What are the types of social stratification system?

 Introduction

 This article summaries and discusses the idea of ‘social stratification’ which is linked with how the societies historically and globally are composed of groups of people with more or less advantages (e.g. more or less opportunities, material rewards, or social honour).

 Giddens & Sutton (2013) summarise three key features that define social stratification:

1. The larger social strata include group of people sharing certain characteristics, even though they might not interact or identify with each other. The strata stay, but individuals move in or out.
2. The ranking of the social category has more power to determine an individual’s opportunity in life than chance.
3. Although one person may move from rank to rank, or may be there is relatively greater mobility up or down in the ranks, the general rankings themselves change very slowly.   

 Class, race, gender and age are different types of social stratification. 

  This article discusses the following topics:  

• Introduce you to the topic of social stratification and one of its main forms, class.
• Offer an overview of the key sociological debates over what class inequality is, and how it persists or changes
• Present the global dimension of class stratification

 This article discusses the following aspects:

• Historical description of the types of stratification and how class system is distinct from other forms of stratifications.
• Distinction between ascribed and achieved social status
• Comparison of Marx and Weber sociological analysis of classes / Wright’s points on the importance of occupation in understanding class.
• Goldthorpe’s research into how to differentiate between classes.
• Using Bourdieu framework to study social class in UK (this framework takes into account not just the occupational strata but also cultural aspects).
• The elites and the excluded.
• Interplay between gender and class.
• Movement between classes.

 Four types of social stratification in history

 Human societies have had many different systems of social stratification. They can be grouped under four main ideal types. By ideal types we mean model that don’t necessarily have actual historical existence but is useful for understanding actual phenomena. The four types are: Slave societies, cast societies, the estate system, and class societies.

 Slave societies: slavery is an economic stratification which people can be owned as property by other people. Slavery based societies vary in terms of how much rights the slaves have (e.g. some can purchase their freedom, some have no legal rights). Slavery is illegal nowadays, but there are still specific types existing (e.g. labour, sex and human trafficking)  

 Cast societies: where an individual’s position is ascribed from birth because of specific characteristics (e.g. skin colour, parents’ religion or social status). Usually in agricultural societies such as India and South Africa in the past).     

 The estate system (in pre-industrial Europe and East Asia) existed for many centuries. It features social positions ascribed from birth, slightly has more fluidity than cast societies (it is based on feudal and aristocratic).    

 Class societies: the class system is the main social stratification system in current globalised world. It involves large populations that are divided into layers according to wealth, property, control over resources and life style. Wealth and occupation are main components of class differences.

Class system is different from other class stratification types because:

• Class in not wholly based on ascribed characteristics or on economic position.
• Class is comprehensive and impersonal.
• Education, work experience and marriage can change person’s life chances and can have great impact on their class position.

 Marx and Weber

 Classical sociologists tried to deal with the dramatic changes that marked the industrial revolution as changes from earlier forms of social stratification to the class stratification.

 Karl Marx theory was based on the idea that capitalism as a new economic system was replacing old economic system in terms of ‘the mode of production’ or how people gain their livehood.  In earlier modes of production the social strata divided into those who owned land (aristocrats, gentry, slave holders) in opposition to the people who produced for them (serfs, slaves, free peasantry).

 In the capitalist mode of production, societies is divided into two main groups who interact oppose each other – capitalists (industrialists) and the rest of the society (people who must sell their labour). Capitalists need ever cheaper labour to stay competitive and that creates ever worsening conditions for workers.

 The wealth created by workers selling their labour exceeded any wealth created in previous economic systems. Workers have little or no access to it. According to this theory, increasing distance between the rich and the poor would lead to ‘class revolution’ where workers seize power from the capitalists. Many of Marx’s predations have not come to reality, some sociologists argued that Marx analysis is simplistic.

 Weber extended Marxian image of class by introducing the concept of status and party into the analysis of social stratification. Weber thought that means of production is not the only element that decides social class. There are other factors such as:

• Person’s market position such as skills, qualification, and experience
• Social honour / status e.g. relations with influential people, dress, how to speak with others, their homes and occupation

A ‘status community’ is a group of people which has a shared identity based on similar levels of social honour accorded to them.

 Weber introduced the idea of ‘party’ as a way for social stratification. A party is similar to an interest group but somehow broader. It is a group that works together because of shared characteristics such as religion or notions which links its members though shared backgrounds or goals.

 Weber ideas of class, status and party provided a multi-dimensional view which expanded Marx ideas.

Marx and Weber combined: E. O. Wright

Eric Wright developed a synthesis of Marx and Weber ideas. Wrights agrees with Marx that control over economic resources is vital element of class. There are three key dimensions of this control:

• Control over investment or capital
• Control over labour power
• Control over the physical means of production

The capitalist class has all these dimensions where as working class has none.

 However, according to Wright, those two extremes are groups that have access to some control such as:

• White collar workers and managers: such as office workers form secretarial to managerial
• Blue collar workers: manual labour of any sort, factory workers, local self employed.

 According to Wright almost all of society has to sell their labour, but they are differentiated in terms of authority and skills. Possessing skills and expertise allows workers to negotiate for rewards for their labour.

