Ethnic differences
Research on ethnic differences has been undertaken using the SARs in a variety of areas including differences in unemployment, educational attainment, participation in full time education, class and occupational attainment, and economic activity. Most of the research highlights the considerable disadvantages suffered by ethnic minority populations as compared with the majority white population.
- Ethnic differences in unemployment
In contrast to the small sample size of survey data which forces many researchers to over-collapse the categories and call all minority ethnic groups 'black', the SARs allows for detailed analysis of ethnic groups. Differences both between and within major ethnic groups can be explored in various aspects of their socio-economic lives while at the same time controlling for other important characteristics. For instance, using the 2% SAR, Blackburn, Dale and Jarman (1997) show striking differences between ethnic groups in the vulnerability to unemployment, even among people with the same level of educational qualifications. One in five (20 per cent) of UK-born Black-African men and women with higher qualifications were unemployed, but the rate for similarly qualified UK-born Whites was only one fifth as many (3 to 4 per cent). This is a case of what might be called 'ethnic penalty' (See also Fieldhouse and Gould, 1998).
- Ethnic differences in educational attainment
Equally significantly, the large sample size of the SARs allows the exploration of nativity effects whilst controlling for other important variables. Significant differences between ethnic groups who are otherwise similar to one another would then allow factors such as cultural differences or traditions to be explored. For example, Blackburn, Dale and Jarman (1997) show that, even among people born in the UK, Chinese, Other-Asian, and Black-African groups were highly qualified but the Black-Other, Black-Caribbean, Pakistani and Bangladeshi groups were far behind. Cheng (1996) suggests that, for some of the groups such as the Chinese, there might be a strong effect of traditional attachment to academic learning (See also Drew, Gray and Sporton, 1997).
- Ethnic differences in participation rates
Similarly, one can use the SARs to make differentiations for detailed analysis of the subpopulations which is not possible even with special-purpose surveys like Youth Cohort Studies where ethnic groups are usually collapsed into a two or three way variable, especially when other variables are built into the multivariate models. In this regard, Drew, Gray and Sporton (1997) study the participation rates of the 16-19 year olds in full-time education using the SAR. The results show that Chinese, Other-Asian, Indian and Black-African groups are much more likely to be in full time education than Black-Caribbean, Black-Other and White groups. And this holds true even when the class position of the family head is taken into account.
- Ethnic differences in class attainment
Ethnic differences in class attainment were pronounced. Heath and McMahon (1997) show that while around a third of British-born Whites were in professional and managerial (service-class) positions, only 1 in 10 of the first-generation Bangladeshi, 12% of Black-Caribbean and 14% of Pakistani groups were found in similar positions. Moreover, the educational qualifications do not translate into occupational positions equally well for all ethnic groups. Among the first-generation and for men and women respondents alike, each of the ethnic groups (except the Other-Asian men) were significantly less likely than the Irish-born Whites to reach service-class positions rather than avoiding working-class positions; and among the second-generation and for both sexes alike, each of the ethnic minority group were significantly less likely to be in service- rather than working class positions than British-born Whites except Black-Other group. And all this is shown even when educational qualifications and the age-groups of the respondents are taken into account.
