Center For Migration Studies of New York, Inc. The International Migration Review

Migration, Mobility, and Occupational Achievement: The Case of Santiago, Chile
Author(s): Dagmar Raczynski

Source: The International Migration Review, Vol. 6, No. 2, Internal Migration in Latin
America (Summer, 1972), pp. 182-198
Published by: Center for Migration Studies of New York, Inc.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3002136
Accessed: 16-01-2017 04:01 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Center for Migration Studies of New York, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to The International Migration Review
This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Mon, 16 Jan 2017 04:01:54 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Migration, Mobility, and Occupational

Achievement: The Case of
Santiago, Chile
by Dagmar Raczynski*
Migration is the main factor that accounts for the rapid population
growth observable in Latin America's large cities. More than half of

the population increase in these cities has been attributed to migration
from the country and smaller towns. During the intercensal period 1952-
1960, Greater Santiago, the case of the present study, had an annual
rate of population growth of 3.9 percent. The growth of Greater Santiago
due to migration has been estimated at about 1.5 or 2.0 percent annually
(Elizaga, 1966:354).
Analyzing the adjustment of this large contingent of migrants to

Latin American cities is an important task. The literature on the conse?
quences of this large migration contains frequent conjectural statements
such as migration favors the growth of alienation and radicalism?

phenomena which in turn are seen as leading to political instability.
This effect of migration is derived from a supposed frustration of the

migrants' expectations for economic improvement and social mobility
in large cities or from the process of social-psychological maladjustment
allegedly inherent in the migration experience (Morse, 1965: 35-74;

Mangin, 1967: 65-97, Cornelius, 1969: 833-57). The present article is
limited to one aspect of the problem: the effect of migration on occupa?

tional mobility.1 The first step will be to determine if migrants are hand?
icapped in the occupational world of Greater Santiago; then further
analysis will be done to determine what variables account for the differ?
ences in occupational advancement between migrants and nonmigrants.
"'Dagmar Raczynski, Instituo de Sociologia, Universidad Catolica de Chile, Santiago de
Chile.
1. In the sociological literature the relationship between migration and mobility has been
approached from two different, although not independent, points of view. Reference
has been made to the impact of migration on the rates and patterns of mobility in a
community, at the same time that studies have been concerned with differences in occupa?
tional advancement of migrants and nonmigrants. See for example, Lipset's analysis of
the relationship between urbanization and social mobility in which he notes (1) how migrants
into large cities take over the lower status positions while native urbanities move up in
the occupational structure, and (2) why lower-class native urbanities are more successful
than low status migrants. (Lipset "Social Mobility and Urbanization" Rural Sociology 20,
Sept.-Dec, 1955, 220-228; Seymour M. Lipset and Reinhard Bendix Social Mobility in
Industrial Society, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1959, Chapter viii.)
182
MIGRATION, MOBILITY, AND OCCUPATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT 183
The dependent variable in this study is occupational mobility. It

is important to realize that occupational mobility encompasses two ele?
ments: social or career beginnings and occupational destinations. The

fact that a given variable is associated with upward and downward move?
ments relative to an initial position is ambiguous, since the variables

that determine where an individual starts may be different from those
that determine where he goes. Further, social or career beginnings are
an important determinant of mobility. With this in mind, rather than
focus on mobility (origin minus destination status), the present article
focuses on occupational achievement (destination status). Similarly,
rather than examine what influence migration exerts on upward mobility,

the present inquiry asks what influence migration exerts on occupational
achievement and how it modifies the effect of other variables, such
as social origins and education, on this achievement.2

This study has been planned essentially in two parts. The first is
descriptive, attempting to determine differentials in mobility of migrants
and non-migrants (e.g. what differences occur in upward and downward
mobility or in inter- and intragenerational mobility). Also part of this
initial analysis is ail investigation of the process of occupational achieve?
ment that has been occurring and how migrants have been affected as
compared to the natives, using education and social origins as controls.
The second part of the study consists of an analysis of four factors

that should be considered as potential independent variables: age at
arrival, length of residence in Greater Santiago, size of community at

birth, and importance of a farm background.
Source of Data
A probability sample of the population of heads of households in

Santiago has been used as the source of data for this study. Of a total
of 822 interviews collected, the present analysis considers only the 628
male heads of households born in Chile.3 Migrants are defined as all those
2. The ambiguities and hazards involved in the use of mobility as a dependent or indepen?
dent variable have been explicitly spelled out. (Blau and Duncan, 1967) The focus on
occupational achievement rather than occupational mobility also presents advantages for
comparative mobility research. It overcomes the issue, crucial to any meaningful compari?
son of patterns of mobility, of translatability and comparability of occupational titles.
Focusing on conditions that make for occupational success, rather than on patterns and
amounts of occupational mobility, "the dependent variable is no longer occupation as

such, nor occupational mobility strictly speaking, but the standing of the individual's occupa?
tion in the occupational system of his own country." (Duncan, 1966: 51-97) The emphasis
on occupational achievement asks for occupational status scales that are meaningful and
proper for their respective situation and avoids the resort to drastic simplifications, such
as the white-collar/blue-collar dichotomy, in comparative mobility research.
3. The data come from a multistage random sample of the population of heads of house?
holds in Santiago, Chile, 1961. (Hamuy, 1962)
184 THE INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION REVIEW
respondents who were born in Chile but outside Greater S
360). Nonmigrants are those respondents born in Gre

