180 likes | 418 Views
Continuity and Change in the Generation(s) and Life-course of Social Exclusion. John Hobcraft University of York. 2006 vs 1976. Birth cohorts 1946 from 30 to 60 1958 from 18 to 48 1970 from 6 to 36 Computing power Statistical packages Increased interdisciplinarity?
E N D
Continuity and Change in the Generation(s) and Life-course of Social Exclusion John Hobcraft University of York
2006 vs 1976 • Birth cohorts • 1946 from 30 to 60 • 1958 from 18 to 48 • 1970 from 6 to 36 • Computing power • Statistical packages • Increased interdisciplinarity? • Multiple deprivation to Social exclusion • Real progress or more of same? • Heavy reliance on NCDS and BCS (plus BHPS)
What is Social Exclusion? • More than Poverty • Multiple Disadvantage/ Deprivation • Multiple Origins to Multiple Outcomes • Dynamic Perspective • Medium & Long-term focus • Outcomes become antecedents or constraints • Pervasive and specific antecedents
Intergenerational elements • Limited parental characteristics • Income/ poverty; class; housing tenure; education; employment status; mother’s malaise (BCS) • Partnership breakdown; parental interest, etc • Missing factors • Cognitive & behavioural measures; measured genes or B-G design; personality traits (&CM); parenting styles
Intergenerational 2 • What do we know? • Strong and fairly specific continuities in class, housing tenure, partnership breakdown, out-of-wedlock childbearing, malaise • Strong and more pervasive influences of poverty, education, parental interest • Strong links on behaviour and cognition, but little on whether specific or pervasive, though likely pervasive • Nature-Nurture? – mainly psychology
Continuity and Change • Continuities across Life-Course • Pervasive antecedents • Specific antecedents • Continuity and Change • Who stays disadvantaged? • Who is newly disadvantaged? • Gendered Pathways to Social Exclusion
Childhood antecedents • Much new research • Broad range of pervasive childhood antecedents of many adult disadvantages • Poverty, school absences, test scores, parental interest, behaviour, family structure (incl care), health • Some particularly strong specific influences • Aggression and anxiety to Malaise • Child health to Limiting long-standing illness
Gender & Cohort (58 & 70) • Gendered pathways • Few differences in strength of childhood antecedents by gender • Yet to find greater ‘legacy’ for males • Females show some exacerbated response especially for low maternal interest, aggression, social housing • Cross-cohort differences • Again remarkably little robust evidence of differences in adult ‘response’ to childhood disadvantages
Late adolescence & Early adult • Very strong links to later disadvantage (58) • Very similar links to disadvantages at ages 23 and 33! • Pervasive links for qualifications, unemployment, NEET, homelessness • Specific links • Left home ‘friction’ to malaise and smoking
Gender and Early Parenthood • Early parenthood per se: • No gender differences in odds ratios • But higher incidence for women • Lone Motherhood shows consistent and large legacies
Continuity & change 23 to 33 • Almost no childhood antecedents distinguish new entrants from those who remain disadvantaged. • ‘Stickiness’ of disadvantage 23-33 unexplained by antecedents • Unemployment 23-33: • Same ‘effect size’ for men and women on benefits, low income and housing (but higher incidence for men) • Divorce 23-33 • Same strong ‘effects’ for men & women for social housing and high malaise at 33 • Very strong for women only on benefit receipt at 33 • Strong both sexes on low income, but doubled for women
An NCDS example • Father’s income at age 16 (ln) – badly measured • Male cohort members income at 33 (ln) • Simple regression gives ‘elasticity’ of 0.298 • Exclude two ‘corner’ cells • Both <0.5 median • Both top band or decile • Elasticity now 0.056! • ‘Stickiness’ of high advantage or high disadvantage for social class, income, etc may be important part of I-G ‘immobility’
Social Exclusion & Policy • Consequences of SE perspective: • Dynamic • Multi-faceted • Long-term • Active Policies • Not deterministic • Recognition of influences of BOTH choice & structure • But still some inheritance from Keith Joseph • SEU’s ‘Breaking the Cycle’
Diagram showing Hills 4 P’s Prevention Propulsion Promotion Threshold or Event Protection
What of Legacies of Past? • Differential Policies according to gender, antecedents and experiences: • Legacies from childhood (Differential Prevention) • ‘Scarring’ from early experiences (Differential Prevention & Propulsion) • Vulnerability to return to disadvantage cf newly disadvantaged (Differential Prevention, Propulsion, and Promotion) • Gendered vulnerability (Differential prevention, Promotion & Propulsion)