Class and health in changing societies: the need for novel approaches

E. Lahelma, O. Rahkonen
{"title":"Class and health in changing societies: the need for novel approaches","authors":"E. Lahelma, O. Rahkonen","doi":"10.1136/jech-2019-213325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Surprisingly little attention has been devoted to the theories, concepts and measurement of social class and socioeconomic position in social epidemiology. This is particularly surprising as the number studies on health inequalities has increased exponentially over the decades.1 Guidelines have though been proposed for the use of socioeconomic position in health research and we have learnt a lot about the nature, measurement and use of various socioeconomic indicators.2–4 However, the suggested socioeconomic classifications have often been pragmatic, based on occupation, education and income, grouped hierarchically following statistical authorities or ad hoc principles.\n\nSo far, theoretical and conceptual issues and their integration to empirical analysis of health inequalities have remained largely a white spot. The theoretical work within the sociology of class has had almost non-existent consequences for research on health inequalities. Similarly, research on socioeconomic inequalities in health has seldom been considered in the sociology of class. Cross-fertilisation between theoretical and empirical work as well as between sociology of class and social epidemiology would deepen our understanding of social class and socioeconomic position in the production of health inequalities.\n\nThe Marxian and the Weberian theories are the dominant social class traditions and these have influenced some subsequent class schemes and classifications. Wright’s neo-Marxian class theory draws on the Marxian tradition in its emphasis on people’s location in the occupational hierarchy based on production relations as well as power and control over access to economic and productive resources.5 Additionally, Wright’s theory draws on the Weberian tradition in its emphasis on skill and expertise, rendering the theory a …","PeriodicalId":15778,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2019-213325","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Surprisingly little attention has been devoted to the theories, concepts and measurement of social class and socioeconomic position in social epidemiology. This is particularly surprising as the number studies on health inequalities has increased exponentially over the decades.1 Guidelines have though been proposed for the use of socioeconomic position in health research and we have learnt a lot about the nature, measurement and use of various socioeconomic indicators.2–4 However, the suggested socioeconomic classifications have often been pragmatic, based on occupation, education and income, grouped hierarchically following statistical authorities or ad hoc principles. So far, theoretical and conceptual issues and their integration to empirical analysis of health inequalities have remained largely a white spot. The theoretical work within the sociology of class has had almost non-existent consequences for research on health inequalities. Similarly, research on socioeconomic inequalities in health has seldom been considered in the sociology of class. Cross-fertilisation between theoretical and empirical work as well as between sociology of class and social epidemiology would deepen our understanding of social class and socioeconomic position in the production of health inequalities. The Marxian and the Weberian theories are the dominant social class traditions and these have influenced some subsequent class schemes and classifications. Wright’s neo-Marxian class theory draws on the Marxian tradition in its emphasis on people’s location in the occupational hierarchy based on production relations as well as power and control over access to economic and productive resources.5 Additionally, Wright’s theory draws on the Weberian tradition in its emphasis on skill and expertise, rendering the theory a …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不断变化的社会中的阶级和健康:对新方法的需要
令人惊讶的是,很少有人关注社会流行病学中社会阶层和社会经济地位的理论、概念和测量。这尤其令人惊讶,因为关于健康不平等的研究在过去几十年中呈指数增长不过,已经提出了在卫生研究中使用社会经济地位的准则,我们对各种社会经济指标的性质、测量和使用也有了很多了解。2-4然而,建议的社会经济分类往往是务实的,以职业、教育和收入为基础,按照统计权威或特别原则分层分组。迄今为止,理论和概念问题及其与卫生不平等的实证分析的结合在很大程度上仍然是一个空白点。阶级社会学的理论工作对健康不平等的研究几乎没有任何影响。同样,阶级社会学很少考虑健康方面的社会经济不平等的研究。理论和实证工作之间以及阶级社会学和社会流行病学之间的相互融合将加深我们对社会阶级和社会经济地位在产生卫生不平等方面的理解。马克思主义和韦伯理论是占主导地位的社会阶级传统,这些理论影响了后来的一些阶级方案和分类。赖特的新马克思主义阶级理论借鉴了马克思主义传统,强调人们在基于生产关系的职业等级中的位置,以及对获得经济和生产资源的权力和控制此外,赖特的理论在强调技能和专业知识方面借鉴了韦伯的传统,使该理论成为……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Early adulthood socioeconomic trajectories contribute to inequalities in adult diet quality, independent of childhood and adulthood socioeconomic position Education-related inequalities in disability during the last years of life: a full population register-based study Impact of increasing workforce racial diversity on black-white disparities in cardiovascular disease mortality Gender-specific aspects of socialisation and risk of cardiovascular disease among community-dwelling older adults: a prospective cohort study using machine learning algorithms and a conventional method Poverty trajectories and child and mother well-being outcomes in Ireland: findings from an Irish prospective cohort
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1