(N=268). Our interest is not in a description of the co
the migrant population in Greater Santiago which has
by other studies (Instituto de Economia, 1959; Herrick,
1966: 354-63; and 1970). According to these studies the typ

on arrival in Greater Santiago is a young adult with an urb
and some kind of prior contact with the capital, either dire
friends and relatives. Within Greater Santiago itself the t
is an adult between 30 and 50 years of age who has bee
for more than 10 years. Generally the migrants in our sa
to this characterization.
All migrants in our sample are similar in that they migrated from
a less to a more urbanized area. Unfortunately, since the data were
not directly collected for the purpose of analyzing the effect of migration
on occupational mobility, we lack information on the occupational status
of migrants before and immediately after arrival in Greater Santiago
and on the number and characteristics of the places the migrant lived
before coming to settle in Greater Santiago. The lack of information

on this last issue is specially unfortunate since migration in Chile and
toward Greater Santiago tends to be a stepwise process.
Migration and Mobility
Studies of other societies have shown that migration generally pro?

motes mobility of either an upward or downward direction with migrants
from rural areas and smaller cities experiencing less upward mobility
relative to their fathers and ultimately achieving a lower occupational
status than natives. The community of origin has been shown to exert
an effect on occupational achievement regardless of the size of commun?
ity of adult residence, with the larger the community of origin, the
higher the occupational achievement.
With regard to mobility within the occupational structure of San?
tiago, it has been suggested that two strata of occupations exist ? the
white and blue collar jobs ? and little contact between them occurs.4
The white-colar/blue-collar line seems to have formed a "barrier" to
upward as well as downward mobility. The city's overall amounts o
gross and exchange mobility are not small, but the majority of the mov
ments occur among the white collar and among the blue collar occupa?
tions and not between them. Looking at intergenerational movemen

within the occupational structure has revealed a net downward mobilit
in Santiago.
The data from this study have not shown that, in general, migrants
are more mobile than nonmigrants; but they do show that migrants
experience less upward and more downward mobility than do nonmigrants. On the basis of three white-collar and two blue-collar occupa?
tional groups5 it has been shown that migrants experience as much

intergenerational mobility as nonmigrants, but less upward mobility,
and that they do not experience as much intragenerational upward mobil?
ity as do the natives. (Table 1.)
Moreover, migrants tend to cross the blue-collar/white-collar barrier
less frequently in an upward direction and more frequently in a down?
ward direction than nonmigrants. In the intergenerational flow, 28 per?
cent of the migrants of blue collar origin move into white collar occupa?
tions, while 33 percent of the nonmigrants do; and 38 percent of the
migrants of white collar origin move into blue collar occupations in con?
trast to only 21 percent of the nonmigrants.
Tables 2a and 2b reveal occupational inheritance, short distance
mobility, and the white-collar/blue-collar barrier as important principles

that affect the process of occupational mobility of migrants as well as
nonmigrants. Table 3, which shows the intergenerational changes in occu?
pational distribution ? the index of dissimilarity between the distribution
4. Dagmar Raczynski "Tasas y Pautas de Movilidad Occupacional en el Gran Santiago,"
to be published in the Journal of the Instituto de Sociologia, Universidad Catolica de
Chile, during 1971. Distinguishing ten occupational groups, eight non-farm and two farm
occupational groups, intergenerational gross mobility (total percentage mobile) equals

79 per cent and intergenerational structural mobility (index of dissimilarity between father's
and respondent's occupational distribution) equals 28 per cent. Structural changes in

Chile tend to be downward rather than upward, leading to a trend of net downward
mobility in the sample. Abstracting from the effects of changes in the occupational structure
by the technique of social distance mobility ratios, the movements between the white-collar
and the blue-collar occupations fall short of expectation in every case but one, movement
from higher white-collar into service occupations. Further, the service, small proprietor
and clerical occupations tend to serve as bridges if a movement between the white-collar
and the blue-collar occupations occurs.

5. Any study of mobility encounters the problem of classification and ordering of occupa?
tional groups. In the present article we distinguish the five following occupational groups:
1. Low blue-collar occupations: nonskilled workers, domestic services, peddlers, farm
laborers.
2. High blue-collar occupations: skilled workers, artisans, foremen.
3. Low white-collar occupations: minor officials of the administration, clerical
employees, small farm as well as nonfarm proprietors.

