Workers' mobility across occupations: complementary insights from the human capital, migration and social stratification literature

Cardoso, Ben Hur Francisco; Hartmann, Dominik Article Workers' mobility across occupations: complementary insights from the human capital, migration and social stratification literature EconomiA Provided in Cooperation with: The Brazilian Association of Postgraduate Programs in Economics (ANPEC), Rio de Janeiro Suggested Citation: Cardoso, Ben Hur Francisco; Hartmann, Dominik (2023) : Workers' mobility across occupations: complementary insights from the human capital, migration and social stratification literature, EconomiA, ISSN 2358-2820, Emerald, Bingley, Vol. 24, Iss. 1, pp. 115-133, https://doi.org/10.1108/ECON-08-2022-0115 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/329545 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Workers’mobility across occupations: Complementary insights from the human capital, migration and social stratification literature. Ben Hur Francisco Cardoso and Dominik Hartmann Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianopolis, Brazil Abstract Purpose –A growing body of literature shows how intragenerational occupational mobility affects economic dynamics and social stratification. In this article the authors aim to carry out a structured review of this literature, outlining a systemic overview for more comprehensive research and public policies. Design/methodology/approach –The authors use methods from structured literature reviews and network science to reveal the segmented research landscape of occupational mobility literature. The authors made an indepth analysis of the most important papers to summarize the main contributions of the literature and identify research gaps. Findings –The authors reveal a segmented research landscape around three communities: (1) human capital theory, (2) social stratification theory and (3) migration studies. Human capital research uses microfounded mathematical modeling to understand the relationship between skills and mobility. Nevertheless, it cannot explain social segregation and generally does not focus on the importance of local labor demand. Social stratification research can explain the social and institutional barriers to occupational mobility. Migration research studies the relationship between migration, labor demand and social mobility. Originality/value –This paper is the first literature review that uses network analysis to perform a systematic review of the intragenerational occupational mobility literature. Moreover, this review identifies opportunities for mutual learning and research gaps in the research landscape. Keywords Occupational mobility, Social mobility, Systematic literature review Paper type Literature review 1. Introduction The volume of papers on intragenerational occupational mobility grows every decade. And it could not be different. The workers’occupations are a central element in defining their income, social status and well-being in general (Sacchi, Kriesi, & Buchmann, 2016). Consequently, the understanding of which is the individual, institutional and structural barrier to workers’movements between occupations has great importance in developing public policies that aim to make prosperity accessible to all. Furthermore, the costs associated with reallocating workers between occupations are particularly relevant considering the recent literature on labor market polarization, which suggests how technological changes have altered the demand for tasks and how this has impacted social opportunities (Cortes, 2019). Workers’ mobility across occupations 115 © Ben Hur Francisco Cardoso and Dominik Hartmann. Published in EconomiA. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/ legalcode The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/1517-7580.htm Received 10 August 2022 Revised 16 February 2023 Accepted 20 February 2023 EconomiA Vol. 24 No. 1, 2023 pp. 115-133 Emerald Publishing Limited e-ISSN: 2358-2820 p-ISSN: 1517-7580 DOI 10.1108/ECON-08-2022-0115 Several research communities in economics and sociology analyze individual and structural factors that explain the mobility of workers across occupations. However, a structured literature review that (1) identifies different research communities, (2) brings their insights together, (3) outlines what they can learn from each other and (3) reveals which research gaps persist are still missing. This matters because each community focuses on different aspects of occupational mobility and provides different