Title: A European Socioeconomic Classification: How we got here and where we are going More info www'iser'e
1A European Socio-economic ClassificationHow we
got here and where we are goingMore info _at_
www.iser.essex.ac.uk/esec
- David Rose Eric Harrison
- Institute for Social and Economic Research
- University of Essex
2Eurostat Statistical Harmonisation Programme
- Aims to create a common set of
-
- core units
- core variables and
- core classifications
- for use in European and national social
statistics
3ESeC
- Expert Group appointed by Eurostat in January
2000 - Proposals for an ESeC made in 2001 Feasibility
Report (see www.iser.essex.ac.uk/esec) - This report forms the basis for the project
4Form of classification.
- The outline classification takes the form of a
two-level nested hierarchy, similar to
classifications such as the French PCS. In its
disaggregated form (level 2, what we term
Socio-economic Groups - SEGs) it covers the
whole population at the individual level. - There are SEGs to cover various other active
and inactive groups. Individuals who are
allocated to these groups on the basis of current
status may then be allocated to ESeC classes in a
variety of ways, depending partly on analytic
purpose and partly on the group concerned.
5Possible ESeC Classes (Level 1)
- Large employers, higher managerial and
professional occupations - Lower managerial and professional occupations
- Intermediate occupations
- Small employers and own account workers
- Employers and self-employed in agriculture
- Lower supervisory and lower technician
occupations - Lower services etc occupations
- Lower technical occupations
- Routine occupations
- Never worked and long term unemployed
6Conceptual basis for the NS-SEC(Goldthorpe)
- Employment relations and conditions are central
to delineating the structure of socio-economic
positions in modern societies
7The Derivation of the NS-SEC
8Dimensions of work as sources of contractual
hazard
Specificity of human assets
high
Difficulty of monitoring
low
high
low
9Typical elements of the Labour Contract
- Short-term exchange of money for effort
- Payment by the time or piece
- No occupational pension or health scheme
- Contract easily terminated
- Low level of job security
10Typical elements of the Service Relationship
- Long-term exchange of service for compensation
- Greater job security and employability
- Salary
- Incremental or similar payment systems
- Occupational pension and health schemes
- Greater control over the job and thus trust
between employer and employee
11Dimensions of work as sources of contractual
hazard, forms of contract and class locations
Specificity of human assets
high
1
6
Service relationship
mixed
Difficulty of monitoring
low
high
mixed
Labour contract
3
low
9
12The conceptual derivation of ESeC
13Underlying ESeC Socio-economic Groups (Level 2)
Class 1 Large employers, higher managerial and
professional occupations
- 11. Employers (other than in agriculture) with
10 employees - 12. Farmers with full-time employees (or large
business farmers) - 13. Higher managerial occupations
- 14. Higher professional occupations (employees)
- 15. Self-employed professional occupations
14Other active groups
- 01. Other unemployed
- 02. Unpaid family workers
- 03. National service
Inactive groups
04. Retired 05. Students (full-time) 06. Children
07. Permanently sick and disabled 08. Looking
after home
Not classifiable
00. Not classifiable (occupations not given or
inadequately described etc.)
15Classification rules for the individual level of
ESeC
- The other unemployed in SEG 01, unpaid family
workers in SEG 02, national service personnel in
SEG 03 and the inactive SEGs 04 - 08 do not
immediately collapse to any class. Rather,
individuals in these groups are (re-) allocated
to the group of their career typical (usually
last main) job or to their household class.
16Household level rules
- The household level of this classification would
work in a similar way, except that the ESeC class
position (level 1) would be allocated through a
household class measure. In this case, those in
SEGs 01-08 and 00 would be allocated to their
household class. - Equally, those allocated to SEGs 11-92 would take
on the ESeC values of their household.
17Flexibility
- One of the advantages of a nested two-level
schema such as this is that it will permit
analysts to look inside classes. This will
assist them in understanding how life-chances may
vary between groups with the same employment
relations. For example, do higher professionals
in SEGs 14 and 15 have better health outcomes
when compared with higher managers in SEG 13?
18Number of SEGs (1)
- As far as the number of SEG categories to be
recognised within each class is concerned, this
is partly an issue of face validity, i.e. of
grouping together in sub-categories similar types
of occupations that share similar employment
relations. - It should be noted that the SEGs within this
outline classification are only postulated ones,
designed to help illustrate how a possible
two-level classification might work.
19Number of SEGs (2)
- However, it is the classes themselves that will
need to be validated. Which SEGs we then wish to
recognise within each class will be largely a
matter of contingency, depending upon, for
example, what might be useful for the internal
analysis of classes, face validity issues, etc. - The question of which SEGs exist, therefore,
relates to which useful class sub-divisions we
might wish to make among those combinations of
occupation and employment status that share
similar employment relations.