4. Intermediate white-collar occupations: lower professionals, intermediate officials
of the administration, proprietors of small industrial and commercial establish?
ments.
5. High white-collar occupations: professionals, high officials of the admini

proprietors of large industrial establishments, large farm owners.
of fathers and that of sons represents structural mobility

there is an association between migration and the downgra
occupational structure.
TABLE 1
Mobility of Migrants and Nonmigrants in Greater Santiago.

(Percentages based on a Five Category Occupational Classification
Intergenerational Mob. Intragenerational Mob.

Mobility Father - 1961 Father - Early Career Early Career - 1961
Nmig. Mig. Nmig. Mig. Nmig. Mig.
Upward 29.8 24.2 16.0 14.7 33.1 26.6
Stable
36.7
Downward
36.4
33.5
39.4
39.4
37.2
44.6
60.9
48.1
65.7
6.0
7.7
TOTAL (N) (245) (335) (231) (312) (251) (335)
?For description of the occupational classification see foo

Father's occupation refers to his last or present occupati
Early career occupation refers to the respondent's o

entered the labor market before that age, and to hi
after the age of 21.

1961 occupation refers to the respondent's occupation
TABLE 2
Mobility From Father's Occupation to 1961 Occupation: Ratios of

Observed Frequency to Frequency Expected on the Assumption of Indepe
(social distance mobility ratio.)
A. Migrants 1961 Occupation

Father's Occup. 12 3
Low
.4
.0
Blue-collar
L7
L3
.6
Highblue-collar 2 1.0 L6 1.0 .4 .2

Low
white-collar
.9
1.0
L2
.8
.6
Interm. wh-collar 4 .6 .5 1.0 2^ 2.0
High white-collar 5 .4 .1 L2 1.4 3.8

B. Nonmigrants 1961 occupation
Father's occup. 12 3
Low
blue-collar
2X)
L5
.6
.3
.0
High blue collar 2 L2 L6 .8 .7 .2

Low white-collar 3 .8 .9 _L2_ .9 .8
Interm.
wh.-collar
.5
.6
1.1
L8
1.3
High white collar 5 .3 .2 .9 1.4 3j6

TABLE 3
Distribution by Occupational Groups of Fathers' and Respondents' Genera
Nonmigrants Migrants
Occup. groups Fathers Respondents Fathers Respondents
1 Low Blue-collar 21.2 18.0 20.0 27.5
2 High blue-collar 18.8 21.6 14.0 22.1
3 Low white-collar 26.5 31.4 38.5 30.7
4 Interm. wh.-collar 20.0 21.2 17.6 11.0
5 High white-collar 13.5 7.8 9.9 8.7
Index of dissimilarity (8.9) (15.6)
Migration and Occupational Achievement
On the average, migrants have slightly
ments than nonmigrants (24.7 SES vs.
achievement of migrants may be deceiving

characteristics of migrants, such as low
In general, migrants do tend to come

of the migrants have fathers in blue-c
only 40 percent of the non-migrants; and
of migrants have 6 or less years of sch

nonmigrants do. Table 4 indicates that a
origins the occupational achievements of
those of nonmigrants. The difference is
6, Occupational achievement is measured by a so

ranges from 1 to 87. (Raczynski, 1970: Appendix
7. To answer these questions we may take advantag
tion analysis. Multiple classification analysis expres
in terms of average deviations from the mean. B

in 1961 occupational achievements of migrants
origins, education and career beginnings, and o
when selected prior and intervening variables ar
analysis treats the dependent variable as quantitat
tive. Our dependent variable is 1961 occupationa
index of socioeconomic status of occupations ra
variables are father's occupation (X), father's ed
and early career occupation (W). The independ

status are measured by five levels of formal sc
assumes that the independent variables are addi
variable, an assumption which permits an estim
the other. For a more detailed description of m
Andrews, (1967) and Peter M. Blau and Otis
did not have a multiple classification program, ou

as dummy variables in a standard multiple regr
back to multiple classification form.
nonmigrants of high white-collar origin. The rather sma

between migrants and nonmigrants of low blue collar o
as will be seen later, to the large proportion of sons with farm

among the migrants of low blue-collar origin. Considering on
and nonmigrants with nonfarm, low blue-collar origin, the
achievement of migrants is on the average 31.70 SES points
of nonmigrants.
TABLE 4
Mean 1961 Occupational Achievements of Migrants and Nonmigrants by

Mean 1961 SESnetofeduc.
Mean 1961 SES* and early occup.

