ArticleThe British journal of sociology2025
Ambivalent Agents: The Social Mobility Industry and Civil Society Under Neoliberalism in England.
Article in The British journal of sociology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Ambivalent Agents: The Social Mobility Industry and Civil Society Under Neoliberalism in England.The British journal of sociology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article examines civil society organisations working to enhance social mobility in England, especially through higher education. Against the backdrop of neoliberal governance, we investigate whether these organisations operate as protective counter-movements resisting marketisation or as institutional mechanisms that stabilise the inequalities they aim to address. Drawing on Karl Polanyi's concept of the 'double movement' and Nancy Fraser's critique of marketised social protections, we map and analyse over 100 charities and non-profits established since 1992. We combined qualitative coding of organisational websites across nine Fraserian dimensions with Latent Profile Analysis to identify structural patterns within the field. Findings reveal that most organisations balance critical framings of inequality with funder-compatible, technocratic delivery models. We argue this structural ambivalence is a defining feature of civil society under neoliberalism and show how the social mobility industry operates to suggest symbolic reform without redistributive transformation. Our contribution is threefold: we provide the first systematic typology of the UK's social mobility sector, extend Polanyi and Fraser's theoretical frameworks into social mobility and education policy, and offer a methodological model combining qualitative and quantitative methods with AI-assisted research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.