- Email: [email protected]
Introduction to volume 18
INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME 18 This millennium issue of Research and Social Stratification and Mobility reflects the growing diversity of perspectives, methods, and insights that are used in social stratification research. The contributions to this volume can be grouped under four headings: (1) The changing real and symbolic boundaries of social stratification, (2) who benefits from rapidly changing markets?, (3) immigration, marginalization, and exclusion, and (4) modeling occupational mobility. Each of these areas, and the contributions within them, represent what is fight with good social science research in addition to providing new and important insights into the rapidly changing nature of social inequality in nations and cultures around the world. More than any other subfield in sociology, the study of social stratification involves shooting at a moving target as new groups are formed, life chances are changed, political regimes crumble and are replaced, and people move to different parts of the world searching for new lives and opportunities. The study of social stratification reveals the complexities of the human condition, and each of our authors attempts to say something important about social inequality as the 21st century opens. Unlike volume 17, which was a special issue devoted to the future of affirmative action, this volume returns to RSSM's traditional format of open submissions, attempting to highlight what is new and insightful in the study of social stratification. Below I briefly summarize each section's contribution to the volume.
THE CHANGING REAL AND SYMBOLIC BOUNDARIES OF SOCIAL
STRATIFICATION
The opening section of the volume provides an interesting theoretical and empirical look at boundary definitions as the contested terrain of social stratification. The lead article by Steven Peter Vallas presents an analysis of the changing interactions between engineers and uncredentialled workers in paper mills as an example of a newly symbolic division of labor based on credentialed knowledge. Joel I. Nelson asks us to urgently study the stratification implications of new and evolving post-industrial technologies, especially as these affect the political mobilization and the demobilization of mass publics. Jerry Jacobs examines the phenomenon of specialty change XV
xvi among physicians, a group that most of us traditionally assume pass through their working lives in heavily invested, privileged, but static careers. George Wilson offers insight into the cognitive processes of the African American middle class and the relative strength of class and racial group interests as a driving force behind support for social policies. Each of these contributions deals with rapidly changing, socially constructed boundaries that provide the basis for the distribution of power and privilege. They emphasize that our objects of study are truly moving targets; the platitudes and certainties of the 1970s are now the uncertainties of a globalized and fragmented economic system. These certainly aren't our father's social stratification systems.
WHO BENEFITS FROM RAPIDLY CHANGING MARKETS? Our next two contributions deal with rapidly changing market activity in two vastly different parts of the world. Jonathan Kelley and Archibald O. Haller reexamine one of the oldest debates in the sociology of development; the relationship between rapidly developing market economies and the social welfare of working class people. Their conclusions will be surprising to some but are consistent with a growing body of evidence from different places and times. Xuenguang Zhou and Olga Suhomlinova look at the pre-transition Soviet Union and People's Republic of China for insights into possible differences in post-market transition stratification systems. Their results highlight the importance of systematically examining specific historical contexts to gain insights into the workings of stratification systems that (overtly at least) operate from the same set of principles. Both contributions highlight the continued importance of studying larger social and economic contexts in different parts of the world, taking into account local circumstances while at the same time attempting to draw general insights that are useful building blocks for further research. IMMIGRATION,
MARGINALIZATION
AND EXCLUSION
Our next two contributions provide additional insights into the complexities created by the growing movements of people around the world and the growing subjection and marginalization of some ethnic and cultural groups as a result of this movement. Yuval Yonay and Vered Kraus specifically examine the unique features of social stratification among Israeli Palestinians, providing insights into the assets and liabilities of various methods for adapting to their status as
xvii a subject, indigenous people in an alien state. Nancy Weinberg examines an additional complexity; mass migration to Israel and the incorporation of culturally disparate ethnic groups in a nation composed almost exclusively of recent immigrants and refugees from elsewhere. The combined contributions give us a new appreciation of the complexities of studying and understanding social stratification in this part of the world and provide a window for examining social stratification systems in other places where migration is heavy, cultures are close, and conflicts over resources are immediate and intense. MODELING
OCCUPATIONAL
MOBILITY
Finally, our last two contributions revisit a traditional activity in social stratification research, the analysis of intergenerational social mobility. Yusheng Peng attempts to incorporate the additional complexities of class as an object of intergenerational transfer in England, comparing log-linear analysis methods with latent class methods for summarizing information in mobility tables. Robert L. Miller provides insights into the changing historical circumstances under which mobility regimes operate, providing a case for incorporating historically specific cohort definitions in the analysis of social mobility that take into account county-specific circumstances. The result is new insights into the unique social stratification system of Northern Ireland and some useful suggestions for contextualizing research using mobility tables. As always, I would like to thank the editorial board, the ad hoc reviewers who devoted their time to making RSSM the best it can possibly be, and to Elsevier Science and our representative, Ann Marie Davenport, for support, information and encouragement in this enterprise. ! would also like to thank the authors for their contributions to RSSM and their toleration of what is often a slow and plodding process of publication. Finally, I would like to thank my research assistant, Scott Fitzgerald, for helping with a myriad of editorial and clerical tasks needed to keep RSSM running, including the maintenance of our website here at The University of Iowa (http://www.uiowa.edu/-strat/ index.htm). Journal editing is an arduous and time-consuming process, but the rewards (in my mind) are great; the chance to read all that is new and insightful; the attempt to make sense of this work's place in a growing stream of research produced by a wide diversity of scholars, and ultimately the satisfaction of seeing a subset of the many papers considered in print. As usual, if you like what you read here, compliment our authors, board members, and reviewers.