Father's Occup. Nmigr. Migr. Nmigr. Migr.
Low blue-collar 15.45 14.40 22.13 19.71
High blue-collar 20.57 16.36 23.19 18.89
Low white-collar 32.50 26.54 30.44 24.78
Middle white-collar 33.21 34.06 30.91 30.52
High white-collar 49.53 36.27 42.03 28.74

No
answer
24.03
27.98
25.90
25.98
?Constant father's education.
Possibly these lower achievements of the low blue collar migrants
may be due to their lower educational achievements when compare
to the nonmigrants of the same social origin.8 However, columns 3 and

4 of Table 4 show that even when controlling for education, the differ
ences in occupational achievements between migrants and nonmigrants
of similar social origins are not reduced.
Comparing migrants and nonmigrants at the same educational leve
shows an interesting result. It is only in the lower educational leve

that migrants do less well than nonmigrants. (Table 5.) This sugges
that lack of or low education is a greater handicap in later occupationa

achievements for migrants than for nonmigrants.
TABLE 5
Mean 1961 Occupational Achievements of Migrants and Nonmigrants by Edu
Mean 1961 SES Mean 1961 SESnetsoc. orig.
Education Nmigr. Migr. Nmigr. Migr.
Less than 6 years 11.36 7.02 14.93 10.15

6 years 10.63 13.30 14.07 13.92
7-11 years 28.15 26.83 27.88 24.15
12 years 39.82 42.07 36.39 39.78
More than 12 years 77.55 74.94 71.33 72.49
8. Among the migrants in our sample 32. 2 per cent have

among the nonmigrants this figure descends to 20.5

This is confirmed by the observations that the largest difference
in the percentage of upwardly mobile is between migrants and nonmi?
grants with less than 6 years of schooling. While only 19.4 percent of
the migrants with less than 6 years of schooling move up from their
origins, 43.8 percent of the nonmigrants do, suggesting that migrants
with little education take over the lower levels of the occupational struc?
ture in Santiago, while nonmigrants whose origins are in these lower
levels move up. Thus, lower status migration (migrants with low educa?
tion) appears to have a structural effect on occupational mobility, promot?
ing upward movement among men who never migrated. Comparison
of the occupational achievements of the migrants and nonmigrants who

began their careers at different levels confirms the finding that lower
status migrants experience a handicap in the occupational world of

Greater Santiago.
Looking at nonmigrants and migrants from higher educational levels

shows the opposite trend. At similar levels of higher education, migrants
are occupationally as successful as nonmigrants, and if we control for

differences in social origins, the highly educated migrants are even more
successful than the nonmigrants. It was also found that migrants who
began their careers at the higher white-collar occupations do better occu?
pationally than the nonmigrants, and this advantage of migrants with
high-status early jobs increases when social origins and education are
controlled.
In summary, migrants on the average experience as much mobility

as nonmigrants but not more, and they tend to end up with lower occupa?
tional status. The migrant's lower social origins do not account for these
differential occupational achievements. Low education and lower early
occupations are more important barriers to occupational achievement
for migrants than for nonmigrants. Migrants with higher education and
with higher career beginnings do as well occupationally as nonmigrants,
even a little better. The fact that only migrants from the lower educational
and/or early career levels do systematically less well than nonmigrants

suggests the existence of two types of migrants: those who migrate in
search of education and wider opportunities and those who are driven
from the rural areas and smaller towns by dearth of opportunities and land
Age at Arrival, Length of Residence

in Greater Santiago and Occupational Achievement.
One explanation for the overall lower occupational achievements

of the migrants has been that they have a disadvantage due to their
lack of acquaintance with the urban labor market and their problems
with assimilation into the urban environment. If this is an

factor in explaining the differential occupational achievem
grants and non-migrants, the following hypotheses should b
1) Migrants who arrived at an earlier age and who have
in Greater Santiago should have been more successful t

who arrived at a later age and have lived relatively brief
Santiago.
2) Migrants coming from rural areas and smaller communities would
achieve lower occupational status in Greater Santiago than those coming
from larger communities.
The first expectation has been tested by comparing migrants
by age at arrival and length of residence in Santiago, Age at arrival

has been studied by dividing the migrants into three groups: those who
arrived at age 15 or earlier, those arriving between 16-29 years of age,
and those migrants who arrived at age 30 or older. Table 6 shows that
although differences in mean occupational achievement between these
three groups were slight, those who came at age 15 or earlier have
done slightly better than those who arrived between ages 16-29.
TABLE 6
Age at Arrival in Santiago and Mean 1961 Occupational Achievements of

Controlling for Selected Variables.
Mean Mean 1961 SES, controlling
Age at arrival N 1961 SES X-V X-V-U X-V-U-W

Less than 16* 94 25.29 23.34 24.94 24.52
16-29 185 23.24 24.31 23.98 24.50
More than 30 81 27.56 27.20 26.26 25.55
?Includes 6 migrants with unknown age at
X: Father's occupation; V: Father's educat
However, this result is reduced and

have been controlled for by socio-e
difference is between migrants wh
30 or older and those who arrive
is explained by the higher educatio

migrated at an older age. These migr
tionally than the average non-migr
Analysis of length of residence a

more time in the urban setting sho
7 shows that there is no systemati
dence in Santiago and 1961 occupati
grants who do best are those who

6 years.