methods; however, policymakers must consider them simultaneously to design effective measures to promote occupational and social mobility. This work will review articles on intragenerational, rather than intergenerational, mobility. The literature on intergenerational mobility studies the change in occupation from parents to children. On the other hand, the literature on intragenerational mobility explores the change in occupations of the same person throughout their career. The study of intergenerational mobility is extremely important to understand long-term changes and the persistence of social status in the same families. On the other hand, the scope of this article is to review works that study changes in occupations in a person’s career. Thus, it seeks to understand the changes in the type of occupations and social status throughout a person’s life. Using methods from structured literature reviews and network science, we identify three (not mutually exclusive) research communities whose previous and ongoing research efforts scrutinize the individual and structural constraints for intragenerational mobility: (1) the economic theory of human capital, (2) the sociological theory of social stratification and (3) migration studies. However, despite a surprisingly low level of cross-citations (See Figure 1), we show that the different approaches can complement and learn from each other. The cornerstone of human capital literature is that employers select workers by their productivity, but there is no productive person in general (Gathmann & Sch€ onberg, 2010). For example, a person can be very productive as an engineer but not as a software developer; in other words, a worker’s productivity in a job cannot be fully transferred to other jobs. With this picture in mind, there is a long debate on how much specific human capital belongs to the firm, industry or occupation (Gueorgui Kambourov & Imanovskii, 2009). This paper will review studies that analyze occupation-specific skills and the consequences of occupational mobility on productivity. From the perspective of the sociological theory of social stratification, occupations are the fundamental stratification positions by which several inequality patterns are produced and reproduced (Sacchi et al., 2016). Within this context, occupations are characterized by their status or prestige. So, individuals can only face upward and downward social mobility through occupational mobility. This literature tends to study how individual and institutional factors contribute to the concentration of a group in some occupations rather than others and how these factors constrain the movement of workers among occupations. This line of research also highlights the importance of gender and race barriers to upward occupational mobility. The migration studies on occupational mobility focus on human capital and stratification aspects (Sim on, Ramos, & Sanrom a, 2014). Primarily, they study how immigrants’ premigration factors constrain their new occupation opportunities in the host country after migration. Additionally, they study how immigrants can be assimilated into the host country’s labor market and which individual characteristics, including human capital, can facilitate it. Generally, they indicate a segmented labor market for immigrants; occupations also stratify immigrants from the native population. There is also literature on the internal migration of workers within the same country (Fielding, 1992). The originality of this work lies in the fact that it is the first literature review on intragenerational occupational mobility that uses network analysis to integrate these three different communities of literature –human capital research, migration studies, and social ECON 24,1 116 Figure 1. Citation Network Workers’ mobility across occupations 117 stratification and mobility research –showing how they can theoretically and methodologically learn with each other. For this purpose, we identified six literature gaps on how, when resolved, will bring a better and more integrated understanding of the phenomenon of occupational mobility. From a methodological point of view, both the social stratification and migration literature can learn techniques used by human capital literature to measure the intensity of social and institutional barriers between occupations. From a theoretical point of view, human capital literature can incorporate the importance of the productive structure of each region, as done by migration studies. In addition, it can recognize the existence of the market power of employers, as the social stratification literature does, to understand social segregation. Human capital literature already focuses on how education and human capital matter for occupational mobility. However, institutional barriers (outlined in stratification studies) and local job-supply opportunities also matter for policymakers to promote occupational mobility in times of technological changes. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents our motivation, keywords and the structure literature review. Section 3 introduces the data and procedural methods. Section 4 presents the main results, including bibliometric measures, the analysis of the main clusters and publications through the citation network, and the main findings of the in-depth analysis related to the research strategies and scope studied. Section 5 presents a systematic analysis of the main insights of the human capital, social stratification and migration studies communities. Section 6 identifies and discusses the main research gaps on the topic. Finally, in Section 7, we discuss the reasons for the gaps identified in the literature and offer our concluding remarks. 2. Structured literature review –initial considerations A literature review related to this field leads to many analysis possibilities and challenges, such as issues in understanding what is relevant to an audience, a too-broad or a too-narrow focus. Here, we chose to apply a data-driven approach by identifying a broad set of keywords. In addition, considering the scientific quality required, we decided to work only with peer-reviewed articles curated within a bibliographic database. Moreover, we used different structured literature review techniques that complemented each other to avoid, as far as possible, a subjective or biased approach. In this sense, we broadened our analysis to capture a relatively broad set of articles associated with occupational mobility, as explained in the materials and methods section. This process led to 193 unique documents that adhere to our research objective. Our bibliometric analysis illustrates the quantitative growth of studies and presents the most cited publications. The network of citations with clusters analysis showed how the research communities in the literature are interrelated. An in-depth content analysis allows for exploring the research strategies and topics addressed within each theme. We found three main research poles on the issues by combining the network analysis and the in-depth analysis of the articles: (1) occupation mobility and its association with skills and human capital, (2) economic mobility and its institutional and social barriers like race and gender, and (3) occupation mobility related to migration. Our study identified that a structured literature review based on this broader view could identify structural gaps and future research opportunities regarding occupational mobility. In this respect, the bibliometric analysis helped us identify the publication dynamics, the most relevant journals, geographic focus and research clusters. Moreover, a combination of network analysis and an in-depth qualitative analysis of the research contents of core articles helped identify research gaps in data, topics and methods, as well as reveal possibilities for mutual learning between different overlapping or separate areas of the literature. Thus, this survey of the literature, conducted via a structured literature review, presented three specific advantages. Firstly, the technique helped us systematize the analyzed articles’results, ECON 24,1 118 relating them to emerging research topics. Secondly, it allowed us to identify and analyze the most important studies in more detail. Thirdly, it helped us to identify gaps in the literature and reveal challenges for future research. 3. Material and methods Our study applies common steps in systemic literature reviews to identify and analyze articles (Jabbour, 2013;Lage Junior & Godinho Filho, 2010): Step 1: Refining the main keywords, using synonyms of “intragenerational occupational mobility”. Step 2: Search articles in Scopus databases, using the set of keywords established in Step 1. Step 3: Screening the articles found by reading their titles and abstracts (filter). Step 4: Scope analysis of all papers selected. Step 5: Selection of publications for in-depth analysis. Step 6: Building the scientific production profile of each article selected, identifying the main research strategies. Step 7: Syntheses the results obtained in the four analyses conducted (bibliometrics, citation network, research strategies and scope) to identify gaps and research opportunities. With the keywords defined in Step 2, searches were performed on the Scopus database on January 5, 2022, based on the title, abstract and keywords for peer-reviewed articles, without any time and research area restriction. However, we exclude literature that focuses merely on intergenerational occupational mobility; understanding how occupations are passed from one generation to another, bringing a perspective of long-term mobility, is very relevant, but this is beyond the scope of this work on intragenerational mobility. Accordingly, the search command on Scopus is represented in Figure 2. This search was performed without any language restriction. In the case of articles not published in English-written journals, Scopus searches for the English version of the title, abstract and keywords commonly required from the authors by these journals. However, only six papers found were not written in English. To ensure comparability and scientific quality, our systematic review only considered journal articles, not books, working papers or other types of publications (e.g. theses, blogs, etc). 4. Results The bibliographic database search process registered 1595 publications on Scopus. We selected only papers with at least one link (citations or cited), resulting in 403 documents. After passing through the filter that analyzed the requirements for adherence to the research by title and abstract reading (filter), 195 unique papers were selected. As seen in Figure 3a, there has been significant growth in publications about occupational mobility. Initially only approached by social science journals, economics journals have published almost half of all articles on the topic in recent years. Finally, it is noteworthy that the decade of the 2010s concentrates more than 50% of total production. 90% of papers were published in Economics or Social Sciences journals. Journals are essential for disseminating new knowledge, especially to target audiences and communities. Figures 4a and 4b present the number of publications for the most relevant Social Sciences and Economics journals, respectively. Research in Social Workers’ mobility across occupations 119 Stratification and Mobility, Work and Occupations, and European Sociological Review, within the social sciencesjournalsgroup,andLabor Economics, International Economics Review, and Journal of Labor Economics, within the economics journals group, are approximately 20% of the publications found in each respective research area. Furthermore, there are specific journals focused on migration studies in social science journals; as expected, they concentrate on almost all papers that relate migration with occupational mobility. Notably, 68 journals published just one article, and 15 journals published only two. This fact may indicate that the theme is still dispersed in the literature or linked to several study areas. Figure 3. Time evolution of the number of publications (a) and countries analyzed (b) by research areas according to the Scopus classification Figure 2. Keywords used in this research ECON 24,1 120 4.1 Scope analysis The set of countries analyzed in this literature is quite restricted. Figures 5a and 5b present the number of publications for the five most frequent countries in journals of Social Sciences and Economics, respectively. Studies on the United States, Germany and the United Kingdom represent 75% of all publications. Except for the articles that make a cross-country comparison of many countries (Bachmann, Bechara, & Vonnahme, 2020;Bartlett, 2009; Bisello, Maccarrone, & Fern andez-Mac ıas, 2020;Gangl, 2004b,2006;Pohlig, 2021), the other 13 of the 21 analyzed countries appear at most two times. Furthermore, there are four works on Latin America and the Caribbean, one on Africa and six on Asia. Despite this large concentration of studies in a few countries, the variety of countries analyzed grows every decade in all research areas, as shown in Figure 3b. 4.2 Network analysis Figure 1 presents the citation network generated from the 193 papers selected. The network analysis identified five clusters. One large cluster represents the research area of human capital. Two clusters represent the research area of social stratification: social and institutional barriers in general and gender barriers in particular. Finally, the migration studies were represented by one large cluster on Immigration and one small one on internal migration. This classification was