20Criterion validation of ESeC (1)
- We have a measure similar to ESeC that has
already been created and validated using the
method of collecting employment relations data at
the level of occupations. This is the UK NS-SEC.
We will also build on previous European research
aimed at developing a comparative measure of
social structure similar to ESeC, for example the
Comparative Analysis of Social Mobility in
Industrial Societies (CASMIN).
21Criterion validation of ESeC (2)
- Given the broad similarities of market economies
and occupational and industrial structures across
the EU, we can expect that employment relations
will also be similar. Thus, it is reasonable to
begin by creating an ESeC derivation matrix with
cell values based on UK employment relations
data. These data were collected in the 1996/97
winter quarter of the LFS.
22What we have to do
- We have constructed a derivation matrix on the
basis of the best available evidence we have on
the employment conditions typical for the
occupational unit groups of ISCO88(COM). This
evidence was drawn from work for the project that
produced the UK National Statistics
Social-economic Classification (NS-SEC), as well
as from earlier work on social mobility by
Erikson, Goldthorpe and their colleagues and more
recent work by academics on employment relations
in Europe. In addition, the matrix is now being
examined by NSIs, partners in the project and
other nominated academic experts.
23Constructing ESeC
- In order for an ESeC to be fully operationalized
in line with our theoretical model, at a minimum
we require measures of occupation, status in
employment and, in some cases, enterprise size.
We also believe that labour market position
should be part of what an ESeC measures. In
addition, some measure of farm size may be
necessary, too, in order to distinguish
capitalist farmers from other (e.g. subsistence)
farmers. How, precisely, are these common
elements to be measured? Do all the datasets we
intend to use have these measures in the form
required?
24Occupation
- For the most part occupation is measured either
by (4-digit) ISCO88(COM) or by a national
occupational classification similar to it. France
is exceptional in this regard, but has developed
a Table des Correspondances between the
Catégories Socioprofessionnelles (CSP) and
ISCO88(COM). ISCO88(COM) is a core variable for
the Eurostat harmonisation programme and so is
the obvious measure of occupation to use for ESeC.
25Status in employment
- All SECs distinguish between employers, the
self-employed (own account workers) and
employees. In the EU context, we may need to add
the category of family worker. The EU harmonised
variable is ICSE-93.
26ICSE-93
- Employees
- Employers
- Own account workers
- Members of producers co-operatives
- Contributing family workers
- Workers not classifiable by status
27Labour market position
- It is necessary to distinguish more than activity
status. Our theoretical model requires us to
discriminate between employers by size, the
self-employed, and between managers (by size of
enterprise or preferably managerial level),
supervisors and other employees. Managerial
status will be dependent on allocation to Major
Group 1 of ISCO88(COM). Thus, labour market
position involves a combination of ICSE-93,
enterprise size and supervisory status.
28Number of employees
The size cut-off for enterprise size in the
non-agricultural sector varies across the
national SECs 1-9, 10 1-24, 25 1-49, 50 or
combinations of these. However, since ISCO88(COM)
is the harmonised occupational classification,
then the initial simple rule for ESeC will need
to be that employed by ISCO for managers and
employers 1-9 and 10.
29Example illustration of parts of the ESeC
derivation matrix
Note in this table, for simplicitys sake, we
assume a seven-category empstat (i.e. that farm
can be established via ISCO).
30Reduced ESeC
- Some data sets may not contain all the elements
required to create ESeC in the prescribed manner.
However, it would also be possible to produce a
reduced form of ESeC for use where data on
establishment size are not given. Naturally, the
costs and benefits of this would have to be
assessed for each member state. The reduced form
could be derived in essentially the same way as
the full form of ESeC, except that (ignoring the
agricultural sector again) the employment status
variable would only have five categories - 1. Self-employed with employees
- 2. Self-employed with no employees
- 3. Manager
- 4. Supervisor
- 5. Employee
- The ESeC category for self-employed with
employees and for managers would be based on the
modal employment status category for each
occupation.
31Simplified ESeC
- The simplified form of ESeC would be for data
sets in which only information on occupation
(i.e. on 4 digit ISCO OUG) is available. The
primary rule would be that occupations (OUGs) are
allocated to the ESeC category for other
employees, except where these are in a minority
within that occupation or an occupation has no
other employee status (e.g. managers). In these
cases the ESeC category of the modal occupation
by employment status combination would be used.
Hence, for example, if within a particular OUG
supervisory status predominates, then the ESeC
value for supervisors in that OUG will apply.
32Next Steps
- Create derivation matrices done
- Matrices report to partners, NSIs, Eurostat and
experts for responses - done - Statistical Compendium being undertaken
- Validation studies May to November 2005
- Validation conference January 2006
- ESeC User Guide mid 2006
- NSIs Workshop mid 2006