Existing datasets provided by statistical agencies (e.g. Eurostat) show that the economic and financial crisis that unfolded in 2008 significantly impacted the lives and livelihoods of young people across Europe. Taking these official statistics as a starting point, the collaborative research project "Cultural Pathways to Perceived economic self-sufficiency: a country-and…

Using pooled European Social Survey data (Rounds 4–7, 2008–2014), we investigate the relationship between intergenerational educational mobility and subjective well-being (SWB) for young Europeans (N = 16,050 individuals aged 25–34 from 18 countries). Previous research has been struggling with inconclusive results due to the methodological challenge of disentangling the independent (i.e., ‘net’) effect of social mobility over and above the effects of social origin and destination. We contribute to this line of research by contrasting mobility effects estimated in a conventional linear regression framework with net mobility effects estimated by (non-linear) diagonal mobility models (DMM). We show how model selection influences estimates of mobility effects and how different specifications lead to radically different findings. Using DMM, we estimate how intergenerational educational mobility affects the SWB of young Europeans, differentiating between downward and upward mobility and different country groups. Our results suggest that status loss/gain across generations affects young adults’ SWB in addition to the level-effect of ending up in a lower/higher status position only in Continental Europe.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11205-017-1753-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Previous studies have shown that overeducation is inferior to adequate employment. For example, overeducated workers have lower earnings, participate less often in continuing education and training, and are less satisfied with their jobs. This article changes perspectives by asking whether it is better for the unemployed to take up a job for which they are overeducated or to remain unemployed and continue the search for adequate employment.Theoretically, we rely on the established confrontation of the stepping stone and trap hypotheses which make opposing predictions in terms of long-term employment chances and job quality. Using the German Socio-Economic Panel and applying a dynamic propensity score matching approach, the analyses reveal an interesting trade-off. Although an overeducated re-entry increases the long-term employment chances persistently, it also implies strong lock-in effects into overeducation for up to five years after re-employment. In sum, the results support the stepping stone hypothesis in terms of future employment chances, but also highlight non-negligible risks of remaining trapped in a job that is below one's level of educational qualification.

Past experiences and expectations about the future shape how people think about work and welfare. Given the uncertainty many young people face when entering the labor market, we investigate whether 1) young peoples’ experiences of social mobility and 2) their future mobility expectations impact their attitudes regarding the meaning of work and welfare. Drawing on the concepts of self-interest and deservingness, we examine how both the experiences and expectations of intergenerational social mobility influence the ways in which young adults view the so-called moral dimension of work and welfare. Results of logistic regression analyses of around 11,000 young adults in eleven countries suggest that the relationship between mobility and individuals’ views on work and welfare varies depending on the dimension of mobility (economic and social origins, for example), with expected future mobility exerting a stronger effect on attitudes than past mobility experiences. We find that self-interest, not empathy with one’s social origins, appears to be the primary driver of these attitudes.

After online first publication of the article, it was noticed that the family name of author Panos Tsakloglou was erroneously misspelt as Tsakoglou. The original article has been corrected.