Cambridge OCR A Level Sociology: Understanding Social Inequalities

When sociologists explain social class inequality, it is easy to focus on differences in income, occupation and education. However, Anthony B. Atkinson’s research reminds us that social advantage can also be passed down through inheritance.

Atkinson’s 2013 study, Wealth and Inheritance in Britain from 1896 to the Present, is a particularly useful source for Cambridge OCR A Level Sociology students because it shows how wealth passed between generations can make society less meritocratic. A person’s life chances may depend not only on their own qualifications or effort, but also on whether their family can pass on property, savings, investments or financial gifts.

OCR identifies Atkinson (2013) as a suggested study for understanding inherited wealth within the social inequalities component.

You can download a copy of Atkinson’s Research Here.

What did Atkinson study?

Atkinson examined the long-term pattern of wealth being transferred between generations in Britain. He used historical estate data from 1896 onwards, when modern Estate Duty was introduced, to estimate the value of wealth passed on at death. He also considered lifetime gifts where the available evidence allowed this.

This makes Atkinson’s work different from a small-scale sociological study. It is a large-scale historical analysis using official data over more than a century. His aim was to investigate whether inheritance had become more or less important in Britain over time.

Atkinson focused on transmitted wealth. This includes wealth passed on through inheritance after a person dies, as well as some forms of financial support or gifts given during a person’s lifetime. It can include property, land, savings, shares and other assets.

What did Atkinson find?

Atkinson found that inheritance was extremely important in Britain before the First World War. In this period, total transmitted wealth was equivalent to around 20% of net national income.

The importance of inheritance then declined across much of the twentieth century. It fell to around 10% after the Second World War and dropped to below 5% of national income by the late 1970s.

However, Atkinson found that this long-term decline had begun to reverse. The estimated flow of inherited and gifted wealth increased from 4.8% of net national income in 1977 to 8.2% in 2006. He linked this rise to the growth of personal wealth, which had increased more quickly than national income since the 1970s.

This does not mean that Britain had returned to the very high levels of inheritance seen before the First World War. However, it does suggest that inherited wealth had become more significant again by the early twenty-first century.

Why does inheritance matter for social class inequality?

Inheritance can reproduce social class advantage because wealthy families are able to pass resources to their children. This may involve leaving a house or savings in a will, helping with university costs, contributing towards a deposit, providing rent-free accommodation or offering financial support during unemployment.

A young person whose parents own property or have substantial savings may have a very different starting point from someone whose family rents privately, has little savings or is managing debt. Both young people may work equally hard, but one may be protected from financial risk and given opportunities that the other cannot access.

For example, a graduate who receives help with a house deposit may enter home ownership earlier, avoid some private-renting costs and begin building wealth themselves. A graduate without family support may face higher housing costs, student debt and fewer options when choosing where to live or what work to accept.

This is why Atkinson’s research challenges simple meritocratic explanations of inequality. Success may not depend entirely on talent, effort or educational achievement. It can also depend on the economic resources available within a person’s family.

Atkinson and Weber: life chances

Atkinson’s work can be linked clearly to Weber’s concept of life chances.

Weber argued that people’s opportunities in life are shaped by their market situation and the resources they can access. Wealth gives individuals and families greater security, greater choice and a stronger ability to cope with risks such as unemployment, ill health or rising housing costs.

Atkinson provides evidence that unequal life chances can be passed between generations. Children from wealthier families may have better access to housing, education and financial support. This makes it more likely that they will maintain, rather than lose, their family’s social position.

A Weberian interpretation would therefore argue that inheritance is important because it increases the life chances of some groups while limiting the opportunities available to others.

Atkinson and Marxism: class reproduction

Atkinson’s findings can also be used to support a Marxist explanation of social class inequality.

Marxists argue that capitalist societies are divided by ownership. Those who own property, land, businesses and financial assets have greater power than those who mainly depend on selling their labour for wages.

Inheritance helps this ownership remain within particular families. Wealthy parents can pass property and financial assets to their children, meaning that economic power is not spread equally across society. Instead, it can remain concentrated among groups who already have advantages.

