Journal of Economy Culture and Society

GÖNDERBİLGİ
EnglishTürkçe

Araştırma Makalesi


DOI :10.26650/JECS2019-0053   IUP :10.26650/JECS2019-0053    Tam Metin (PDF)

Türkiye’de Toplumsal Tabakalaşma ve Hareketliliğin Meslekler Üzerinden Ölçümü

Caner Özdemir

Türkiye’de toplumsal tabakalaşma üzerine yapılan nicel çalışmaların sayısı uluslararası literatürle karşılaştırıldığında çok sınırlı kalmıştır. Bu durumun en önemli sebeplerinden birisi veri yetersizliğidir. Bu çalışmada meslek temelli tabakalaşma ölçekleri kullanılarak Türkiye’de toplumsal tabakalaşmanın mevcut durumunun, mesleki statüyü etkileyen faktörlerin ve toplumsal hareketliliğin değişiminin halihazırdaki verilerle tespit edilmesi hedeflenmiştir. Bu amaçla çeşitli sınırlılıklarına rağmen 2009 tarihli Uluslararası Sosyal Tarama Programı (ISSP), 2010 tarihli TÜİK Hanehalkı İşgücü Araştırması ve 2012 tarihli TÜİK Yetişkin Eğitimi Araştırması verilerindeki meslek bilgileri kullanılarak örneklemlerdeki bireylerin mesleki statüleri ve tabakalaşma hiyerarşisindeki konumları farklı kuramsal kavramlaştırmalara dayanan EGP, ISEI ve CAMSIS ölçeklerine göre ayrı ayrı hesaplanmıştır. En küçük kareler regresyon modelleri ve çoklu kategori lojistik regresyon modelleri analizlerinde ebeveyn mesleki statüsü, birey eğitim düzeyi ve ebeveyn eğitim düzeyinin bireyin mesleki statüsü üzerindeki etkisinin tüm verisetleri ve ölçeklerde anlamlı olduğu bulunmuştur. Ayrıca, çok düzeyli modelleme analizlerinde ebeveyn mesleki statüsünün birey mesleki statüsü üzerindeki etkisinin genç kuşaklarda azaldığı tespit edilmiştir. Bu sonuçlar uluslararası literatürdeki bulgularla büyük ölçüde paralellikler göstermektedir. Yapılan analizlerde yukarı hareketlilik imkanlarının artma eğiliminde olduğu gözükse de daha kesin yargılara varabilmek için hem örneklemi hem ölçüm araçları Türkiye’de toplumsal hareketlilik düzeyini ölçmek üzere tasarlanmış ebeveyn ve birey eğitim ve meslek durumlarını doğrudan ölçen hedefe yönelik araştırmalara ihtiyaç vardır.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Toplumsal tabakalaşma, toplumsal hareketlilik, mesleki statü, çok düzeyli modelleme, ikincil veri analizi
DOI :10.26650/JECS2019-0053   IUP :10.26650/JECS2019-0053    Tam Metin (PDF)

Measurement of Social Stratification and Mobility in Turkey Through Occupations

Caner Özdemir

In Turkey, the number of quantitative studies on social stratification has been low for years. This is mostly due to a lack of available data. In this paper, it is aimed to investigate the status of social stratification in Turkey, the effects on occupational status and the change in social mobility through the analysis of secondary data. To this end, datasets from International Social Survey Programme dated 2009, TURKSTAT Household Labor Force Research dated 2010 and TURKSTAT Adult Education Research dated 2012 have been analysed despite their shortcomings. Occupational status scores and social stratification positions of the respondents in these surveys have been calculated according to EGP, ISEI and CAMSIS indexes which are based on distinct conceptualizations. Ordinary least squares and multinomial logistic regression models show that parental occupational status, educational level of the respondent and parental educational level have all significant effects on respondents’ occupational status across all indexes and datasets. Moreover, multilevel models show that the effect of parental occupational status on respondents’ occupational status is lower among younger cohorts. These results are in line with the international literature. Despite the implications towards an increase in upward mobility, in order to have more clear inferences further research should be designed to capture social mobility through direct measures of educational and occupational statuses of respondents and their parents.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Social stratification, social mobility, occupational status, multilevel modelling, secondary data analysis