TABLE 7
Length of Residence in Santiago and Mean 1961 Occupational Achievemen

of Migrants, Controlling for Selected Variables.
Mean 1961 SES, controlling
Length of residence N Mean 1961 SES X-V* X-V-U* X-V-U-W*

Less than 6 years 27 30.36 28.07 29.02 29.64
6-10 years 41 20.87 24.16 23.67 22.60

11-20 years 84 22.89 24.65 23.68 21.40
21-30 years 92 27.67 27.13 26.48 26.65
More than 30 years 116 23.81 22.10 23.50 24.54
X: Father's occupation; V: Father's education; U: Education; W:
*And age and age at arrival in Santiago.
Their higher occupational achievements are not du

social origins, education, career beginnings, age, and
gesting that they may be due to some special cond
market in those years which we are not in a position

Hence, neither age at arrival nor length of residen
cantly to 1961 occupational achievements, indicating
tance with the new environment is not importan
achievements or that the age at which a man arrives in

and his length of residence in it are unimportant or u
of his acquaintance with the new environment.
Community of Birth and Occupational Achievement
Another indicator of the knowledge a migrant ma
urban environment is the size of his community a

the U.S. and Western Europe have shown that mig
communities do less well, other conditions being equ
were raised in larger communities. Assumptions b

are that occupational structures in smaller commu
they exert a constraint on knowledge about the oppo
cities and that the educational opportunities are lowe
thus giving migrants from these origins a handicap.
It appears from the data that the community of b
occupational achievement. However, it is not a direct
grants raised in medium and large cities have attained

tional achievements (even higher than the average oc
ments of nonmigrants in Greater Santiago). Migrant
and small towns have overall lower achievements t

various sized cities, but migrants born in rural areas
occupational achievements than those born in sma
192
THE INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION REVIEW
8.) Furthermore, these relationships are not altered by c

age at arrival, and length of residence in Greater Santia
TABLE 8
Community of Birth and Mean 1961 Occupational Achievements of M

Age, age
Mean arr., yrs.
Community of
Birth
1961 SES Residence
X-V*
X-V-U* X-V-U-W*
Rural
47
24.251
23.92
26.51
28.27
26.49
Town
139
17.78
18.01
20.97
23.61
22.90
Small city
68
26.01
25.62
21.56
22.83
23.34
Medium City
Large city
76
33.83
33.87
32.44
26.07
26.58
30
31.86
32.12
27.10
25.40
29.01
*And age and age at arrival in Santiago.

X: Father's occupation; V: Father's education; U: Education; W: Early occupation.
The control of socio-economic background does account for some

of the differences in occupational achievement based on community
of birth; yet pronounced differences still remain. The highest socioeconomic background, as indicated by father's occupation, corresponds
to migrants born in small cities (22% from blue-collar), followed by

those from rural areas (36% from blue-collar), and finally the lowest
in towns (42% in blue-collar). When socio-economic background (plus
age, age at arrival, and length of residence) are all controlled for, migrants
from medium sized cities have higher occupational achievements than

those from larger or smaller places.
Relating educational attainments of migrants to their community
of birth confirms the expectation that the smaller the place of origin,
the lower are the educational attainments. Specifically, about two-thirds
of those from small towns and rural areas have achieved only a primary
education (less than 7 years), while only one third of those born in
small cities receive less than 7 years of schooling.9 The highest education?
ally qualified migrants are those born in large cities where iust one
fourth have only had a primary school education and almost half have
attained 12 or more years.
When education is controlled for, in addition to the other factors,
migrants from medium and large sized cities do only slightly better
than migrants from small cities and towns. An especially interesting
result is that when education is controlled for, migrants born in rural
areas show the highest 1961 occupational achievements. Perhaps an

explanation for this result would be that the rural migrants had special
9. This much lower proportion may in part be due to the higher socioeconomic origin
of the migrants born in small cities.
initiative and motivation. Looking at early career achievements is one

way that this possiblity could be measured.
Control of early career experience and the prior status variables

reduces the mean 1961 occupational achievements of migrants born
in rural areas, but they still are occupationally more successful than
those born in towns and small cities. That is, migrants born in rural
areas are already more successful early in their careers, suggesting that
those born in rural areas who later migrate to Greater Santiago, may
do so in search of education and better opportunities while migrants

from towns and small cities are more driven from these places by dearth
of opportunities.
A summary of this section shows the following relationships between
community of birth and mean 1961 occupational achievements. Those