made through an in-depth analysis of a select sample of papers from each cluster. By definition, there are more links within clusters than between them. Nevertheless, the high number of links between the human capital cluster and the social and institutional barriers cluster is remarkable. Some publications were considered appropriate for the systematic literature review in-depth analysis. This selection process was necessary to ensure that the number of articles Figure 4. Most Relevant Journals about Social Sciences (a) and Economics (b) Workers’ mobility across occupations 121 to be analyzed represented the most relevant studies in the main research areas. To select a representative sample of the transmission of knowledge between the papers, we choose the 20% of the most cited and citing articles within the network for each community, resulting in a total of 70 articles for the in-depth content analysis. These papers have yellow borders in the citation network (Figure 1). 4.3 Main research strategies This subsection analyses the primary research strategies of the 70 publications chosen for the in-depth analysis. Firstly, all selected papers work with theoretical and empirical approaches, using numerical-qualitative techniques, like statistical tables or graphs. Only a part of these papers uses econometric techniques, like probit, logit, multinomial logit and ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions. We quantify how many documents in each community use or do not use some econometric technique in Table 1. Differences in the theoretical analyses and indepth content will be dealt with in Chapter 5. Cluster With econometrics Without econometrics Human Capital 29 3 Social and Institutional barriers 14 0 Gender barriers 2 2 Internal migration 2 2 Immigration 13 3 Source(s): Authors work Figure 5. Number of papers in journals of social sciences (a) and Economics (b) by country Table 1. The number of papers with and without econometrics for each cluster in the citation network ECON 24,1 122 This study was partially financed by the Coordenaç~ ao de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de N ıvel Superior –Brasil (CAPES) –Finance Code 001. BFC acknowledges CAPES for a scholarship. DH would like to express his gratitude for the financial support of CNPq (406943/ 2021-4 and 315441/2021-6). References Abraham, A. (2020). International migration, return migration and occupational mobility: Evidence from Kerala, India. Indian Journal of Labour Economics,63(4), 1223–1243. doi: 10.1007/s41027- 020-00284-9. Bachmann, R., Bechara, P., & Vonnahme, C. (2020). Occupational mobility in Europe: Extent, determinants and consequences. Economist,168(1), 79–108. doi: 10.1007/s10645-019-09355-9. Barbiano di Belgiojoso, E. (2019). The occupational (im)mobility of migrants in Italy. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies,45(9), 1571–1594. doi: 10.1080/1369183X.2017.1414585. Barbiano di Belgiojoso, E., & Ortensi, L. E. (2015). Female labour segregation in the domestic services in Italy. Journal of International Migration and Integration,16(4), 1121–1139. doi: 10.1007/ s12134-014-0384-y. Bartlett, W. (2009). The effectiveness of vocational education in promoting equity and occupational mobility amongst young people. Economic Annals,54(180), 7–39. doi: 10.2298/EKA0980007B. Bisello, M., Maccarrone, V., & Fern andez-Mac ıas, E. (2020). Occupational mobility, employment transitions and job quality in Europe: The impact of the Great Recession. Economic and Industrial Democracy,43(2), 585–611. doi:10.1177/0143831X20931936. Blackwell, L. (2001). Occupational sex segregation and part-time work in modern Britain. Gender, Work and Organization,8(2), 146–163. doi: 10.1111/1468-0432.00126. Buchs, H., Murphy, E., & Buchmann, M. (2017). Landing a job, sinking a career? The trade-off between occupational downgrading and quick reemployment according to unemployed jobseekers’ career stage and job prospects. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility,52,26–35. doi: 10. 1016/j.rssm.2017.10.001. Chang, T. F. H. (2003). A social psychological model of women’s gender-typed occupational mobility. Career Development International,8(1), 27–39. doi: 10.1108/13620430310459496. Chiswick, B. R., Lee, Y. L., & Miller, P. W. (2003). Patterns of immigrant occupational attainment in a longitudinal survey. International Migration,41(4), 47–69. doi: 10.1111/1468-2435.00252. Chiswick, B. R., Lee, Y. L., & Miller, P. W. (2005). A longitudinal analysis of immigrant occupational mobility: A test of the immigrant assimilation hypothesis. International Migration Review,39(2), 332–353. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-7379.2005.tb00269.x. Constant, A., & Massey, D. S. (2005). Labor market segmentation and the earnings of German guestworkers. Population Research and Policy Review,24(5), 489–512. doi: 10.1007/s11113-005- 4675-z. Cortes, G. M. (2016). Where have the middle-wage workers gone? A study of polarization using panel data. Journal of Labor Economics,34(1), 63–105. doi: 10.1086/682289. Cortes, G. M. (2019). The individual-level patterns underlying the decline of routine jobs. Travail et Emploi,2019(157), 45–66. doi: 10.4000/travailemploi.8869. Cortes, G. M., & Gallipoli, G. (2018). The costs of occupational mobility: An aggregate analysis. Journal of the European Economic Association,16(2), 275–315. doi: 10.1093/jeea/jvx006. Crespo, N., Simoes, N., & Moreira, S.B. (2014). Gender differences in occupational mobility - evidence from Portugal. International Review of Applied Economics,28(4), 460–481. doi: 10.1080/ 02692171.2014.884548. Cubas, G., & Silos, P. (2020). Social insurance and occupational mobility. International Economic Review,61(1), 219–240. doi: 10.1111/iere.12422. Workers’ mobility across occupations 129 Deng, L., Li, H., & Shi, W. (2022). Willingness for different job mobility types and wage expectations: An empirical analysis based on the online resumes. Papers in Regional Science,101(1), 135–161. doi: 10.1111/pirs.12636. Dex, S., & Bukodi, E. (2012). The effects of part-time work on women’s occupational mobility in Britain: Evidence from the 1958 birth cohort study. National Institute Economic Review,222, R20–R37. DiPrete, T. A., & Nonnemaker, K. L. (1997). Structural change, labor market turbulence, and labor market outcomes. American Sociological Review,62(3), 386–404. doi: 10.2307/2657312. Dlouhy, K., & Biemann, T. (2018). Path dependence in occupational careers: Understanding occupational mobility development throughout individuals’careers. Journal of Vocational Behavior,104,86–97. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2017.10.009. Fedorets, A. (2019). Changes in occupational tasks and their association with individual wages and occupational mobility. German Economic Review,20(4), e295–e328. doi: 10.1111/geer.12166. Fellini, I., & Guetto, R. (2019). A “U-shaped”pattern of immigrants’occupational careers? A comparative analysis of Italy, Spain, and France. International Migration Review,53(1), 26–58. doi: 10.1177/0197918318767931. Fern andez-Mac ıas, E., Grande, R., del Rey Poveda, A., & Ant on, J.I. (2015). Employment and occupational mobility among recently arrived immigrants: The Spanish case 1997–2007. Population Research and Policy Review,34(2), 243–277. doi: 10.1007/s11113-014-9347-4. Fielding, A. J. (1992). Migration and social mobility: South east england as an escalator region. Regional Studies,26(1), 1–15. doi: 10.1080/00343409212331346741. Findlay, A., Mason, C., Houston, D., McCollum, D., & Harrison, R. (2009). Escalators, elevators and travelators: The occupational mobility of migrants to South-East England. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies,35(6), 861–879. doi: 10.1080/13691830902957676. Forsythe, E. (2019). Careers within firms: Occupational mobility over the lifecycle. Labour,33(3), 241– 277. doi: 10.1111/labr.12146. Gabe, T., Abel, J. R., & Florida, R. (2019). Can workers in low-end occupations climb the job ladder?. Economic Development Quarterly,33(2), 92–106. doi: 10.1177/0891242419838324. Gangl, M. (2004a). Institutions and the structure of labour market matching in the United States and West Germany. European Sociological Review,20(3), 171–187. doi: 10.1093/ esr/jch016. Gangl, M. (2004b). Welfare states and the scar effects of unemployment: A comparative analysis of the United States and west Germany. American Journal of Sociology,109(6), 1319–1364. doi: 10. 