Filippo Oncini – PhD Student
Sociologia e Ricerca Sociale, Università degli Studi di Trento
Sitting at the (Inequality) Table
Classi socialie consumo alimentarein Italia
Contributi sociologici: i classici
• ‘The Condition of the Working Class in England’ - Engels (1844)
• Booth (1886-1903), Rowntree (1908), Pember Reeves (1914)
• Bourdieu ‘La distinction’ (1984)
Literature review
• Generalmente, le ricerche mostrano che lo status socio-economico è ancora oggi
determinante per indagare il consumo di alcuni alimenti (e.g. Darmon & Drwnoski, 2008);
• Rilevanza del tema: obesità (definita la “epidemia globale” dalla WHO);
• Verdura, frutta, cibi biologici, pesce, carni bianche, prodotti integrali: upper Ses
• Carne, junk food, fast food, pasta-pane-riso, legumi e patate: lower SeS
• Higher SeS = cibo più salutare, pochi grassi e pochi alimenti con contenuto chilocalorico
elevato;
• Lower SeS = carne, grassi aggiunti, zuccheri
Quali problemi?
• Variabili socioeconomiche: spesso trattate in modo troppo vago
(Lalluka et al., 2006; Braveman et al., 2003).
• Il consumo di cibo deve essere considerato come un insieme di
pratiche (Warde, 2000). Molti dataset…ma informazioni
tendenzialmente scarse.
• Quali variabili considerare? Status, classe, istruzione, reddito…
Dati e metodo
• Multiscopo: 2003-2012 (Lavoratori: 25-55; N=156,169, 64% del
campione)
• Variabili che riguardano il cibo: porzioni alla settimana;
trasformazione da ordinale a metrica per facilitarne l’interpretazione.
• Variabili di controllo: classe sociale (6 categorie), livello di istruzione (4
categorie), bmi, stato civile, età, regione, sesso
Variables
Original Cat.
Transformed Cat.
Pane-pasta-riso, salumi, carne bianca, carne
rossa, maiale, latte, formaggio, verdura in
foglia, verdura in frutto, frutta, pesce, uova,
snack, legumi, patate, dolci
1. Mai
2. Meno di una volta a settimana
3. Qualche volta alla settimana
4. Una volta al giorno
5. Più di una volta al giorno
1. Mai
2. Solo stagionalmente
3. Più raramente
4. 1-2 bicchieri al giorno
5. Da mezzo a un litro al giorno
6. Più di un litro al giorno
1. 0 portions
2. 0.5 portions
3. 4 portions
4. 7 portions
5. 12 portions
1. 0 portions
2. 0.1 portions
3. 0.4 portions
4. 2.1 portions
5. 3.5 portions
6. 7 portions
Soft Drinks
Table 1. Ordinal to metric transformation. Occasional missing s treated as 0.
Bread, Pasta,
Rice
9.1
Cured Meat
8.1
White Meat
Red Meat
7.1
Pork
Milk
6.1
Cheese
Leaf Veg.
5.1
Fruit Veg.
4.1
Fruits
Fish
3.1
Eggs
Snack
2.1
Legumes
Potatoes
1.1
Sweets
0.1
2003
2005
2006
2007
Figure 5. Food consumption trends. 2003-2012.
Figure 5. Food consumption trends. 2003-2012.
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Soft Drinks
Costruzione delle variabili dipendenti: PCA
Variable
Carni
Frutta e
verdura
Square
Dolci e Junk Latticini
Base
Uniqueness
Carni bianche
0.76
0.45
Carni rosse
0.82
0.37
Maiale
0.68
0.48
Verdure foglia
0.86
0.26
Verdura frutto
0.86
0.27
Frutta
0.60
0.60
Legumi
Uova
0.83
Patate
0.74
0.37
0.43
0.38
0.51
0.43
Snack
0.77
0.39
Dolci
0.71
0.47
Soft Drinks
0.61
0.63
Latte
0.82
0.37
Formaggio
Pasta-paneriso
0.71
0.41
0.80
0.35
Salumi
0.48
0.52
Pesce
-0.40
0.54
Table 5. PCA. Rotated factor loadings (promax). (Blanks represents loadings < 0.35).