born in medium-sized cities tend to attain higher occupational status
because of advantages in educational qualifications which brings them
into more prestigeous early occupations. Migrants born in large cities
also enjoy higher occupational achievements because of advantages in
educational qualifications; but they have an additional advantage, a
superiority in the ability to take advantage of occupational opportunities
once they have begun their career. The higher occupational achievements
of migrants born in rural areas cannot be attributed to education and
early career advantages, raising the possibility that their success is due
to some special initiative and motivation.
Farm Background and Occupational Achievement
A comparison of occupational achievements of those migrants with

a farm background with those from a nonfarm background shows that
the farm background is not a handicap. Those with a farm background
have been analyzed in two groups ? farm laborers and farm owners.10
The farm laborers have been compared with those nonfarm migrants
from low blue-collar occupations, while the farm owners have been com?
pared to the low white-collar migrant.
The mean 1961 occupational status of sons of farm laborers is 9.23
(Table 9), slightly lower than that of sons of fathers in low blue collar
occupations. Control of father's education, holding constant some of
the heterogeneity that may exist within each occupational origin group,
reveals that sons of farm laborers do almost as well occupationally as
sons of nonfarm, low blue-collar origin. Further, we observe that once
a son of a farm laborer has attained an educational level similar to
that of a son of low blue-collar father, his farm background is no ad
10. For a discussion of the socioeconomic position of the farm occupational groups rel
to the nonfarm occupational groups see Raczynski, (1970: Appendix B).
194
THE INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION REVIEW
tional handicap for his occupational achievement. The initia

in occupational achievements between respondents of farm
nonfarm low blue-collar origins is due to poorer educationa
tions of the former group. Moreover, once a son of a farm
finished his education and begun his career at a similar
of blue collar origins, he is occupationally more successful th

Farm laboring background, therefore, affects the opportuni
educational qualifications. But once these are attained, no fu
icap is observed.
TABLE 9
Farm Background and Mean 1961 Occupational Achievements.

Mean
Father's occup. N 1961 SES V V-U V-U-W

Farm laborer
Farm owner
Low blue collar
Low white collar
42
9.23
13.75
22,48
25.07
107
26.83
28.23
29.82
29.83
79
11.25
14.78
22.36
23.97
129
34.96
31.32
29.66
27.96
Migrants'
Mean
Early occup.
Farm laborer
40
6.00
8.37
14.02
Farm owner
16
18.61
19.44
24.30
1961 SES
x-v X-V-U
Low Blue collar
189
11.43
13.54
18.66
Low white collar
179
41.65
39.66
37.01
X: Father's occupation; V: Father's education; U: Education; W: Early occupation.
The situation is different for those respondents who themselves

begin their occupational career at a farm laborer level. The mean 1961
occupational achievement of these respondents is 5.43 SES points below
that of men with a nonfarm low blue-collar early occupation. The differ?
ence in mean occupational achievement between these two groups does
not decrease significantly when social origins and/or educational attain?
ments are controlled. Thus, respondents who begin their career as farm
laborers tend to experience a handicap in the occupational world of

Greater Santiago which cannot be attributed to their social origins or
educational limitations. Even those who have attained educational levels
similar to nonfarm low blue collar career beginners have achieved lower
1961 occupational statuses.
In summary, to be from a farm laboring background does not

constitute a handicap for occupational achievement beyond some disad?
vantage in getting an education, but to begin an occupational career

as a farm laborer and later move into the occupational world of Greater
Santiago constitutes a handicap beyond those that can be explained by
lower educational qualifications.
A similar pattern is observable among those with a farm owning
background and those with a farm-owner early occupation. In Table

9, we observe that a son of a farm owner does better occupationally
than men of blue-collar origins and worse than men of low white-collar
origin. However the differential occupational achievements of respon?
dents with farm-owning and those with low white-collar backgrounds
can be attributed to differences in access to education. If this handicap
is eliminated, the occupational chances of sons of farm owners are as

good and even better than those of sons of low white-collar origins.
An early career farm-laborer experience constitutes a handicap
beyond limitations in opportunities to acquire education. This situation
is similar for respondents who had an early occupational experience

as farm owners. The small size of this group does not permit any conclu?
sions. Nevertheless, the data suggest that an early career farm-owner

occupational experience is a handicap to later achievements in Greater
Santiago. Respondents with a farm-owner experience do less well occupa?
tionally, by 8.22 SES points, than those whose fathers were farm owners.
Their occupational achievements are considerably lower (by 23.04 points)
than those whose early job is low white-collar. This difference diminishes
to 12.71 SES points when social origins and education are controlled.
That is, education is an important factor in the handicap of respondents
with early farm-owning experience in the occupational world of Greater
Santiago, but it is not sufficient enough to account for this handicap.
Conclusions.
The aim of the present article is an account of the relationship
between migration and occupational mobility in one of Latin America's
large cities: Santiago de Chile. The analysis began by observing that

migrants on the average experience as much mobility as nonmigrants,
but not more, and that they experience more downward mobility. We
saw that the process of occupational mobility of migrants as well as
nonmigrants is checked by a) the principles of occupational inheritance

