INHERITING THE JOB: INTERGENERATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY AND CLOSURE IN TÜRKİYE

Öz

This paper analyzes intergenerational occupational status transmission and mobility at national and regional levels using micro-data from the 2021 Family Structure Survey (TAYA). Through transition matrices and odds ratios, we examined the tendency of children to remain in their fathers' occupational groups. Our results indicate strong persistence at both the top and bottom of the occupational hierarchy. Professional occupations and skilled agricultural jobs exhibit the highest closure, while labor exiting agriculture primarily shifts to the "open channel" service sector. Regional patterns are heterogeneous: agricultural ties are dissolving in the Industrial West (7%), but property-based closure remains strong in the East, Central, and Coastal West (30-34%). High entry barriers for professional roles persist nationwide, independent of development levels. Ultimately, while structural transformation has increased absolute mobility, inequalities transmitted via education and property continue to restrict relative mobility.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Intergenerational Occupational Mobility
• Occupational Closure
• Regional Inequality
• Türkiye.

INHERITING THE JOB: INTERGENERATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY AND CLOSURE IN TÜRKİYE

Öz

Bu çalışma, 2021 Aile Yapısı Araştırması (TAYA) mikro verilerini kullanarak ulusal ve bölgesel düzeyde kuşaklararası mesleki statü aktarımını ve hareketliliğini analiz etmektedir. Geçiş matrisleri ve Odds Oranları aracılığıyla, çocukların babalarıyla aynı meslek grubunda kalma eğilimleri incelenmiştir. Sonuçlar, mesleki hiyerarşinin hem en üstünde hem de en altında güçlü bir kalıcılığa işaret etmektedir. Profesyonel meslekler ve nitelikli tarım işleri en yüksek kapanmayı sergilerken, tarımdan ayrılan işgücünün ağırlıklı olarak "açık kanal" işlevi gören hizmet sektörüne kaydığı gözlenmiştir. Bölgesel kalıplar heterojen bir yapı sunmaktadır: Sanayileşmiş Batı'da tarımsal bağlar çözülürken (%7), Doğu, Orta ve Kıyı Batı bölgelerinde mülkiyete dayalı kapanma güçlü kalmaya devam etmektedir (%30-34). Profesyonel roller için yüksek giriş engelleri, kalkınma düzeylerinden bağımsız olarak ülke genelinde varlığını sürdürmektedir. Nihayetinde, yapısal dönüşüm mutlak hareketliliği artırmış olsa da, eğitim ve mülkiyet yoluyla aktarılan fırsat eşitsizlikleri göreli hareketliliği kısıtlamaya devam etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kuşaklararası Mesleki Hareketlilik
• Mesleki Kapanma
• Bölgesel Eşitsizlik
• Türkiye

Kaynakça

1. Akarçay-Gürbüz, A. and Polat, S. (2017) "Schooling Opportunities and Intergenerational Educational Mobility in Turkey: An IV Estimation Using Census Data", The Journal of Development Studies, 53(9): 1396-1413.
2. Aydemir, A. and Yazıcı, H. (2017) "Intergenerational Education Mobility and the Level of Development: Evidence from Turkey", SSRN Electronic Journal.
3. Azam, M. (2015) "Intergenerational Occupational Mobility among Men in India", The Journal of Development Studies, 51(10): 1386-1405.
4. Bavaro, M. and Tullio, F. (2022) "Intergenerational Mobility Measurement with Latent Transition Matrices", The Journal of Economic Inequality, 20: 371-394.
5. Björklund, A. and Jäntti, M. (2000) "Intergenerational Mobility of Socio-Economic Status in Comparative Perspective", Nordic Journal of Political Economy, 26: 3-32.
6. Black, S. E. and Devereux, P. J. (2010) "Recent Developments in Intergenerational Mobility", O. Ashenfelter and D. Card (eds.) Handbook of Labor Economics, Vol. 4, Amsterdam, Elsevier.
7. Bossuroy, T. and Cogneau, D. (2013) "Social Mobility in Five African Countries", Review of Income and Wealth, 59: 84-110.
8. Checchi, D. (1997) "Education and Intergenerational Mobility in Occupations: A Comparative Study", The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 56(3): 331-351.

9. Choudhary, A. and Singh, A. (2018) "Examination of Intergenerational Occupational Mobility among Indian Women", International Journal of Social Economics, 45(7): 1071-1091.
10. Constant, A. F. and Zimmermann, K. F. (2003) "Occupational Choice across Generations", IZA Discussion Paper No. 975, Institute of Labor Economics.
11. Demirtaş, N. M. and Torul, O. (2024) "Intergenerational Income Mobility in Turkey", The Journal of Economic Inequality, 22(1): 185-209.
12. De Pablos Escobar, L., and Gil Izquierdo, M. (2016) "Intergenerational Educational and Occupational Mobility in Spain: Does Gender Matter?", British Journal of Sociology of Education, 37(5): 721-742.
13. Erikson, R. and Goldthorpe, J. H. (1992) "The Constant Flux: A Study of Class Mobility in Industrial Societies", Oxford, Clarendon Press.
14. Hout, M. and Guest, A. M. (2013) "Intergenerational Occupational Mobility in Great Britain and the United States since 1850: Comment", American Economic Review, 103(5): 2021-2040.
15. Long, J. and Ferrie, J. (2013) "Intergenerational Occupational Mobility in Great Britain and the United States since 1850", American Economic Review, 103(4): 1109-1137.
16. Mercan, M. A. and Barlin, H. (2016) "Intergenerational Income Elasticity in Turkey: A New Estimate", International Journal of Research in Business & Social Science, 5(3): 30-37.
17. Reddy, A. B. (2015) "Changes in Intergenerational Occupational Mobility in India: Evidence from National Sample Surveys, 1983-2012", World Development, 76: 329-343.
18. Sen, K. (2024) "Moving up the Ladder: The Spatial Determinants of Intergenerational Occupational Mobility in Rural India", Journal of Social and Economic Development, 26(S1): 28-49.
19. Song, X., Massey, C. G., Rolf, K. A., Ferrie, J. P., Rothbaum, J. L., and Xie, Y. (2020) "Long-term Decline in Intergenerational Mobility in the United States since the 1850s", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(1): 251-258.
20. Turkish Statistical Institute (TurkStat) (2021) "Family Structure Survey (TAYA) Micro Data Set", Ankara.
21. Xie, Y. and Killewald, A. (2013) "Intergenerational Occupational Mobility in Great Britain and the United States since 1850: Comment", American Economic Review, 103(5): 2003-2020.