GENİŞLETİLMİŞ ÖZET


This study is aimed to measure social stratification in Turkey using occupation-based measures, to identify factors affecting social stratification and to investigate the change in social mobility through secondary data analysis. Despite more than a century of history of quantitative studies on social stratification and mobility in international literature, the number of studies using representative data is very limited in Turkey. First of all, the research on social stratification in Turkey have been limited to conceptual discussions on social classes. Another reason for the shortage of quantitative studies on social stratification and mobility in Turkey is the lack of available representative data that include detailed information about occupations and educational backgrounds of respondents and their parents. Despite their limitations, some datasets that have become available in recent years provide opportunities in this sense. In this paper, three different datasets that have been collected in the last decade have been analysed. These are the data from International Social Survey Programme dated 2009, TURKSTAT Household Labor Force Research dated 2010 and Adult Education Research dated 2012. For all three datasets, occupational status scores and social stratification positions are calculated for Turkish respondents using EGP, ISEI and CAMSIS indexes which depend on distinct conceptualizations. Ordinary least squares regression models and multinomial logistic regression models show that parental occupational status, respondents’ education level and parental education level all have significant effects on respondents’ occupational status. This result is in line with the international literature for almost all countries. The effect of education level of both the parents and respondents themselves have been found to be highly effective since Blau and Duncan. However, some studies have shown that the effects of parental occupational status and parental education on respondents’ occupational status decline as a result of educational expansion, especially at the tertiary level, while some others have shown persistent effects on occupational status in other contexts. On the other hand, some scholars argued for equalizing effects of education only for bachelor’s degrees. Considering the fact that, educational expansion in Turkey is relatively a new phenomenon even for the primary level, it can be expected that the strong effects of parental and individual education level on occupational status may persist for a while. Nevertheless, using multilevel modelling the change in the levels of social mobility in Turkey is also investigated in this paper. Respondents are nested within birth cohorts in a multilevel model using Adult Education Research data. In this model, ISEI scores of respondents are defined as a dependent variable and the intercept and the slope for the effect of parental occupational status are set to be random. Thus, the change in the effect of parental occupational status on the respondents’ occupational status across cohorts could be identified. Similar effects on occupational status are found for parental occupational status, respondents’ education level and parental education. Furthermore, a negative correlation is calculated for the relationship between parental and individual occupational status scores, which means the effect of parental occupational status on individual occupational status is higher for cohorts that have lower parental occupational status on average. Since the mean score for parental occupational status is higher for younger cohorts, it can be concluded that there are more upward social mobility opportunities for younger cohorts. This result can be explained in reference to recent educational expansion in Turkey especially at the tertiary level and the shift from non-skilled jobs, especially in agriculture, to skilled jobs, routine non-manual jobs and to professional occupations as shown in recent studies on Turkey. However, considering the limitations of the data used in this paper, ad hoc research designed to measure the level of social mobility in Turkey is needed for further and more clear inferences.