Regressione OLS
Meat
Veg&Fru
Snack&Sweets
Square
Dairy
Essential
Fish
Controls
2005
0.01
(0.05)
0.15*
(0.08)
0.07*
(0.04)
0.05
(0.04)
0.03
(0.05)
-0.11**
(0.04)
0.03
(0.02)
2006
-0.08*
(0.05)
2.55***
(0.08)
0.17***
(0.04)
-0.10**
(0.04)
-0.15***
(0.05)
-0.17***
(0.04)
0.04**
(0.02)
2007
0.08
(0.05)
0.21***
(0.08)
0.17***
(0.04)
-0.32***
(0.04)
-0.24***
(0.05)
-0.30***
(0.04)
0.06***
(0.02)
2008
0.07
(0.05)
0.18**
(0.08)
0.20***
(0.04)
-0.22***
(0.04)
-0.23***
(0.05)
-0.31***
(0.04)
0.00
(0.02)
2009
0.21***
(0.05)
-0.17**
(0.08)
0.32***
(0.04)
0.02
(0.04)
-0.28***
(0.05)
-0.32***
(0.04)
0.04*
(0.02)
2010
0.18***
(0.05)
-0.00
(0.08)
0.39***
(0.04)
-0.07*
(0.04)
-0.20***
(0.05)
-0.43***
(0.04)
0.06***
(0.02)
2011
0.13***
(0.05)
-0.05
(0.08)
0.42***
(0.04)
-0.09**
(0.04)
-0.33***
(0.05)
-0.49***
(0.04)
0.05***
(0.02)
2012
0.10**
(0.05)
-0.21**
(0.08)
0.19***
(0.04)
-0.11**
(0.04)
-0.48***
(0.05)
-0.72***
(0.04)
-0.02
(0.02)
0.04
(0.04)
0.04
(0.06)
0.09***
(0.03)
0.13***
(0.03)
0.12***
(0.04)
0.12***
(0.03)
-0.04**
(0.02)
Pet. Agri.
0.60***
(0.10)
0.79***
(0.16)
-0.04
(0.09)
0.72***
(0.09)
0.87***
(0.11)
1.12***
(0.08)
-0.19***
(0.04)
Pet. Urban
0.25***
(0.05)
0.06
(0.08)
0.25***
(0.04)
0.30***
(0.04)
0.05
(0.05)
0.32***
(0.04)
-0.01
(0.02)
W.C. Agri
0.12
(0.08)
-0.16
(0.13)
0.08
(0.07)
0.80***
(0.07)
0.07
(0.09)
0.63***
(0.07)
-0.20***
(0.03)
W.C. Urban
0.45***
(0.04)
-0.12*
(0.07)
0.47***
(0.04)
0.63***
(0.04)
0.21***
(0.05)
0.42***
(0.04)
-0.07***
(0.02)
Low. Sec.
0.11**
(0.05)
0.40***
(0.09)
0.30***
(0.05)
-0.46***
(0.05)
0.42***
(0.06)
0.08
(0.05)
0.06***
(0.02)
-0.05
(0.06)
0.83***
(0.10)
0.19***
(0.05)
-0.61***
(0.05)
0.43***
(0.06)
-0.05
(0.05)
0.19***
(0.03)
Tert. or high.
-0.45***
(0.06)
1.53***
(0.11)
-0.09
(0.06)
-0.82***
(0.06)
0.54***
(0.07)
-0.17***
(0.06)
0.26***
(0.03)
Married
0.45***
(0.03)
0.36***
(0.05)
-0.17***
(0.03)
0.26***
(0.03)
0.29***
(0.03)
0.34***
(0.03)
0.05***
(0.01)
Div. or widow.
0.14***
(0.05)
-0.33***
(0.08)
-0.09**
(0.04)
0.18***
(0.04)
0.16***
(0.05)
-0.27***
(0.04)
0.03
(0.02)
Centre
1.14***
(0.03)
0.21***
(0.05)
-0.49***
(0.03)
0.64***
(0.03)
-0.12***
(0.04)
0.20***
(0.03)
0.43***
(0.01)
South
0.55***
(0.03)
-1.09***
(0.04)
-0.50***
(0.02)
1.42***
(0.02)
-0.55***
(0.03)
0.07***
(0.02)
0.52***
(0.01)
Normal 18.5-24
0.30***
(0.06)
0.19**
(0.10)
-0.35***
(0.05)
-0.02
(0.05)
0.24***
(0.06)
-0.14***
(0.05)
-0.02
(0.03)
Overweight 25-30
0.55***
(0.06)
0.11
(0.10)
-0.44***
(0.05)
-0.04
(0.06)
0.13*
(0.07)
-0.15***
(0.05)
-0.02
(0.03)
Obese 31-
1.00***
(0.07)
0.12
(0.12)
-0.34***
(0.06)
-0.06
(0.06)
-0.02
(0.08)
-0.03
(0.06)
-0.03
(0.03)
35-44
-0.56***
(0.03)
0.78***
(0.05)
-0.88***
(0.03)
-0.04
(0.03)
-0.20***
(0.03)
-0.27***
(0.03)
0.08***
(0.01)
45-55
-0.87***
(0.03)
1.72***
(0.06)
-1.58***
(0.03)
-0.02
(0.03)
-0.48***
(0.04)
-0.33***
(0.03)
0.13***
(0.01)
Female
-0.66***
(0.03)
2.16***
(0.04)
-0.40***
(0.02)
-0.16***
(0.02)
0.87***
(0.03)
-1.15***
(0.02)
0.01
(0.01)
Constant
8.70***
(0.09)
16.82***
(0.16)
5.74***
(0.08)
7.46***
(0.08)
8.70***
(0.11)
12.05***
(0.08)
2.15***
(0.04)
Observations
156,169
156,169
156,169
156,169
156,169
156,169
156,169
0.03
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.01
0.03
0.02
White Coll.