 Studying class: preoccupation with occupation     

 Sociologists tried to produce measurement for social class by looking at stratification in relation to a person’s occupation.

 Durkheim attempted to look at the differences between pre- and post-industrial division of labour. Later sociologists looked at occupation as a marker of class because people in same occupation tended to share similar experiences and circumstances.

 Two forms of class images based on occupation have been used:

• Relational: usually under core conflicts in society between different occupational groups
• Descriptive: mere record of what classes there are and how the system of class stratification may be changing

Goldthorpe developed a relational class scheme through survey research. His system was based on market and work situation to analyse class. Eleven classes fits in these general categories: service, intermediate and working class.

 Many sociologists today is think that stratification is achieved through cultural consumption, not class position e.g. cars, clothes, houses and holidays.

 Internal changes of class system: The bloated middle class

 Sociologists had long debate on class. Is it based on occupation or consumption? How to measure it? By market position, or property control?

 Nowadays the world is changing and the middle class has grown. Blue collar occupations have been replaced with white collar occupations.  The middle class usually include white collar jobs who sell both mental and physical labour. However, middle class is difficult to demarcate because its members are varied in backgrounds and interests.

 White collar workers (professional, managerial and administrative occupations) are changing in our time because:

• Modern societies require large scale organizations
• Welfare states requires professionals (social workers, teachers, health care staff)
• Development of economics and industry increases demand for service experts (e.g. law, finance, accounting and IT)

 Blue collar workers are not necessarily poor. More people have become middle class through material resources that blue collar occupations can bow afford. Goldthorpe study (1968) found that although blue collar people might be changing in their consumption to match the middle class, still blue collar face unstable work conditions and didn’t mingle with other classes.

Objective and subjective class determinants

 Pierre Bourdieu (1974) worked on notions of ‘capitals’ to identify different classes in France. According to Bourdieu capital refers to the different sorts of resources a class group has. Four types of capital are important in determining and maintaining one’s class position.

• Cultural capital: education, appreciation of arts, leisure
• Social capital: networks of friends and contacts
• Symbolic capital: good reputation, social status
• Economic capital: property and money

 Savage et al (1992) agreed with Bourdieu that class is connected to specific life style and consumption patterns. Savage found three sectors based on cultural tastes and assists:

• Professionals in public service had high cultural capital marked by active life styles and high community participation
• Managers and bureaucrats had ‘indistinctive’ consumption with little activity in community participation and traditional preferences
• There is a post modern group with a life style which combined unusual elements of the arts, sport and community activity

Savage et al (2013) published an update – the Great British Class Survey 2013 – which expanded the study of class in UK. It described seven main social classes:

1. Elite
2. Technical experts
3. New affluent workers
4. Lower levels of the class structure
5. Ageing traditional working class
6. Precariat (low levels of capital)
7. Emergent service workers

 Elites and social exclusion

Class is one system of social stratification that is connected to other systems in various ways (e.g. race and ethnicity, gender, life course). Some groups of people face certain disadvantages than other groups according to their belonging to certain social stratification systems.

 The idea of underclass (marginalized or socially excluded people) has been used for groups that are subjected to forms of inequality such as long term unemployment, homeless and welfare dependence. E.g. in the USA social segregated areas where African Americans or Hispanic Americans are deprived of social capital (education, health care, good transportation) and this has created a culture of exclusion when people in these areas have little in common socially, politically or economically with people outside. Immigrant communities in Western Europe are facing similar circumstances.

 Elite refers to the rich members of society, either with one national society or globally.

Polarisation refers to the phenomena when the elite become increasingly rich and form a small proportion of society that is divided from the mainstream or majority of the society.

 Transactional capitalist class has a number of features

• They have international and prestigious qualifications
• Have important roles in governments and central banks and globalizing organizations
• Have positions in the world economic organizations

 Interplay of gender and economic inequality

 Gender is one of the most entrenched field of inequality. What is the overlap between gender and class inequality? Until recently many sociologists assumed that class inequalities governed gender inequality e.g. women class position depends on their father or husband social status.

 There have been number of criticism of this idea because of the changing nature of households e.g. more women are working, in many cases women can have better jobs than their husbands, more single mothers or unmarried women have good jobs.

 Class mobility and rigidity

 Social strata change slowly over time however there can be great deal of internal movement of individuals.

Social mobility: when individuals move up or down between different socio economic levels

Vertical mobility (moving up to higher class) is a measure of a society’s openness. There are other types of mobility such as downward mobility and horizontal mobility.

 Meritocracy means that those individuals who are most able and do the most in society are rewarded the most.  Some sociologists criticised this idea saying it is politically charged as it seems to support inequality. E.g. a child from a disadvantaged family had to show a great deal more merit to get the same rewards as a child from privileged background.

 Social class now

Some of the older elements of class are starting to disappear. Class stratification still holds a powerful determining force over the lives of many whether measured by occupation, wealth or consumption. Class is connected to a range of inequalities such as educational access, health and life expectancy. Class polarisation both within and between nations in increasing.

What are the different types of social stratification?

What are the 3 types of stratification?

What are the 2 types of system of stratification?

What are the 3 common basis of social stratification?