From a Marxist perspective, inheritance is not simply a private family matter. It is one mechanism through which social class inequalities are reproduced. Children from affluent families can inherit an economic head start, while those from less wealthy backgrounds may begin adulthood with debt, insecure housing and fewer opportunities.

Does inheritance make Britain less meritocratic?

Atkinson’s work raises an important question: can society be genuinely meritocratic when inherited wealth gives some people such a large advantage?

Supporters of meritocracy may argue that inheritance is natural. Parents who work hard, save and invest may reasonably wish to pass their resources on to their children. Some inherited wealth may therefore reflect effort, responsibility and long-term planning.

However, critics would argue that inheritance gives advantages which are not earned by the recipient. A person may receive money, property or financial security simply because of the family they were born into. This can make claims about equal opportunity less convincing.

Atkinson’s research is useful because it shows that inheritance did not disappear as Britain became more modern. Instead, it became increasingly important again after the late 1970s. This suggests that class inequality can be reproduced not only through unequal wages, but also through unequal ownership of wealth.

Evaluating Atkinson’s research

A major strength of Atkinson’s study is its historical scale. It examines Britain over more than one hundred years, allowing students to identify long-term changes rather than relying only on a snapshot from one year.

It is also based on official estate data, making it more reliable than people’s memories or opinions about whether inheritance matters. The research provides clear quantitative evidence that transmitted wealth declined for much of the twentieth century before increasing again from the late 1970s.

However, Atkinson recognises that constructing a long-term series of inheritance estimates is difficult. Historical estate and tax records do not capture every form of wealth transfer perfectly, especially lifetime gifts. The study is therefore strongest for showing broad historical patterns rather than proving exactly how every family transfers advantage.

Another limitation is that Atkinson’s evidence does not directly show what happens to each individual recipient of inheritance. It demonstrates that transmitted wealth has become more important in the economy, but it cannot on its own prove that inheritance causes particular educational, employment or health outcomes.

Students should also remember that the key figures end in 2006. Atkinson’s study remains valuable for understanding the historical relationship between wealth, inheritance and class reproduction, but contemporary evidence should be added when making claims about Britain today.

How to use Atkinson in an OCR answer

Atkinson is particularly useful in answers on:

• social class and life chances;
• wealth inequality;
• social mobility;
• inheritance and meritocracy;
• Weberian explanations of inequality;
• Marxist explanations of class reproduction.

A strong application might read:

Atkinson’s study of wealth and inheritance in Britain shows that class advantage can be passed between generations. He found that the value of inherited wealth increased from 4.8% of net national income in 1977 to 8.2% in 2006. This suggests that children from wealthier families may receive property, savings or financial support that improves their housing, education and employment opportunities. This supports Weber’s view that unequal resources create unequal life chances, while Marxists would argue that inheritance helps maintain class inequality through the continued ownership of wealth.

Study snapshot

Study	Main focus	Key finding	Sociological relevance
Atkinson (2013)	Wealth and inheritance in Britain, 1896–2006	The estimated flow of inherited wealth rose from 4.8% of net national income in 1977 to 8.2% in 2006.	Shows how family wealth can reproduce unequal life chances across generations.
Method	Historical quantitative analysis	Used official estate data, with estimates of estates and lifetime gifts where possible.	Provides long-term evidence rather than a one-off snapshot.
Theory links	Weber and Marxism	Wealth can expand life chances and preserve ownership within advantaged families.	Useful for evaluating meritocracy and social mobility.

The key takeaway

Atkinson’s research shows that social class inequality is not only about how much people earn. It is also about what families own and what they can pass on.

Inheritance can give some young people a financial cushion, access to housing and greater freedom to make educational or career choices. Others may start adult life without these advantages. This means that social class can be reproduced across generations, making equal opportunity harder to achieve.

Activity download: Use the accompanying Atkinson (2013): Inheritance, Life Chances and Class Reproduction lesson pack to help students apply this research through evidence cards, theory tasks, a meritocracy debate and an OCR-style writing challenge.