By slow degrees: Two centuries of social reproduction and mobility in Britain

Paul Lambert, Kenneth Prandy, Wendy Bottero

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


This paper discusses long term trends in patterns of intergenerational social mobility in Britain. We argue that there is convincing empirical evidence of a small but steady linear trend towards increasing social mobility throughout the period 1800-2004. Our conclusions are based upon the construction and analysis of an extended micro-social dataset, which combines records from an historical genealogical study, with responses from 31 sample surveys conducted over the period 1963-2004. There has been much previous study of trends in social mobility, and little consensus on their nature. We argue that this dissension partly results from the very slow pace of change in mobility rates, which makes the time-frame of any comparison crucial, and raises important methodological questions about how long-term change in mobility is best measured. We highlight three methodological difficulties which arise when trying to draw conclusions over mobility trends - concerning the extent of controls for life course effects; the quality of data resources; and the measurement of stratification positions. After constructing a longitudinal dataset which attempts to confront these difficulties, our analyses provide robust evidence which challenges hitherto more popular, politicised claims of declining or unchanging mobility. By contrast, our findings suggest that Britain has moved, and continues to move, steadily towards increasing equality in the relationship between occupational attainment and parental background.
Original languageEnglish
JournalSociological Research Online
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 31 Jan 2007


  • Intergenerational change
  • Longitudinal trends
  • Occupations
  • Social mobility
  • Social stratification


Dive into the research topics of 'By slow degrees: Two centuries of social reproduction and mobility in Britain'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this