Upper Sec.
R-squared
Risultati: classe e istruzione
• Effetto classe sociale ≠ istruzione;
• Tendenzialmente c’è coerenza con i risultati trovati in altri
paesi;
• Effetto classe rimarrebbe al netto del reddito o dello status?
• Ambiente rurale vs ambiente urbano?
Frutta e verdura
Carne
primary or none
primary or none
lower secondary
lower secondary
upper secondary
upper secondary
tertiary or higher
tertiary or higher
-.6
-.4
-.2
Meat Portions
0
.2
0
Fig. 1 Effetto Istruzione su Carne
1
Veg&Fru Portions
1.5
2
Fig. 2 Effetto Istruzione su Frutta e Verdura
Bourg.
Bourg.
White Coll.
White Coll.
Pet-Agri
Pet-Agri
Pet-Urb
Pet-Urb
Work-Agri
Work-Agri
Work-Urb
Work-Urb
0
.5
.2
Fig. 3 Effetto classe sociale su Carne
.4
Meat Portions
.6
.8
-.5
0
.5
Veg&Fru Portions
Fig. 4 Effetto classe sociale su Frutta e verdura
1
Square
Base
primary or none
primary or none
lower secondary
lower secondary
upper secondary
upper secondary
tertiary or higher
tertiary or higher
-1
-.8
-.6
-.4
Square Portions
-.2
0
Fig. 5 Effetto Istruzione su Square
-.4
Bourg.
White Coll.
White Coll.
Pet-Agri
Pet-Agri
Pet-Urb
Pet-Urb
Work-Agri
Work-Agri
Work-Urb
Work-Urb
.2
Fig. 7. Effetto Classe sociale su Square
-.2
-.1
Dairy Portions
0
.1
Fig. 6 Effetto Istruzione su Base
Bourg.
0
-.3
.4
.6
Square Portions
.8
1
0
.5
1
Dairy Portions
Fig. 8. Effetto Classe sociale su Base
1.5
Dolci e junk
Pesce
Education
Education
primary or none
primary or none
lower secondary
lower secondary
upper secondary
upper secondary
tertiary or higher
tertiary or higher
0
.1
.2
-.2
.3
0
.2
Snack&Sweets Portions
Fish Portions
Fig. 10 Effetto Istruzione su Dolci e Junk
Fig. 9 Effetto Istruzione su Pesce
Bourg.
Bourg.
White Coll.
White Coll.
Pet-Agri
Pet-Agri
Pet-Urb
Pet-Urb
Work-Agri
Work-Agri
Work-Urb
Work-Urb
-.3
-.2
Fig. 11 Effetto Classe sociale su Pesce
.4
-.1
Fish Portions
0
.1
-.2
0
.2
Snack&Sweets Portions
Fig. 11 Effetto Classe sociale su Dolci e Junk
.4
.6
E la spesa?
• Bisognerebbe considerare anche la spesa, non solo la
quantità;
• Prezzo della carne: dipende da molti fattori (origine, taglio,
etc.)
• E’ possibile ottenere una panoramica più dettagliata
confrontando l’indagine Multiscopo con quella sui Consumi
delle famiglie (2009);
• Dati e metodi: spesa mensile pro capite; adulti lavoratori 2555 (N=9,619 - 42%). Confronto tra regressioni OLS:
Bourgeoisie vs Working Class
Multiscopo vs Consumi delle famiglie (2009)
Variables
Multiscopo
Social Class
Freq.
%
Freq.
%
Bourgeoisie
2,811
16.5
1,652
17.2
White Collar
5,446
32.0
3,153
32.8
280
1.7
114
1.2
2,189
12.9
1,116
11.6
Agri. Pet-Bourg.
Urban Pet-Bourg.
