The world-wide gender gap in education depends not just on countries' economic performance, but also on cultural factors. However, world cultures are not fixed entities. Rather, culture is a characteristic of groups as well as of (world-)regions. How do global cultures moderate women's low education? Based on data of the World Value Survey, this study applies Latent Profile Analysis to generate a fuzzy-set typology of cultures in the world, but based on individuals instead of nation states. Individuals do not belong exclusively to one culture, but to several cultures simultaneously, with varying probabilities. In the second step, cross-classified logistic multilevel models test the country-time specific effects of 'female' on the risk of getting (at best) low education, controlling for various individual and country-specific factors. Cross-level interactions show that the 'female' effect on low education is indeed moderated by world cultures, but neither world cultures, economic factors nor individual characteristics completely explain the strength of the female effects.
Stephen Devereux (Research Fellow at the Institute for Development Studies, University of Sussex, UK, and Mercator Fellow at CRC 1342) is a leading expert in Social Policy in southern Africa.
Devereux is currentliy working on a book on social protection agents and agencies in Africa. In this lecture he will look at methodological and ethical issues, as well as some of the interesting findings from interviews he has conducted so far.
The lecture will most likely be held online via Zoom. The link to join in will be shared in due time
Mario Azevedo is Professor at the Department of History and Philosophy and Dean of the College of Liberal Arts at Jackson State University. He earned his Ph.D. in African History from Duke University and an M.P.H. in Epidemiology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He has written extensively on African history with a special focus on health politics. In his talk, he will present core findings from his two-volume book "Historical Perspectives on the State of Health and Health Systems in Africa" (Cham: Springer International, 2017).
Meeting-ID: 975 0659 3878
Spring Conference of the Section on Social Network Analysis of the German Sociological Association (DGS), February 6 / 7, 2020
Social protection is crucial for human development. However, the great majority of the global population is not or only partly covered by social protection (ILO 2014: xxi). In developing countries, in particular, it is often the very poorest and most vulnerable in a society who do not receive essential social benefits (Holliday 2000). Although the people’s need for social protection in developing countries is obvious, countries perform very differently in this respect. In some countries the reach of social protection is very limited despite high needs, while others have comprehensive social protection systems with both contributory and non-contributory components (Devereux et al. 2015). Accordingly, whereas some countries are successfully tackling poverty and inequality through a broad provision of social protection, others continue to prioritize the rights and needs of small elites over those of the broad mass of the population. This is highly problematic given that inclusive social protection is assumed to be a key factor for national productivity, global economic growth and domestic stability (Rudra 2015), and also considering that access to social protection is a human right.
How can these vast differences in the provision of social protection be explained? Elucidating the policy mix, coverage and generosity of contemporary social protection requires a deep understanding of its historical roots and specific trajectories. As most of the research continues to focus on the OECD world, however, little is known about the origins, characteristics and outcomes of social protection beyond the OECD. The narrative of welfare state emergence in rich democracies with its emphasis on domestic factors, such as industrialization and urbanization, provides only limited insight into the emergence and structure of social protection systems in other regions of the world. Several studies analyzing social protection in the Global South have emphasized that social protection has been strongly shaped by external influences and international actors over the course of the last 120 years (e.g. Gough et al. 2004; Deacon 2007; Niño‐Zarazúa et al. 2012; Midgley and Piachaud 2011; Brooks 2015; Rudra, 2015).
In order to systematically analyze alternative routes to early and contemporary social protection in low- and middle-income countries, the focus of this workshop will hence be on three of the most important external influences in the building of social protection systems in the Global South, namely colonial ties, the Cold War, as well as international donors and organizations.
In sum, this workshop brings together scholars from different disciplines with expertise in different policy areas and/or regions in order to create a larger picture of the role of external influences in the building of social protection systems in the Global South in the last 120 years. The aim is to identify alternatives routes to welfare regime building and, in consequence, to explain the differences in the policy mix, coverage, and generosity of early and contemporary social protection provision beyond the OECD.
With the increasing availability of longitudinal data, researchers need to decide the best models for their data.
A wide variety of models have been proposed, many of which are available using Structural Equation Models (SEM). This course will review some of the major longitudinal SEMs. Among others this will include autoregressive/crosslag models, latent growth curve models, and Autoregressive Latent Trajectory (ALT) models. The workshop will present each type of model and illustrate their estimation and fit with empirical data.
Some knowledge of SEMs is assumed.
Ken A. Bollen is the Henry Rudolph Immerwahr Distinguished Professor in the Department of Sociology and the Department of Psychology and Neuroscience at UNC at Chapel Hill. He is a faculty member in the Quantitative Psychology Program in the Thurstone Psychometric Laboratory. He also is chair of the Methods Core and a Fellow of the Carolina Population Center and a Faculty member of the Center for Developmental Science. Since 1980 he has been an instructor in the ICPSR Summer Program in Quantitative Methods of Social Research. Bollen's primary areas of statistical research are in structural equation models, longitudinal methods, and latent growth curve models.
E-Mail an Johannes Nostadt (firstname.lastname@example.org)