PDF Görünüm

Referanslar

  • Bahçe, S., Günaydın, F. Y. & Köse, A. H. (2011). Türkiye’de toplumsal sınıf haritaları: Sınıf oluşumları ve sınıf hareketliliği üzerine karşılaştırmalı bir çalışma. S. Şahinkaya ve İ. Ertuğrul (Eds.), Bilsay Kuruç’a armağan kitabı içinde (pp. 359–392). Ankara: Mülkiyeliler Birliği Yayınları. google scholar
  • Bihagen, E., & Lambert, P. (2018). Can class and status really be disentangled? Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 58, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2018.08.001 google scholar
  • Blackburn, R. M., & Prandy, K. (1997). The reproduction of social inequality. Sociology, 31(3), 491–509. google scholar
  • Blau, P. M., & Duncan, O. D. (1967). The American occupational structure. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. google scholar
  • Boran, B. S. (1945). Toplumsal yapı araştırmaları: İki köy çeşidinin mukayeseli tetkiki. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi. google scholar
  • Boratav, K. (2005). 1980’li yıllarda Türkiye’de sosyal sınıflar ve bölüşüm. Ankara: İmge Kitabevi. google scholar
  • Boratav, K. (2000). İstanbul ve Anadolu’da sınıf profilleri. Ankara: İmge Yayınları. google scholar
  • Breen, R. (2014). Neo-weberci sınıf analizinin esasları. E. O. Wright (Ed.), Ü. Akıncı (Çev.), Sınıf analizine yaklaşımlar kitabı içinde (pp. 49–72). Ankara: NotaBene Yayınları. google scholar
  • Breen, R., & Jonsson, J. O. (2005). Inequality of opportunity in comparative perspective: Recent research on educational attainment and social mobility. Annual Review of Sociology, 31(1), 223–243. https://doi.org/10.1146/ annurev.soc.31.041304.122232 google scholar
  • Breen, R., Luijkx, R., Müller, W., & Pollak, R. (2010). Long-term trends in educational inequality in europe: Class inequalities and gender differences. European Sociological Review, 26(1), 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcp001 google scholar
  • Chan, T. W., & Goldthorpe, J. H. (2007). Class and status: The conceptual distinction and its empirical relevance. American Sociological Review, 72(4), 512–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200402 google scholar
  • Duncan, O. D. (1961). A socioeconomic index for all occupations. In A. J. Reiss (Ed.), Occupations and social status (pp. 109–138). New York: Free Press. google scholar
  • Erikson, R., & Goldthorpe, J. H. (1992). The constant flux. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Erikson, R., Goldthorpe, J. H., & Portocarero, L. (1979). Intergenerational class mobility in three Western European societies: England, France and Sweden. The British Journal of Sociology, 30(4), 415–441. google scholar
  • Ganzeboom, H. B., Treiman, D. J., & Ultee, W. C. (1991). Comparative intergenerational stratification research: Three generations and beyond. Annual Review of Sociology, 17(1), 277–302. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev. soc.17.1.277 google scholar
  • Ganzeboom, H., Graaf, P. De, & Treiman, D. (1992). A standard international socio-economic index of occupational status. Social Science Research, 21(1), 1–56. google scholar
  • Gayle, V., Connelly, R., & Lambert, P. (2015). A review of occupation-based social classifications for social research (ESRC CPC Working Paper No. 60). Retrieved from: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/373858/1/2015_ WP60_A_Review_of_Occupation_Based_Social_Classifications.pdf. google scholar
  • Gedikli, Ç. (2014). Exploring the extent of inequality associated with occupational gender segregation in Turkey (Working Paper). Retrieved from htttp://www.camsis.stir.ac.uk/versions.html#Turkey google scholar
  • Goldthorpe, J. H., & Llewellyn, C. (1977). Class mobility: Intergenerational and worklife patterns. The British Journal of Sociology, 28(3), 269–302. google scholar
  • Goldthorpe, J. H., & Mills, C. (2004). Trends in intergenerational class mobility in Britain in the late twentieth century. In Social mobility in Europe (pp. 195–224). Oxford: Oxford University Press. google scholar
  • Grusky, D. B., & Sørensen, J. B. (1998). Can class analysis be salvaged? American Journal of Sociology, 103(5), 1187–1234. https://doi.org/10.1086/231351 google scholar
  • Hauser, R. M. (1978). A structural model of the mobility table. Social Forces, 56(3), 919–953. google scholar
  • Kalaycioglu, S., Çelik, K., Çelen, Ü., & Türkyılmaz, S. (2010). Temsili bir örnenklemde sosyo-ekonomik statü ölçüm aracı geliştirilmesi: Ankara kent merkezi örneği. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, 13(1), 183–220. google scholar
