Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:27:12.919Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Income Source as a Social Barometer*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2009

Beryl Day
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper, based on an exploratory study of households in an English south coast town, argues that main income source is a significant factor to be taken into account when distinguishing between households. The research was triggered by information drawn from the 1981 Census showing that less than half the population of Great Britain experienced a direct relationship between current paid employment and income. It suggests that generalisations based on an assumption that household income drawn mainly from paid employment is the norm, marginalise more than half the population. The study draws attention to some of the issues highlighted when the focus of research is on sources of income. These are presented as supplementing, rather than negating, views from other perspectives. This exploratory study highlights additional insights having implications for social policy, while acknowledging that each merits more detailed attention.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 21 , Issue 4 , October 1992 , pp. 469 - 487
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Berthoud, R. (1984), The Reform of Supplementary Benefit, PSI Working Papers, London.Google Scholar
Brannen, J. and Wilson, G. (1987), Give and Take in Families, Allen and Unwin, London.Google Scholar
Braverman, H. (1974), Labour and Monopoly Capital, Monthly Review Press, New York and London.Google Scholar
Coakley, J. and Harris, L. (1983), The City of Capital, Basil Blackwood, Oxford.Google Scholar
Conference of Socialist Economists (1982), In and Against the State, Pluto Press, London.Google Scholar
Connell, R.W. (1987), Gender and Power, Polity Press, London.Google Scholar
Cooper, S., Observations in Supplementary Benefit Offices, Policy Studies Institute, London.Google Scholar
Cottrell, A. (1984), Social Classes in Marxist Theory, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
Dale, A. (1987), ‘Occupational inequality, gender and life-cycle’, Work, Employment and Society, 1:3, 326–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, B.M. (1989), Work, Non-work and Society, unpublished thesis, University of Sussex.Google Scholar
Day, B.M. (1992), Dependency: Personal and Social Relations, Ashgate Publishing Limited, Aldershot.Google Scholar
Delbridge, R. and Smith, M. (eds) (1982), Consuming Secrets, National Consumer Council and Burnett Books, London.Google Scholar
Duncan, S. and Goodwin, M. (1982), ‘The local state and restructuring social relations’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 6:2, 157–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, M. (1985), ‘Planning and the land market: problems, prospects and strategy’, in Bull, M. (ed.), Land, Rent, Housing and Urban Planning, Croon Helm, London.Google Scholar
Gershuny, J. (1983), Social Innovation and the Division of Labour, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gorz, A. (1982), Farewell to the Working Class, Pluto Press, London.Google Scholar
Holloway, J. and Picciotto, S. (eds) (1978), State and Capital, Edward Arnold, London.Google Scholar
Hollowell, P. (ed.) (1982), Property and Social Relations, Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
Jahoda, M. (1982), Employment and Unemployment, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, G., Rose, M., Vogler, H. and Newby, H. (1988), Social Class in Modern Britain, Hutchinson, London.Google Scholar
Marshall, G., Rose, D., Vogler, C., Newby, H. (1985), ‘Class, citizenship and distributional conflict in modern Britain’, British Journal of Sociology, xxxvi, 2, 274–84.Google Scholar
Moore, W.E. (1963), Man, Time and Society, Wiley, London.Google Scholar
Morgan, K. and Sayer, A. (1985), ‘A “modern” industry in a “mature” region’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 9:3, 383–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, L. and Ruane, S. (1989), Household Finance Management and the Labour Market, Avebury—Gower Publishing Co. Ltd, London.Google Scholar
Oakley, A. (1974), The Sociology of Housework, Martin Robertson, London.Google Scholar
Pahl, R. (1984), Divisions of Labour, Blackwell, London.Google Scholar
Reid, D. (1976), ‘The decline of Saint Monday’, Past and Present, 71, 76–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sayer, A. (1984), Method in Social Science, Hutchinson, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, P. (1988), ‘The constitution of the home in contemporary English culture’, paper given at First International Conference on the Sociology of Consumption, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Smith, J., Wallerstein, I. and Evers, H.D. (eds) (1984), Households and the World Economy, Sage Publications, California.Google Scholar
Thompson, E.P. (1967), ‘Time, work, discipline and industrial capitalism’, Past and Present, 38, 56–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urry, J. (1981), The Anatomy of Capitalist Societies, Macmillan, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urry, J. (1983), ‘De-industrialisation, classes and polities’, in King, R. (ed.), Capitol and Politics, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
Williams, R. (1982), Towards 2000, Chatto and Windus, London.Google Scholar
Wright, E. (1985), Classes, Verso, London.Google Scholar