In Mexico, more than 40 percent of the population is under the official poverty line. In the same time, Mexico is characterized by a society in which the socioeconomic origin condition is highly related to life achievement, especially on the extremes of the socioeconomic distribution (Vélez-Grajales et al, 2014). On this matter, empirical evidence shows that once the population is divided by quintiles, 48 out of 100 that were born in the lowest quintile stay there for the rest of their lives. Above the rest of them, i.e. those who are able to move to another quintile, 22 reach the second quintile. In summary, previous result leaves in poverty 70 percent of those with origin in the first quintile. It has to be noted that only 4 out of 100 that were born in the lowest quintile will move up to the top quintile.
On the other hand, above those that were born in the top quintile, 52 out of each 100 stay there for the rest of their lives. Moreover, above those that experience downward mobility, 28 out of each 100 move to the fourth quintile, i.e., 80 out of each 100 that were born in the top quintile will stay at least in the fourth quintile. Finally, it has to be noted that only 2 out of 100 that were born in the top quintile will move down to the lowest quintile. This means social mobility is very low.
This project is part of the European Facility for a research program on Inequalities in Developing and Emerging Countries, which is coordinated by the AFD. Financed by the Development Cooperation Instrument of the European Union, this facility enables to implement 20 research projects over the 2017-2020 period, in partnership with donors and research centers from the South to the North.
How economic inequality and social mobility are related? Is it possible that the highest levels of socioeconomic persistence (lower social mobility) in terms of origin determined, in part, both perception and tolerance against economic inequality? The Mexican case, which is one where socioeconomic regional disparities are significant, represents a good option to analyze if such relationship holds. Moreover, there is still a gap in the literature for explaining the mechanisms behind the observed negative relationship.
Additionally, an important and relevant unanswered question for the Mexican case is the perception of Mexicans about inequality and social mobility levels. What if Mexicans think that the country is one of equal opportunities and results for all? Policy implications should be different among different perception scenarios. In any case, it is necessary to get information in order to understand the mechanisms at household and local level that explain the potential distance between perception and reality.
First, using a multivariate analysis method, relative intergenerational mobility can be estimated for each macro-region of the country. Several inequality measures will be estimated, but for several points in time. The researchers have chosen to do so because it is possible that not current but origin economic inequality is the relevant one for intergenerational social mobility. Once the relationship is estimated, a discussion on the mechanisms behind it should be developed. The empirical analysis will be mainly based on the “Encuesta ESRU de Movilidad Social en México 2017”.
Additionally, work with groups in 4 different cities with different levels of socioeconomic performance will be held. The researchers expect to do fieldwork in at least two different spots within each city: one for a group of medium-high socioeconomic level and one of medium-low socioeconomic level. The interview will include a measure for both inequality and social mobility. In such a way, the researchers will be able to understand in a better way the relationship between perceptions and objective measures on the variables of research interest.
See this project's 2 minutes pitch from Alice Krozer, researcher at Colegio de México:
This project is carried out with the support of the European Union
The content of this project information sheet falls under the sole responsibility of the AFD and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the European Union.