  • Kalaycıoğlu, S., Kardam, F., Tüzün, S. ve Ulusoy, M. (1998). Türkiye için bir sosyoekonomik statü ölçütü geliştirme yönünde yaklaşım ve denemeler. Toplum ve Hekim, 13(2), 126–137. google scholar
  • Karademir Hazır, I., Çelik, K. ve Kalaycıoğlu, S. (2016). Kuşak-içi ve kuşaklararası toplumsal hareketliliğin yörüngesi: Ankara ili örneği. Sosyoloji Dergisi, 36(1), 175. https://doi.org/10.16917/sd.68905 google scholar
  • Kaya, Y. (2008). Proletarianization with polarization: industrialization, globalization, and social class in Turkey, 1980–2005. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 26, 161–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. rssm.2007.11.003 google scholar
  • Keyder, Ç. (1993). Türkiye’de devlet ve sınıflar. İstanbul: Metis Yayınları. google scholar
  • Kıray, M. B. (1999). Toplumsal yapı toplumsal değişme. İstanbul: Bağlam Yayınları. google scholar
  • Köse, A. H. ve Bahçe, S. (2009). “Yoksulluk” yazınının yoksulluğu: Toplumsal sınıflarla düşünmek. Praksis, 19, 385–419. google scholar
  • Kurz, K. ve Müller, W. (1987). Class mobility in the industrial world. Annual Review of Sociology, 13, 417–442. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.13.1.417 google scholar
  • Lipset, M. S., & Bendix, R. (1959). Social mobility in industrial society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. google scholar
  • Mardin, Ş. (1967). Tabakalaşmanin tarı̇hsel belı̇rleyı̇cı̇lerı̇: Türkı̇ye’de toplumsal sınıf ve sınıf bilinci. Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(4), 5–44. google scholar
  • Müller, W., & Karle, W. (1993). Social selection in educational systems in Europe. European Sociological Review, 9(1), 1–23. Ollman, B. (1968). Marx’s use of “Class”. American Journal of Sociology, 73(5), 573–580. google scholar
  • Özdemir, C. (2018). Türkiye’de yükseköğretimin yaygınlaşmasının toplumsal tabakalaşmaya etkisi. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 8(3), 542–551. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2018.295 google scholar
  • Raftery, A. E., & Hout, M. (1993). Maximally maintained inequality: Expansion, reform, and opportunity in Irish education, 1921-75. Sociology of Education, 66(1), 41–62. https://doi.org/10.2307/2112784 google scholar
  • Raudenbush, S., & Bryk, A. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. google scholar
  • Savage, M., Devine, F., Cunningham, N., Taylor, M., Li, Y., Hjellbrekke, J., Miles, A. (2013). A new model of social class? Findings from the BBC’s Great British Class Survey Experiment. Sociology, 47(2), 219–250. https://doi. org/10.1177/0038038513481128 google scholar
  • Shavit, Y., & Blossfeld, H. P. (1993). Persisting barriers: Changes in educational opportunities in thirteen countries. Boulder: Westview Press. google scholar
  • Sorokin, P. A. (1941). Social and cultural mobility. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. StataCorp. (2011). Stata statistical software: Release 12. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP. Stewart, A., Prandy, K., & Blackburn, R. M. (1973). Measuring the class structure. Nature, 245(5426), 415–417. google scholar
  • Sunar, L. (2018). Sosyal tabakalaşma: Kavramlar, kuramlar ve temel meseleler. Ankara: Nobel Akademik. google scholar
  • Sunar, L. ve Kaya, Y. (n.d.). Türkiye sosyo-ekonomik statü araştırması. Erişim adresi: http://tyap.net/tuses google scholar
  • Torche, F. (2011). Is a college degree still the great equalizer? Intergenerational mobility across levels of schooling in the United States. American Journal of Sociology, 117(3), 763–807. https://doi.org/10.1086/661904 google scholar
  • Treiman, D. J. (1977). Occupational prestige in comparative perspective. New York: Academic Press. google scholar
  • Treiman, D. J., & Ganzeboom, H. B. G. (2000). The fourth generation of comparative stratification research. In S. R. Quah & A. Sales (Eds.), The international handbook of sociology (pp. 123–150). London: Sage. https://doi. org/10.4135/9781848608405.n6 google scholar
  • Wright, E. O. (2000). Class counts. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Wright, E. O. (2014). Neo-marksist sınıf analizinin esasları. In E. O. google scholar
  • Wright (Ed.), Ç. Çidamlı (Çev.), Sınıf analizine yaklaşımlar kitabı içinde (pp. 15–48). Anka: NotaBene Yayınları. Wright, E. O. (2016). Sınıflar. (S. Toral, Çev.). Ankara: NotaBene Yayınları. google scholar
  • Yüceşahin, M. M. ve Tuysuz, S. (2011). Ankara kentinde sosyo-mekânsal farklılaşmanın örüntüleri. Coğrafi Bilimler Dergisi, 9(2), 159–188. google scholar

