No abstract

Abstract:We investigate the recruitment into the upper class, analysing the impact of different forms of capital and modes of closure. Unlike many Bourdieu-influenced approaches to class, we systematically investigate divisions by composition of capital: the relative weight of economic to cultural capital. We find capital-specific barriers to mobility: Access to the upper classes is not only differentiated by one's parents' volume of capital or the general class hierarchy, but also by the relative weight of cultural to economic capital. Drawing on theories of social closure, we further investigate the role of two distinct modes of closure -credentialism and private property. The degree of closure differs significantly between subfractions of the upper class, based on the degree to which they refer to positions involving specific credential requirements. Our findings underline the importance of capital composition, but also that closure operates by neither credentials nor property alone. In the present paper, we push this line of research further by analysing how inherited economic and cultural capital are shaping recruitment to upper class fractions, and how these intersect with educational credentialization and private property as two distinct modes of closure (Parkin 1979, Murphy 1988.We see class divisions as manifested in the distribution of forms of capital (Savage, Warde, and Devine 2005). While it is widely recognized that economic, cultural and social resources are of great significance for understanding how class 'works' (Goldthorpe, Llewellyn, and Payne 1987:99, Khan 2012), it is with Bourdieu's perspective that they come to be seen as the most 'determinant property' of social class (Bourdieu 1984:106, see the discussion in Flemmen 2013). But unlike recent attempts at applying Bourdieu's ideas in class analysis, like the GBCS, we operationalize the class structure as two-dimensional, shaped by both the total amount of capital, but also the composition of this capital -the relative weight of economic to cultural capital (see Flemmen et al. forthcoming). We therefore distinguish four main hierarchical levels of the class structure -working class, lower middle class, upper 4/34 middle class and upper class. We then differentiate the upper and middle groups into fractions by the type of capital, so that each is split into a cultural-capital fraction, an economic-capital fraction and a fraction with a balanced mix.While most approaches to social stratification emphasize the significance of education, class analysis stresses the role of private property (Flemmen 2013): Marxians see class as anchored in relations of production (Wright 2005), whereas Weberians see the divide between the propertied and the property-less as the basic fault line in the class structure (Breen 2005).But education or property should not be an either/or choice, so we move beyond this dichotomy by drawing on theories of social closure: 'In modern capitalist society the two main exclusionary devices by which the bourgeoisie construct...

Using high-quality Norwegian register data on 49,879 children from 23,655 families, the authors estimated sibling fixed-effects models to explore whether children who are younger at the time of a parental union dissolution perform less well academically, as measured by their grades at age 16, than their older siblings who have spent more time living with both biological parents. Results from a baseline model suggest a positive age gradient that is consistent with findings in some of the extant family structure literature. Once birth order is taken into account, the gradient reverses. When analyses also control for grade inflation by adding year of birth to the model, only those children who experience a dissolution just prior to receiving their grades appear relatively disadvantaged. The

A direct focus on social class has largely disappeared from questions concerning spatial divisions. Instead, studies on residential segregation usually focus on ethnicity, education or income; seemingly the common perception is that people are now divided by such factors and that class divisions belong to the past. Although the structures of inequality have changed in recent times, little is known about how they affect spatial divisions. Here, we investigate these issues by analysing the developments of class segre gation in Norway's capital, Oslo, during a period of great societal change and welfare state expansion. We analyse both vertical segregation, between the upper class and the working class, and horizontal segregation, between class factions possessing a high level of mainly cultural or economic capital. We apply a Bourdieuinspired classification scheme to capture data on the parents of full cohorts of children aged 13-15 years in 1970, 1980 and 2003. The results support the idea of a changed class structure, with segregation levels between the upper and working classes having increased during this period. Moreover, there are also moderate and slightly increasing levels of horizontal segregation between top class factions based on cultural and economic capital.We would like to thank Annick Prieur, Ingar Brattbakk, Magne Flemmen, Marte Mangset and Marianne Nordli Hansen for their encouraging and insightful comments on earlier versions of this article. Thanks also to three anonymous IJURR referees for their very constructive comments and suggestions.

Despite several decades of Sport for All policies, social class differences in organized sports participation of youth persist. However, few population-based studies have examined how social class may influence adolescent participation. We use survey data from upper secondary school students (aged 16–19) from the Norwegian capital of Oslo ( N = 10,531) and investigate the factors through which social class operates. To measure parental social class, we use the well-established Erikson, Goldthorpe and Portocarero class scheme, supplemented by indicators of economic and cultural resources. We also include data on immigrant status, neighbourhood and school affiliation. There were large differences in organized sport participation between youth from the higher and lower social classes. Indicators of parental economic resources mediated many of these differences and had an additional independent statistical effect. Indicators of cultural resources, immigrant status, and neighbourhood and school affiliation only had modest effects. We conclude that social class plays a major role in organized sport participation, and economic resources are particularly important. Methodologically, we suggest that well-established social class schemes should be used in such research, supplemented with more detailed indicators of economic resources.