xviii In closing, I would like to bring your attention to our next CALL FOR PAPERS for volume 20 of RSSM. This will be a special issue of RSSM titled THE STATE OF MARKET TRANSITION. I am hoping to bring scholars from a wide variety of disciplines and perspectives to discuss the stratification implications of the newly minted market economies in Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union, China, and elsewhere. The deadline for submissions to this special issue is May 15th, 2001. Kevin T. Leicht Iowa City, Iowa August 28, 2000
THE CHANGING REAL AND SYMBOLIC BOUNDARIES OF SOCIAL
STRATIFICATION
The opening section of the volume provides an interesting theoretical and empirical look at boundary definitions as the contested terrain of social stratification. The lead article by Steven Peter Vallas presents an analysis of the changing interactions between engineers and uncredentialled workers in paper mills as an example of a newly symbolic division of labor based on credentialed knowledge. Joel I. Nelson asks us to urgently study the stratification implications of new and evolving post-industrial technologies, especially as these affect the political mobilization and the demobilization of mass publics. Jerry Jacobs examines the phenomenon of specialty change XV
xvi among physicians, a group that most of us traditionally assume pass through their working lives in heavily invested, privileged, but static careers. George Wilson offers insight into the cognitive processes of the African American middle class and the relative strength of class and racial group interests as a driving force behind support for social policies. Each of these contributions deals with rapidly changing, socially constructed boundaries that provide the basis for the distribution of power and privilege. They emphasize that our objects of study are truly moving targets; the platitudes and certainties of the 1970s are now the uncertainties of a globalized and fragmented economic system. These certainly aren't our father's social stratification systems.
WHO BENEFITS FROM RAPIDLY CHANGING MARKETS? Our next two contributions deal with rapidly changing market activity in two vastly different parts of the world. Jonathan Kelley and Archibald O. Haller reexamine one of the oldest debates in the sociology of development; the relationship between rapidly developing market economies and the social welfare of working class people. Their conclusions will be surprising to some but are consistent with a growing body of evidence from different places and times. Xuenguang Zhou and Olga Suhomlinova look at the pre-transition Soviet Union and People's Republic of China for insights into possible differences in post-market transition stratification systems. Their results highlight the importance of systematically examining specific historical contexts to gain insights into the workings of stratification systems that (overtly at least) operate from the same set of principles. Both contributions highlight the continued importance of studying larger social and economic contexts in different parts of the world, taking into account local circumstances while at the same time attempting to draw general insights that are useful building blocks for further research. IMMIGRATION,
MARGINALIZATION
AND EXCLUSION
Our next two contributions provide additional insights into the complexities created by the growing movements of people around the world and the growing subjection and marginalization of some ethnic and cultural groups as a result of this movement. Yuval Yonay and Vered Kraus specifically examine the unique features of social stratification among Israeli Palestinians, providing insights into the assets and liabilities of various methods for adapting to their status as
xvii a subject, indigenous people in an alien state. Nancy Weinberg examines an additional complexity; mass migration to Israel and the incorporation of culturally disparate ethnic groups in a nation composed almost exclusively of recent immigrants and refugees from elsewhere. The combined contributions give us a new appreciation of the complexities of studying and understanding social stratification in this part of the world and provide a window for examining social stratification systems in other places where migration is heavy, cultures are close, and conflicts over resources are immediate and intense. MODELING
OCCUPATIONAL
MOBILITY
Finally, our last two contributions revisit a traditional activity in social stratification research, the analysis of intergenerational social mobility. Yusheng Peng attempts to incorporate the additional complexities of class as an object of intergenerational transfer in England, comparing log-linear analysis methods with latent class methods for summarizing information in mobility tables. Robert L. Miller provides insights into the changing historical circumstances under which mobility regimes operate, providing a case for incorporating historically specific cohort definitions in the analysis of social mobility that take into account county-specific circumstances. The result is new insights into the unique social stratification system of Northern Ireland and some useful suggestions for contextualizing research using mobility tables. As always, I would like to thank the editorial board, the ad hoc reviewers who devoted their time to making RSSM the best it can possibly be, and to Elsevier Science and our representative, Ann Marie Davenport, for support, information and encouragement in this enterprise. ! would also like to thank the authors for their contributions to RSSM and their toleration of what is often a slow and plodding process of publication. Finally, I would like to thank my research assistant, Scott Fitzgerald, for helping with a myriad of editorial and clerical tasks needed to keep RSSM running, including the maintenance of our website here at The University of Iowa (http://www.uiowa.edu/-strat/ index.htm). Journal editing is an arduous and time-consuming process, but the rewards (in my mind) are great; the chance to read all that is new and insightful; the attempt to make sense of this work's place in a growing stream of research produced by a wide diversity of scholars, and ultimately the satisfaction of seeing a subset of the many papers considered in print. As usual, if you like what you read here, compliment our authors, board members, and reviewers.
xviii In closing, I would like to bring your attention to our next CALL FOR PAPERS for volume 20 of RSSM. This will be a special issue of RSSM titled THE STATE OF MARKET TRANSITION. I am hoping to bring scholars from a wide variety of disciplines and perspectives to discuss the stratification implications of the newly minted market economies in Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union, China, and elsewhere. The deadline for submissions to this special issue is May 15th, 2001. Kevin T. Leicht Iowa City, Iowa August 28, 2000