Education
Marital Status
Region
Age
Gender
Consumi
Agri. Work. Class
462
2.7
185
1.9
Urb. Work. Class
5,823
34.2
3,399
35.3
Primary or none
800
4.7
402
4.2
Lower secondary
7,217
42.4
4,249
44.2
Upper secondary
6,215
36.5
3,518
36.6
Tertiary or higher
2,779
16.3
1,450
15.1
Single
5,096
30.0
1,914
19.9
10,252
60.3
6,657
69.2
Married
Divorced/Widowed
1,663
9.8
1,048
10.9
North
7,899
46.4
4,557
47.4
Centre
3,160
18.6
1,668
17.3
South and Island
5,952
35.0
3,394
35.3
24-34
4,651
27.3
1,463
15.2
35-44
6,408
37.7
3,830
39.8
45-55
5,952
35.0
4,326
45.0
Male
9,036
53.1
7,429
77.2
7,975
46.9
2,190
22.8
17,011
100.0
9,619
100
Female
Total
Table 8. Independent variables. Multiscopo 2009 and Indagine sui consumi delle famiglie 2009.
1. Spesa e quantitàdifferiscono
Meat
18
Work-Urb
15
14
17
16
28
35
Bourg.
Expenditure
31
32
33
47
46
45
44
43
Quantity
24
23
22
Bourg.
Work-Urb
28
35.5
29
36
36.5
37
Expenditure
25
37.5
26
Essential
38
Dairy
Work-Urb
30
Bourg.
Quantity
16
18
Expenditure
19
32
Quantity
30
Expenditure
36
37
Quantity
38
17
20
39
34
Snack&Sweets
Bourg.
Work-Urb
Figure 1. Bourgeoisie and Urban Working Class differentials in expenditure and quantity. Black=expenditure;
Blue=quantity.
2. Solo una dimensione differisce
Wine
Work-Urb
Bourg.
Fish
Work-Urb
Expenditure
17
18
19
11
10.8
14
15
10.6
10.4
10.2
4
3.8
Quantity
4.2
Bourg.
3.6
Expenditure
32
31
30
29
Quantity
33
34
4.4
Square
Work-Urb
16
Bourg.
9
76
2.6
24
10
11
Expenditure
2.7
12
13
14
3
2.9
2.8
28
Quantity
26
Expenditure
78
77
Quantity
79
30
Veg&Fruits
Bourg.
Work-Urb
Figure 1. Bourgeoisie and Urban Working Class differentials in expenditure and quantity. Black=expenditure;
Blue=quantity.
Discussione (1)
• Taste of luxury and taste of necessity? (Bourdieu, 1983);
• Brand of luxury and of necessity?
e.g. cibo biologico in UK (Wier et al., 2008)
Possibile spiegazione:
• Hard Discount: 0.7 to 1.2 incremento nei multinomial log-odds
per la working class (Dove compri di solito pane, pasta, carne,
verdura, pesce etc.?)
• Negozi tradizionali e mercato: -0.2 punti per la working class
Discussione (2)
• Pattern culturali di disuguaglianze sono ancora radicati nello status socioeconomico; necessario capire meglio quali dimensioni siano più importanti;
• Necessarie variabili più dettagliate, sia nelle variabili dipendenti che in quelle
indipendenti; considerare «l’intreccio» tra le pratiche alimentari:
1. Quantità e spesa nello stesso dataset;
2. Condimenti, tipi di cottura;
3. Food-styles (etnico, fast-food, vegano, macrobiotico…);
4. Trasmissione del gusto: ‘indelible mark of infant learning’ [Bourdieu, p.76]);
5. Mangiar fuori (Warde, 2000).
Grazie!
Bibliografia
• Bourdieu, (1983). La distinzione. Critica sociale del gusto. Il Mulino.
• Braveman PA, Cubbin C, Egerter S, Chideya S, Marchi KS, Metzler M et al. (2005). Socioeconomic
status in health research: one size does not fit all. Journal of American Medical Association 294,
2879–2888.
• Darmon, N., & Drewnowski, A. (2008). Does social class predict diet quality? The American journal
of clinical nutrition, 87(5), 1107-1117.
• Lallukka, T., Laaksonen, M., Rahkonen, O., Roos, E., & Lahelma, E. (2006). Multiple socio-economic
circumstances and healthy food habits. European journal of clinical nutrition, 61(6), 701-710.
• Warde, A., & Martens, L. (2000). Eating out: Social differentiation, consumption and pleasure.
Cambridge University Press.
• Warde, A. (2004). La normalità del mangiar fuori. Rassegna italiana di sociologia, 45(4), 493-518.
• World Health Organization. (2000). Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic (No.
894).
• Wier, M., O’Doherty Jensen, K., Andersen, L. M., & Millock, K. (2008). The character of demand in
mature organic food markets: Great Britain and Denmark compared. Food Policy, 33(5), 406-421.