and short distance mobility; b) a barrier to upward as well as downward
movement along the white-collar/blue-collar line (moving up this barrier
is more difficult for migrants while moving down is more difficult for
nonmigrants); and c) intergenerational changes in the occupational struc-
ture, which in Santiago point toward net downward
changes tend to exert a larger constraint on the occupat

process of migrants).
Thus, these findings on the differential mobility of
nonmigrants in Greater Santiago's male head of house
confirm the frequent assumption about a mobility disad

grants in Latin America's large cities.
Yet our analysis also shows that it is dangerous to com
and nonmigrants as if each were a homogeneous group;
tant to distinguish types of migrants and nonmigrants.
education, early job, and community of birth are imp
in this respect. They are powerful determinants of occu
ment and help to explain in part the differential occupa
ments of migrants and nonmigrants. The data indicat
their social origin, migrants do less well occupationally
nonmigrants. Migrants who have low educational and low
achieve lower occupational statuses than comparable non
high status migrants (migrants with high educational and
do as well occupationally as nonmigrants and even a littl
only low status migrants experience a handicap in the occ
of Greater Santiago. This finding suggests that the influ
at the bottom may have a structural effect on the proce
in Santiago; the low status migrants take over the lower
in the city while the native urbanites move up on t
ladder.
The differential occupational achievements of migrants and native

urbanites have been attributed to differences in acquaintance with the
occupational possibilities and sophistication of the labor market. The

data show that neither age at arrival in Santiago nor length of residence
within it are related to occupational achievements, place of origin, educa?
tion and early occupation. Community of birth is revealed as an impor?
tant variable that affects the migrant's occupational achievement. At

similar levels of social origins, migrants born in medium sized cities,
large cities and rural areas attain the highest occupational statuses,
but for different reasons. Those born in medium sized cities tend to
attain higher occupational status because of their advantage in acquiring

education; those born in large cities seem to have some kind of superiority
in the ability to take advantage of the occupational opportunities pre?
sented to them once they begin their career, that is, over and above
advantages in attaining education. Neither advantages in education nor

in career beginnings account for the higher achievements of those born
in rural areas, raising the possibility that their success is due to some
special initiative or motivation. Farm background (fathers in farm occu-
pations) is no handicap in the occupational world of Santiago either.

Those who do worse occupationally in Santiago are migrants from non-
farm occupations in towns and small cities, and not rural-
farm-background migrants as it is often assumed. Yet, an early farm

occupation is a handicap over and above differences in social origin
and education.
The analysis, therefore, confirms in part and for one specific cas
Santiago de Chile, the common assumption about migrant-native socio
economic differences in Latin America's large cities. Yet it also specif
that this assumption is valid only for certain segments of the migran
population: low status migrants from towns and small cities, and migran
who themselves begin their career in farm occupations. Many question
for which we do not yet have answers emerge: what is the relative imp
tance of these migrants in the migration streams toward Santiago and
in the population of Santiago? What are the personal feelings of these
migrants in regard to Santiago's stratification structure and their posit
within it? How do they perceive their opportunities for occupatio
mobility and economic improvement?

Needless to say, this study is only a first approximation, based on
limited data, of the relationship between migration and occupation

mobility in Santiago. The findings cannot be taken as accomplishe
facts; they can only suggest relationships and call for an analysis
the subject based on occupational and migration life histories. Further
it is important to analyze not only the occupational opportunities
migrants and nonmigrants in Santiago, but also the occupational caree
of migrants and nonmigrants in more and less urbanized areas. Su
an analysis would have to include as variables the structural characterist

of the places of origin and destination. Only such an analysis can give
us a complete picture of the relationship between geographic and soci
movements, phenomena which is central to an understanding of o

developing societies.
References
Andrews, F. et al.
1967 Multiple Classification Analysis. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Survey Research Center,
University of Michigan.
Blau, Peter M., and Otis D. Duncan
1966 "Methodological Issues in the Analysis of Mobility," in Neil Smelser and

Seymour M. Lipset (eds.) Social Structure and Mobility in Economic Development.
Chicago: Aldine, pp. 51-97.

Cornelius, Wayne A.
1969 "Urbanization as an Agent in Latin American Political Instability: The Case

of Mexico." The American Political Science Review, 63 (September): 833-57.
Elizaga, Juan C.
1966 "A Study of Migration to Greater Santiago," Demography, 3 (F
Elizaga, Juan C.
1970 Migraciones a las Areas Metropolitanas de America Latina. Centro
de Demografia (CELADE), Santiago de Chile.
Glass, David V. (ed.)

