The article studies the role of the class of origin in the occupational outcomes of second generation ethnic minorities and white British in England and Wales. In so doing, it reconsiders the relationship between 'ethnic penalties' and intergenerational social reproduction (or the reverse: intergenerational social mobility) by combining approaches from the migration and social stratification literatures. Two main hypotheses are tested. The first states that the class of origin, or parental social background, helps explain differences in occupational outcomes between ethnic minorities and white British; the second says that intergenerational social reproduction processes vary between groups. Based on data from the United Kingdom Housing Longitudinal Study (UKHLS: 2009-2010), the article finds partial evidence for both hypotheses. In particular, it reveals that the lower social reproduction of Pakistani, Caribbean and African men has particularly negative consequences for higher educated minorities, who do not gain -as the white British do -from more advantageous origins.

The impact of neighbourhood ethnic concentration on ethnic minorities' outcomes is a contested topic, with mixed empirical results. In this paper, we use a large-scale longitudinal dataset of England and Wales, covering a 40-year period, to assess the impact of neighbourhood co-ethnic concentration in childhood on subsequent adult labour market outcomes. We distinguish the five main minority groups in the UK and develop theoretical expectations about how social interaction mechanisms in the neighbourhood might influence their employment and social class outcomes, given different group (cultural values and ethnic capital) and individual (gender) characteristics. By separating in time explanatory and outcome variables and by controlling for factors that mediate or confound co-ethnic concentrationsuch as neighbourhood deprivation, household resources in childhood (i.e. parental social class), and individuals' own educationour analytical model tackles potential problems of selfselection and endogeneity. Among other findings, we show that greater concentration of co-ethnics in the neighbourhood results in substantially lower labour market participation and lower social class for Pakistani and Bangladeshi women but better social class outcomes for Indian men. We link the outcomes for Pakistani and Bangladeshi women to cultural maintenance of more traditional norms, facilitated by greater social interaction. The results for Indian men, instead, suggest the positive role that high levels of group resources or 'ethnic capital' can play. Our study is, we believe, the first to demonstrate a role for coethnic concentration in childhood in explaining Pakistani and Bangladeshi women's low labour market participation and Indian men's labour market success.

Ethnic minorities' spatial concentration and their predominance in deprived areas are two well‐known patterns that characterise Britain's social landscape. However, little is known about ethnic minorities' opportunities for spatial integration, especially those of the second generations. Using a large‐scale longitudinal data set of England and Wales covering a 40‐year period (1971–2011), in combination with aggregated census data, the article examines ethnic inequalities in access to neighbourhoods with varying levels of ethnic concentration and deprivation. On equality of individual, social origin, and childhood neighbourhood characteristics, second generation ethnic minorities are less likely than White British individuals to reside in “whiter” and less deprived neighbourhoods. For most minorities, these differences reduce among those with higher education and a higher social class, in line with weak place stratification/ethnic enclave. Growing up in areas with high ethnic concentration and high deprivation has a particularly strong “retention effect” among second generation Asians. The study shows that ethnic spatial segregation is, in part, the product of time‐persisting ethnic inequalities in the access to neighbourhoods and that these inequalities are conditioned both by childhood and by adult resources.

Research has shown that positive attitudes towards immigration are often associated with a higher presence of immigrants at the local level; however, this relationship might not apply everywhere. While a higher presence of immigrants might be positive for attitudes in areas with better socioeconomic resourcesvia the development of more cooperative intergroup contactsit might bring no or even a negative effect on attitudes in poorer areasdue to an enhanced competition for (scarce) resources and poorer social cohesion. This article combines data from the European Social Survey with NUTS3 aggregated data of twelve European countries to study this relationship. We find that a higher concentration of immigrants is associated with more positive attitudes towards them; in line with our expectations, this effect decreases as the socioeconomic conditions of areas worsen. In the most deprived areas, however, a higher concentration of immigrants does not have an effect on attitudes.

The study compares the social mobility and status attainment of first‐ and second‐generation Turks in nine Western European countries with those of Western European natives and with those of Turks in Turkey. It shows that the children of low‐class migrants are more likely to acquire a higher education than their counterparts in Turkey, making them more educationally mobile. Moreover, they successfully convert this education in the Western European labor market, and are upwardly mobile relative to the first generation. When comparing labor market outcomes of second generations relative to Turks in Turkey, however, the results show that the same level of education leads to a higher occupation in Turkey. The implications of these findings are discussed.