Social diffrfnciation and long distancf mobility in Francf Somf - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Social diffrfnciation and long distancf mobility in Francf

Somf rfsults from a gfnfral population survfy

Aurore FLIPO Etore RECCHI

Statf of thf art

• Long distance mobility has been increasing in the past decade,

both for work and for leisure (Orfeuil & Soleyret 2002, CGET 2010, Ravalet et al. 2014, amongst others)

• International mobility and intranational mobility are both

socially stratified (Mau 2007, Wagner 2007, Cliche 1980, Courgeau 1985, amongst others)

• Mobility behaviours is related to biographies and lifecycles

(Courgeau 1985, Scheiner 2007)

• Mobility behaviours contribute to the making of mental maps

(Gould and White 1985).

Rfsfarch qufstions

• What are the socio-demographic determinants of long-distance

mobility, both at the intranational and international level?

• What are the main motives and paterns of long-distance

mobility?

• What are the interactions between both scales?
• How is long-distance mobility socially stratified?

Mfthodology

• ELIPSS Panel (Internet-based longitudinal study for the

social sciences), pilot phase

• Random drawing based on the national census, mainland

France, respondents aged 18-79.

• Self-administered survey on a touch pad
• 30 minutes max. for the collection of respondents' long-

distance mobility behaviours over the lifetime

Thf spacf-sfts

+ Focus = places the respondent feels the most familiar with (open question, 5 answers max.)

HELP WINDOW Access to the list of selected countries Zooming

• ptons

Searching engine Example of selecton

• n the map

Rfsults

Countries where respondents have been

A lfisurf-drivfn mobility

• Has ever been abroad for work: 10 % - for leisure: 83 %

Intfrnational mobility

• Few countries concentrate most of the answers :

– Spain (60% of the sample has been there at least once) – Italy (28%) – Gfrmany (22%) – Switzfrland (17%)

• Southern Europe: leisure and short-term mobilities

Germany, Switzerland and the UK : work-driven and long- term mobilities

• Regular mobilities:

– 88% of those who have been abroad have been more

than once in the same country

– 37% goes once a year in one of them

• Somf pfoplf don’t movf: 27 % of the sample has never changed

residence place; 25 % have declared 2 or less visited departments ; 17 % have never lef France and 27% have never been abroad for more than 7 days.

• … and somf pfoplf movf a lot: 25 % of the sample goes abroad more

than once a year, 10% have been in more than 10 countries (max registered = 50).

Somf placfs arf distinctivf…

And indicators of long-distancf mobility arf corrflatfd

• At the international scale, correlation between short-term and

long-term indicators and between size and range:

– the more you travel, the farthest you go – the more you travel, the more you combine diferent forms

• f mobility (short, middle and very long distance, short and

long term)

– long-term mobility pertains to closer and less numerous

countries than short-term mobility (cf. gravity models)

• National and international mobility are correlated:

– the most mobile at the international level are also mobile at

the national level

Socio-dfmographic dftfrminants of long distancf mobility

Is thfrf an « intfrnational capital »?

• Is international mobility a cultural capitall

– Diploma – Inherited cultural capital – Distinctive cultural consumption

• Or a privilege of the both well-educated and well-of?

– Monthly income per consumption unit – All things being equal, both cultural and economic

capital indicators have the strongest predictive power on the probability of being an international traveller.

Conclusion

• Long-distance mobility in France is driven by leisure and both

geographically and socially concentrated

• All in all, international mobility reflects and synthetizes the main

inequalities :

– Of free time (between young and old in particular) – Of cultural capital – And (most importantly) economic capital

• Though international and intranational mobilities are correlated,

intranational mobility paterns are more complex and diverse

• International comparison: France, Italy, Germany (Othfr countrifs

wflcomf!)

Thank you for your atfntion.