Atıflar

Biçimlendirilmiş bir atıfı kopyalayıp yapıştırın veya seçtiğiniz biçimde dışa aktarmak için seçeneklerden birini kullanın


DIŞA AKTAR



APA

Özdemir, C. (2020). Türkiye’de Toplumsal Tabakalaşma ve Hareketliliğin Meslekler Üzerinden Ölçümü. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 0(1), 59-77. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2019-0053


AMA

Özdemir C. Türkiye’de Toplumsal Tabakalaşma ve Hareketliliğin Meslekler Üzerinden Ölçümü. Journal of Economy Culture and Society. 2020;0(1):59-77. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2019-0053


ABNT

Özdemir, C. Türkiye’de Toplumsal Tabakalaşma ve Hareketliliğin Meslekler Üzerinden Ölçümü. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, [Publisher Location], v. 0, n. 1, p. 59-77, 2020.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Özdemir, Caner,. 2020. “Türkiye’de Toplumsal Tabakalaşma ve Hareketliliğin Meslekler Üzerinden Ölçümü.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0, no. 1: 59-77. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2019-0053


Chicago: Humanities Style

Özdemir, Caner,. “Türkiye’de Toplumsal Tabakalaşma ve Hareketliliğin Meslekler Üzerinden Ölçümü.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0, no. 1 (Dec. 2024): 59-77. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2019-0053


Harvard: Australian Style

Özdemir, C 2020, 'Türkiye’de Toplumsal Tabakalaşma ve Hareketliliğin Meslekler Üzerinden Ölçümü', Journal of Economy Culture and Society, vol. 0, no. 1, pp. 59-77, viewed 27 Dec. 2024, https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2019-0053


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Özdemir, C. (2020) ‘Türkiye’de Toplumsal Tabakalaşma ve Hareketliliğin Meslekler Üzerinden Ölçümü’, Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 0(1), pp. 59-77. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2019-0053 (27 Dec. 2024).


MLA

Özdemir, Caner,. “Türkiye’de Toplumsal Tabakalaşma ve Hareketliliğin Meslekler Üzerinden Ölçümü.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society, vol. 0, no. 1, 2020, pp. 59-77. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2019-0053


Vancouver

Özdemir C. Türkiye’de Toplumsal Tabakalaşma ve Hareketliliğin Meslekler Üzerinden Ölçümü. Journal of Economy Culture and Society [Internet]. 27 Dec. 2024 [cited 27 Dec. 2024];0(1):59-77. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2019-0053 doi: 10.26650/JECS2019-0053


ISNAD

Özdemir, Caner. “Türkiye’de Toplumsal Tabakalaşma ve Hareketliliğin Meslekler Üzerinden Ölçümü”. Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0/1 (Dec. 2024): 59-77. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2019-0053



ZAMAN ÇİZELGESİ


Gönderim18.06.2019
Kabul04.01.2020
Çevrimiçi Yayınlanma11.09.2020

LİSANS


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


PAYLAŞ




İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, uluslararası yayıncılık standartları ve etiğine uygun olarak, yüksek kalitede bilimsel dergi ve kitapların yayınlanmasıyla giderek artan bilimsel bilginin yayılmasına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları açık erişimli, ticari olmayan, bilimsel yayıncılığı takip etmektedir.