Reclaiming social mobility for the opportunity mission

It’s no surprise then, that this is a deep-rooted belief in Britain’s collective psyche. Nor, that it is at the centre of the new government’s mission to ‘break down the barriers to opportunity.’ This mission is welcome as it challenges the more problematic ideas about social mobility and privileges the progressive ones.

This blog aims to sharpen the focus of this ambition. In contrast to unhelpful rhetoric from the recent past, we outline a progressive definition of social mobility to meet the challenges of the day.  We then offer a series of policymaking principles to consider so that economic growth can genuinely deliver the building blocks of a good life: good work, a secure home, health and community. We do this in preparation for co-produced research and policy work with young people in spring 2025.

The problem

At its best, social mobility is the root of the social contract which says each generation is better off than the last and everyone has equal opportunities to succeed. The problem is that this contract is broken. Relative social mobility - usually measured as the gap between parental income and children’s life chances - has stalled in recent years and is low by international standards. This is partly because there is a relationship between lower intergenerational income mobility and higher income inequality known as the Gatsby curve - with Britain currently suffering from both ailments. This might be because the concept has been used to justify widening inequality in recent years. As illustrated in recent works Social mobility and its enemies, Know Your Place, and IPPR’s own collection from 2018: Move on up, more elitist models of social mobility bake in hierarchy and inequality by default and while politicians of all stripes invoke social mobility, few have achieved it.

Rather than acknowledging inequality but saying it is ultimately surmountable for individuals who undergo ‘rags to riches’ transformations, new progressive paradigms of social mobility should be about increasing opportunity and reducing inequality overall. While the former is politically useful, we can see that it is failing in Britain. In the same way that the fallacy of trickle-down economics has only resulted in further consolidation of wealth, the fantasy of trickle up mobility allows for good news stories about individualised success, while rigidly maintaining the structures of inequality for everyone else - especially those at the sharp end of compounded and persistent disadvantage.

The government’s opportunity mission turns the tide on this failure, setting its sights on reducing intergenerational income persistence once and for all. However, this ambitious and detailed plan to measure and sever hereditary income links seems to have been scaled down by the realities of government. Plenty of work is happening across government to build better futures for young people but these lack a golden thread, a pragmatic vision to describe what success would look like in this parliament. Like other political priorities, the opportunity mission needs milestones that can pay political dividends sooner rather than later.

These dividends might be golden in more ways than one: the UK’s economic forecasts stagnating and the numbers of young people who are not in employment, education or training (NEET) increasing is no coincidence. Getting opportunity right could be the answer to the government’s inclusive growth predicament with research estimating it is worth up to £19 billion a year to the British economy.

The project

That is why IPPR has set about consulting experts, academics and young people about a specifically progressive definition of opportunity and social mobility for modern Britain. Through roundtable discussions with experts this year, we have developed four principles for policymaking to achieve this ambition. These are:

• Equity. Background and identity matter even if we wish they didn’t. One of the major failings of some historic definitions of social mobility is their blindness to structural inequality which dictates so many people’s life chances so that effort is not equally rewarded. This means it will be necessary to target interventions at those who need it most to genuinely level the playing field. Those measuring opportunity should pay particular attention to specific groups. Disrupting persistent and compounded disadvantage should be the goal. For example, reducing rates of those not in education, employment and training (NEET) is central to delivering opportunity but paying particular attention to groups most at risk of being NEET will also help in reducing inequality overall.
• Place.Some models of social mobility separate ‘gifted’ individuals from deprived communities so that they are expected to choose between staying in their community or leaving to explore opportunities. Asking young people to get ‘up and out’ of their communities should be a thing of the past so that internal migration in the UK is a choice, not a necessity. Taking place seriously when thinking about progressive social mobility also means looking at delivering opportunity to communities and collectives, not simply individuals.  
• Beyond the school gates. Education remains a key driver of social mobility and opportunity, but it should not act alone in a world where what happens outside of school can dictate young people’s ability to learn just as much as what happens at school. The challenges young people face and the world around them has changed dramatically in recent years such that a whole-government approach to opportunity and equality is needed. This will require a systematic shift in the way that government acts for young people to make work more joined up.
• Lifelong. Children and young people must be offered continuous and iterative opportunities throughout their childhood, adolescence, early adulthood and beyond. Those at the sharp end of structural disadvantage may not always be ready to jump when an opportunity says how high. They may not be able to afford to take the risks more well-off children can. If interventions in early years or childhood fail, public services must step in time and again throughout adolescence to allow all children the privilege that only some currently have: to fail and try again.

These are not new ideas or debates. They are the topic of decades, if not centuries, of work. But they are worth restating now amid a fraught political discourse with opportunity and belonging at its heart. Offering opportunity and genuine social mobility which reduces inequality for young people can help create a positive and aspirational vision for the government – as well as fulfilling its ambitions for economic growth.  This vision is one which recognises structural inequality and seeks to erase it. One that offers young people opportunity time and time again in the places they call home and the places they want to call home. One that values different visions of success and skill so that all parts of the country and the economy are well served by ambition that feels possible for every young person. This will be the focus of upcoming policy and research work, co-produced with young people, in spring 2025.

Thank you to Impetus and the Youth Futures Foundation for their support in this work as well as a literature review kindly contributed by Professor Lindsey Macmillan and Dr Laura Outhwaite at the Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunity, the University College London.