movement from one stratum to another. Can be ascending or descending. As a rule, upward mobility associated with an increase in social status and income is voluntary, and downward mobility is forced; ascension - individual movement to positions of higher prestige, income and power, or the ascension of an entire group. descent is the opposite. - horizontal– the transition of an individual from one social group to another, located at the same level of social space. As a type, geographic mobility is distinguished - moving from one place to another while maintaining the same status. If such a movement is accompanied by a change in status, then we speak of migration. Types of social mobility can be distinguished according to other criteria: 1) by range: short-range mobility (between adjacent hierarchical levels) and long-range (between distant levels); 2) by quantitative indicator: individual and group; 3) according to the degree of organization: a). spontaneous(for example, moving residents of neighboring countries to large Russian cities for the purpose of earning money); b). organized, which is controlled by the state. Can be carried out with the consent of people (e.g. relocation to Soviet time youth to Komsomol construction sites) and without their consent (deportation of peoples); V). structural Its reason is changes in the structure of the national economy that occur against the will and consciousness of people (the emergence of new industries and new professions, statuses).
Circulation channels: the function of social circulation is performed in different ways social institutions(an organized association of people performing certain socially significant functions), the most important of which are: army, church, school, political, economic, professional organizations.
Factors of social mobility - conditions affecting mobility. Factors of social mobility: - at the micro level- this is the immediate social environment of the individual, as well as his total life resource. - at the macro level- this is the state of the economy, the level of scientific and technological development, the nature of the political regime, the prevailing stratification system, the nature of natural conditions, etc. Let's highlight factors, determining social mobility in society: the historical type of structure, the state of the economy, the degree of its development, the social situation in the country, ideology, traditions, religion, education, upbringing, family, place of residence, individual characteristics of a person ( talent, ability).
Sorokin: Social mobility - any transition of an individual/social object (value) from one social position to another. 1. Horizontal - transition of an individual/social object from one social group to another, located on that the same level (▲change of citizenship; from one factory to another - while maintaining your professional status)
2. Vertical - those relationships that arise when moving from one social layer to another. a) ascending (social rise) - individual (penetration of an individual from a lower layer to a higher one) - group (creation of an individual -mi of a new group and the penetration of the entire group into a higher layer with already existing groups) b) downward (social descent) - individual (fall of an individual to a lower social position without disturbing the group) - group (degradation social group as a whole, lowering its rank against the background of other groups / destroying its social unity)! Communities (according to the degree of movement): Mobile – Fixed. [+] mobs: contributing to the development of societies (improving the quality of work), personal development is underway, the realization of abilities is underway, reducing confrontation between people (directing energy to replace one’s position).[-] leads to alienation, loss of belonging to a specific group (development of individualism), causes stress, sometimes: destabilization in society.
The study of social mobility is closely related to the theory of social stratification.
Social stratification, in our opinion, primarily mediates a person’s desire to move from one social layer to another. This desire is key in studying the nature of social mobility.
In our opinion, a person’s belonging to a certain social stratum influences the attitude towards a person, since belonging to a specific social stratum influences the behavior and thinking of people to a much greater extent than other aspects of social life, it determines their life chances, the more natural is the desire a person to achieve more significant social heights and find himself in a different social stratum.
Turning to social mobility, we must again mention P.A. Sorokina. It was he who owned the term itself and the first major work on this problem (published in 1927).
This work, entitled “Social Mobility,” belongs to sociological classics, and its most important provisions have long been included in numerous textbooks on social sciences.
What is social mobility? This is a change in the position of groups and individuals within the system of social stratification. This is a change in social status, the social position of people in the social structure of society. Thus, a change by an individual from one social status to another, as a rule, means his transition from one social group to another. This is, for example, the transition from teenagers to young men, from schoolchildren to students, from cadets to officers. People are in constant social movement, and society is in development.
Horizontal mobility involves the movement of an individual from one social group to another, with both groups being at approximately the same level. Examples in this case include movements from one citizenship to another, from an Orthodox religious group to a Catholic one, from one labor collective to another.
Such movements are not accompanied by noticeable changes in social position in the vertical direction.
Vertical mobility involves the movement of an individual or group from one social stratum to another. Depending on the direction of movement, upward mobility, or social ascent, and downward mobility, or social descent, are distinguished. Thus, promotion, rank and demotion respectively show these types of vertical social mobility. Both types manifest themselves in economic, political and professional mobility, which represents another option for structuring social mobility. Vertical upward mobility can be shown in this case as a person acquiring property, being elected as a deputy, or obtaining a higher position.
In addition, social mobility can be group (an individual moves down or up the social ladder with his group) and individual (when he does this independently of others).
Factors of group mobility: social revolutions, foreign interventions, civil wars, military coups, changes in political regimes, entry into force of a new constitution, economic crisis.
Factors of individual mobility: social status of the family, level of education, nationality, physical abilities, intellectual abilities, place of residence, advantageous marriage.
Society cannot help but regulate social mobility, so P.A. Sorokin, considering vertical mobility in his works, identifies the so-called “social circulation channels.”
As such he analyzes the army, the church, government groups, political organizations and political parties, school, professional organizations, family, etc. So, characterizing the school in this regard, P.A. Sorokin notes: “In a society where schools are available to all its members, the school system represents a “social elevator” moving from the very bottom of society to the very top. In a society where charter schools are available only to the upper classes, the school system is an elevator that moves only on the upper floors of a public building, carrying up and down only the residents of the upper floors. However, even in such societies, some individuals from the lower strata still managed to get into this school elevator and, thanks to it, rise to the top” [Cit. from: 2, p. 37].
There are two ways to study social mobility and they are associated with the analysis of intragenerational and intergenerational mobility.
In the first case, we are talking about studying people’s careers, and in the second, we are talking about changing or maintaining the social status of children in relation to their parents. The study of intergenerational mobility allows us to imagine the degree of entrenchment social inequality in a particular society.
Thus, we can draw the following conclusions that the nature of social mobility in society is inextricably linked with the movement of a person from one social stratum to another.
Sociologists have identified the corresponding types of social mobility. These classifications are based on one or another defining classification feature.