1954 Social Mobility in Britain. London: Routledge and Kegan Pau
Hamuy, Eduardo
1962 "La Investigacion sobre Estratificacion y Movilidad Social Real
Santiago," Documento 15, Provisional, Union Panamericana. J
Herrick, Bruce H.
1965 Urban Migration and Economic Development in Chile. The M.I.T. Press
Instituto de Economia, Universidad de Chile
1959 "La Poblacion del Gran Santiago," Publicacion 19, Santiago de Chile.
Lipset, Seymour M.
1955 "Social Mobility and Urbanization," Rural Sociology 20 (September-December):
220-228.
Lipset, Seymour M. and Reinhard Bendix

1959 Social Mobility in Industrial Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Macisco, John J., Et. al.
"The Effect of Labor Force Participation on the Relation Between Migratio

Status and Fertility" Millbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 48:51-79 (January).
(January).
Mangan, William
1967 "Latin American Squatter Settlements: A Problem and a Solution," Latin America
Research Review 2, 3 (Summer): 65-97.
Morse, Richard M.
1965 "Recent Research on Latin American Urbanization: A Selective Survey with

Commentary," Latin America Research Review 1, l(Fall): 35-74.
Raczynski, Dagmar
1970 "Occupational Mobility and Occupational Achievement in Santiago de Chile".

Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
Raczynski, Dagmar
1971 "Tasas y Pautas de Movilidad Ocupacional en el Gran Santiago," Forthcoming,
Journal of the Instituto de Sociologia, Universidad Catolica de Chile.
Rogoff, Natalie
1953 Recent Trends in Occupational Mobility. New York: The Free Press.

Center For Migration Studies of New York, Inc. The International Migration Review

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Center For Migration Studies of New York, Inc. The International Migration Review

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Migration, Mobility, and Occupational Achievement: The Case of Santiago, Chile

Author(s): Dagmar Raczynski

Migration, Mobility, and Occupational

growth observable in Latin America's large cities. More than half of

Analyzing the adjustment of this large contingent of migrants to

such as migration favors the growth of alienation and radicalism?

This effect of migration is derived from a supposed frustration of the

allegedly inherent in the migration experience (Morse, 1965: 35-74;

limited to one aspect of the problem: the effect of migration on occupa?

icapped in the occupational world of Greater Santiago; then further

MIGRATION, MOBILITY, AND OCCUPATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT 183

The dependent variable in this study is occupational mobility. It

ments: social or career beginnings and occupational destinations. The

ments relative to an initial position is ambiguous, since the variables

focuses on occupational achievement (destination status). Similarly,

rather than examine what influence migration exerts on upward mobility,

as social origins and education, on this achievement.2

The second part of the study consists of an analysis of four factors

arrival, length of residence in Greater Santiago, size of community at

A probability sample of the population of heads of households in

amounts of occupational mobility, "the dependent variable is no longer occupation as

holds in Santiago, Chile, 1961. (Hamuy, 1962)

184 THE INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION REVIEW

respondents who were born in Chile but outside Greater S

360). Nonmigrants are those respondents born in Gre

1966: 354-63; and 1970). According to these studies the typ

is an adult between 30 and 50 years of age who has bee

for more than 10 years. Generally the migrants in our sa

a less to a more urbanized area. Unfortunately, since the data were

before coming to settle in Greater Santiago. The lack of information

Migration and Mobility

Studies of other societies have shown that migration generally pro?

The white-colar/blue-collar line seems to have formed a "barrier" to

upward as well as downward mobility. The city's overall amounts o

tions and not between them. Looking at intergenerational movemen

MIGRATION, MOBILITY, AND OCCUPATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT 185

tional groups5 it has been shown that migrants experience as much

Tables 2a and 2b reveal occupational inheritance, short distance

mobility, and the white-collar/blue-collar barrier as important principles

occupational groups, intergenerational gross mobility (total percentage mobile) equals

and respondent's occupational distribution) equals 28 per cent. Structural changes in

and the blue-collar occupations occurs.

2. High blue-collar occupations: skilled workers, artisans, foremen.

3. Low white-collar occupations: minor officials of the administration, clerical

employees, small farm as well as nonfarm proprietors.

5. High white-collar occupations: professionals, high officials of the admini

186 THE INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION REVIEW

of fathers and that of sons represents structural mobility

Mobility of Migrants and Nonmigrants in Greater Santiago.

Intergenerational Mob. Intragenerational Mob.

TOTAL (N) (245) (335) (231) (312) (251) (335)

?For description of the occupational classification see foo

Early career occupation refers to the respondent's o

after the age of 21.

Mobility From Father's Occupation to 1961 Occupation: Ratios of

A. Migrants 1961 Occupation

Highblue-collar 2 1.0 L6 1.0 .4 .2

Interm. wh-collar 4 .6 .5 1.0 2^ 2.0

High white-collar 5 .4 .1 L2 1.4 3.8

High blue collar 2 L2 L6 .8 .7 .2

High white collar 5 .3 .2 .9 1.4 3j6

MIGRATION, MOBILITY, AND OCCUPATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT 187