1086/381902. Gangl, M. (2006). Scar effects of unemployment: An assessment of institutional complementarities. American Sociological Review,71(6), 986–1013. doi: 10.1177/000312240607100606. Gathmann, C., & Sch€ onberg, U. (2010). How general is human capital? A task-based approach. Journal of Labor Economics,28(1), 1–49. doi: 10.1086/649786. Gerard, F., Lagos, L., Severnini, E., & Card, D. (2021). Assortative matching or exclusionary hiring? The impact of employment and pay policies on racial wage differences in Brazil. American Economic Review,111(10), 3418–3457. doi: 10.1257/aer.20181596. Gordon, I., Champion, T., & Coombes, M. (2015). Urban escalators and interregional elevators: The difference that location, mobility, and sectoral specialisation make to occupational progression. Environment and Planning A,47(3), 588–606. doi: 10.1068/a130125p. Gorry, A., Gorry, D., & Trachter, N. (2019). Learning and life cycle patterns of occupational transitions. International Economic Review,60(2), 905–937. doi: 10.1111/iere.12371. Green, D. A. (1999). Immigrant occupational attainment: Assimilation and mobility over time. Journal of Labor Economics,17(1), 49–79. doi: 10.1086/209913. ECON 24,1 130 Groes, F., Kircher, P., & Manovskii, I. (2013). The U-shapes of occupational mobility. Review of Economic Studies,82(2), 659–692. doi: 10.1093/restud/rdu037. Guvenen, F., Kuruscu, B., Tanaka, S., & Wiczer, D. (2020). Multidimensional skill mismatch. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics,12(1), 210–244. doi: 10.1257/mac.20160241. Harper, B. (1995). Male occupational mobility in britain. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 57(3), 349–369. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0084.1995.mp57003005.x. Jabbour, C. J. C. (2013). Environmental training in organisations: From a literature review to a framework for future research. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,74, 144–155. doi: 10. 1016/j.resconrec.2012.12.017. Jacobs, S. (1999). Trends in women’s career patterns and in gender occupational mobility in Britain. Gender, Work and Organization,6(1), 32–46. doi: 10.1111/1468-0432.00067. Kambourov, G., & Imanovskii, I. (2009). Occupational specificity of human capital (jan 2008 ver) *industry 2/1digit. International Economic Review,50,63–115. Available from: http://economics. sas.upenn.edu/∼manovski/papers/occupation_specific_HC.pdf Kambourov, G., & Manovskii, I. (2008). Rising occupational and industry mobility in the United States: 1968–97. International Economic Review,49(1), 41–79. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2354.2008. 00473.x. Kambourov, G., & Manovskii, I. (2009). Occupational mobility and wage inequality. Review of Economic Studies,76(2), 731–759. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-937X.2009.00535.x. Kumlin, J. (2010). Occupational shifts across sex-type boundaries in the Swedish labour market. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility,28(4), 417–436. doi: 10.1016/j.rssm.2010.06.003. Lage Junior, M., & Godinho Filho, M. (2010). Variations of the kanban system: Literature review and classification. International Journal of Production Economics,125(1), 13–21. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe. 2010.01.009. Lal e, E. (2012). Trends in occupational mobility in France : 1982 –2009. Labour Economics,19(3), 373–387. doi: 10.1016/j.labeco.2012.03.005. Masso, J., Eamets, R., & M~ otsmees, P. (2014). Temporary migrants and occupational mobility: Evidence from the case of Estonia. International Journal of Manpower,35(6), 753–775. doi: 10. 1108/IJM-06-2013-0138. McBrier, D. B., & Wilson, G. (2004). Going down? Race and downward occupational mobility for white-collar workers in the 1990s. Work and Occupations,31(3), 283–322. doi: 10.1177/ 0730888404266383. McCollum, D., Liu, Y., Findlay, A., Feng, Z., & Nightingale, G. (2018). Determinants of occupational mobility: The importance of place of work. Regional Studies,52(12), 1612–1623. doi: 10.1080/ 00343404.2018.1424993. Moscarini, G., & Thomsson, K. (2007). Occupational and job mobility in the US. Scandinavian Journal of Economics,109(4), 807–836. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9442.2007.00510.x. Mueller, B., & Schweri, J. (2015). How specific is apprenticeship training? Evidence from inter-firm and occupational mobility after graduation. Oxford Economic Papers,67(4), 1057–1077. doi: 10.1093/ oep/gpv040. Neffke, F.M.H., Otto, A., & Weyh, A. (2017). Inter-industry labor flows. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization,142, 275–292. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2017.07.003. Obu cina, O. (2013). Occupational trajectories and occupational cost among senegalese immigrants in Europe. Demographic Research,28(March), 547–580. doi: 10.4054/DemRes.2013.28.19. Otto, K., Dette-Hagenmeyer, D. E., & Dalbert, C. (2010). Occupational mobility in members of the labor force: Explaining the willingness to change occupations. Journal of Career Development,36(3), 262–288. doi: 10.1177/0894845309345842. Papageorgiou, T. (2014). Learning your comparative advantages. Review of Economic Studies,81(3), 1263–1295. doi: 10.1093/restud/rdt048. Workers’ mobility across occupations 131 Parrado, E., Caner, A., & Wolff, E. N. (2007). Occupational and industrial mobility in the United States. Labour Economics,14(3), 435–455. doi: 10.1016/j.labeco.2006.01.005. Pohlig, M. (2021). Occupational mobility in Europe during the crisis: Did the social elevator break?. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility,72, 100549. doi: 10.1016/j.rssm.2020.100549. Poletaev, M., & Robinson, C. (2008). Human capital specificity: Evidence from the dictionary of occupational titles and displaced worker surveys, 1984-2000. Journal of Labor Economics,26(3), 387–420. doi: 10.1086/588180. Ressia, S., Strachan, G., & Bailey, J. (2017). Operationalizing intersectionality: An approach to uncovering the complexity of the migrant job search in Australia. Gender, Work and Organization,24(4), 376–397. doi: 10.1111/gwao.12172. Rinawi, M., & Backes-Gellner, U. (2021). Labour market transitions after layoffs: The role of occupational skills. Oxford Economic Papers,73(1), 76–97. doi: 10.1093/oep/gpz064. Robinson, C. (2017). Occupational mobility, occupation distance and specific human capital. Journal of Human Resources,53(2), 0814–6556R2, June 2010. doi: 10.3368/jhr.53.2.0814.6556r2. Roosaar, L., M~ otsmees, P., & Varblane, U. (2014). Occupational mobility over the business cycle. International Journal of Manpower,35(6), 873–897. doi: 10.1108/IJM-06-2013-0130. Rooth, D. O., & Ekberg, J. (2006). Occupational mobility for immigrants in Sweden. International Migration,44(2), 57–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2435.2006.00364.x. Rosenfeld, R.A., & Spenner, K.I. (1992). Occupational sex segregation and women’s early career job shifts. Work and Occupations,19(4), 424–449. doi: 10.1177/0730888492019004005. Sabirianova, K. Z. (2002). The great human capital reallocation: A study of occupational mobility in transitional Russia. Journal of Comparitive Economics,30(1), 191–217. doi: 10.1006/jcec. 2001.1760. Sacchi, S., Kriesi, I., & Buchmann, M. (2016). Occupational mobility chains and the role of job opportunities for upward, lateral and downward mobility in Switzerland. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility,44,10–21. doi: 10.1016/j.rssm.2015.12.001. Schultz (2019). The wage mobility of low-wage workers in a changing economy, 1968 to 2014. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences,5(4), 159. doi: 10.7758/rsf.2019.5. 4.06. Sim on, H., Ramos, R., & Sanrom a, E. (2014). Immigrant occupational mobility: Longitudinal evidence from Spain. European Journal of Population,30(2), 223–255. doi: 10.1007/s10680- 014-9313-1. Stanek, M., & Ramos, A. V. (2013). Occupational mobility at migration - evidence from Spain. Sociological Research Online,18(Issue 4), 223–255. doi:10.5153/sro.3134. Sullivan, P. (2010). A dynamic analysis of educational attainment, occupational choices, and job search. International Economic Review,51(1), 289–317. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2354.2009.00580.x. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics,84(2), 523–538. doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3. Veira-Ramos, A., & Schmelzer, P. (2018). Outcomes of unemployment episodes during early career for mismatched workers in the United Kingdom and Germany and the mediating effects of education and institutions. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility,55(July 2016), 99–108. doi: 10.1016/j.rssm.2018.04.005. Villarreal, A. (2020). The U.S. Occupational structure: A social network approach. Sociological Science, 7, 187–221. doi: 10.15195/V7.A8. Wilson, G., & Roscigno, V. J. (2010). Race and downward mobility from privileged occupations: African American/White dynamics across the early work-career. Social Science Research,39(1), 67–77. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.03.008. Wilson, G., & Roscigno, V. J. (2016). Public sector reform and racial occupational mobility. Work and Occupations,43(3). doi: 10.1177/0730888416654203. ECON 24,1 132 Wilson, G., Sakura-Lemessy, I., & West, J. P. (1999). Reaching the top: Racial differences in mobility paths to upper-tier occupations. Work and Occupations,26(2), 165–186. doi: 10.1177/ 0730888499026002002. Zorlu, A. (2013). Occupational adjustment of immigrants in The Netherlands. Journal of International Migration and Integration,14(4), 711–731. doi: 10.1007/s12134-012-0264-2. Corresponding author Ben Hur Francisco Cardoso can be contacted at: [email protected] For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: [email protected] Workers’ mobility across occupations 133