辣椒视频

Analysing Social Milieus and Social Stratification in Georgia in a Period of Transition

Prepared by Alexander Tsagareli

May, 2025

Background:

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Georgian society underwent a significant shift in social and cultural formation. A long and challenging transition period, the country's move towards European orientation and the adoption of new market and social norms have resulted in a transformed societal structure.

Despite the officially proclaimed classless society in the Soviet Union, the constitutions of 1936 and 1977 recognized three distinct classes: the working class, the peasantry, and the intelligentsia, which encompasses non-manual professions such as scientists, artists, teachers, and various other professionals. Following the rapid deindustrialization and significant economic decline that ensued after the collapse of the Soviet Union, a pronounced hysteresis effect emerged, leading to a situation where a substantial portion of the population experienced a disjunction between their socio-economic conditions and their established social and cultural lifestyle. Although there has been an observable increase in the size of the upper-middle class, over half of households continue to fall below the middle-class threshold.

However, limited research has been conducted on social stratification in Georgian social sciences. The only visibly published work related to these issues is Ronald Inglehart's "System of World Cultures鈥�, which assesses the values of Georgian society as one among many others, in the context of world cultures. A study conducted in 2009 examined social classes in the three South Caucasian republics, revealing distinctions based on key indicators such as income, education, and employment. However, it is important to note that the differences among social strata or groups within Georgian society have not been explored in depth.

Despite the existence of a few fragmentary assessments and external observer evaluations, there is a paucity of published work on the subject. Therefore, additional research is necessary to expand upon the current body of knowledge.

Hypothesis:

The rather economic equality characteristic of the Soviet system contributed to the ascendancy of various forms of capital, such as social, symbolic, and cultural capital, which ultimately became dominant in societal interactions. As a result, lifestyles and attitudes became more pronounced as individuals sought to distinguish themselves from one another. Consequently, familial habits persisted even in a market economy, fostering multidimensional social differences within society based on value-attitudes derived from historical experiences. This phenomenon occurred despite the predominance of two socio-economic classes 鈥� low and middle 鈥� as identified in studies conducted in the South Caucasus region.

It is important to note that individuals espousing socio-nativist according to Piketty's notion or materialistic values by Inglehart can be found not only among the lower class but also within the upper class. Conversely, those inclined toward globalist or post-materialist perspectives are typically situated within the middle and upper classes. Such distinctions are shaped by individuals' adaptation to the free market and their family backgrounds in the Soviet Union.

Therefore, a comprehensive analysis of the social characteristics of various groups, beyond a rigid class framework, is essential for a nuanced understanding of the complexities within Georgian society.

Research Questions:

• What social milieus exist in contemporary Georgia?
• What are the main value characteristics of each milieu?
• How have social milieus changed during the transitional period from the early 1990s to the present day?
• How do value-attitude milieus intersect with socio-economic status?

Theoretical Frame and Objective of the Research:

What is a 鈥淪ocial Milieu鈥�? In research terms, social milieu mainly refers to groups of like-minded people with the same values, principles, lifestyle, mentality and other characteristics.

The concept of social milieu is often referred to as a subjective class rather than being measured solely by objective class indicators. This concept was initially articulated by Durkheim, who described it as the primary space for individual interactions. In contrast to Marx's conception of class, Weber's notions of stratum and Lebensf眉hrung (way of life) emphasize status over market position. Nevertheless, Weber acknowledged that status and class are interrelated and coexist as distinct yet connected aspects of social order. According to Bourdieu, the milieu serves as a space for individuals who share similar practices and tastes. Consequently, members of the same class may inhabit different social milieus based on their unique aspirations and practices.

The objective of this investigation is to pinpoint various milieus within Georgian society and assess them based on a range of factors, delving into their way of life, values, abilities, and overall traits.

Methodology:

The initial step involves carefully selecting the most significant variables and factors for analyzing the social fabric. Subsequently, the study will cluster and compare the key social characteristics of Georgian society, followed by an examination of comparable factors across different classifications mentioned below.

An emphasis will be placed on values/attitude, because it is a defining indicator of differences between social groups/milieu, which this study can obtain from the data source described below. The primary approach is to create a two-dimensional map of social milieus in Georgia. The vertical axis will represent class indicators such as income, education, and urban/rural status, while the horizontal axis will indicate value-attitude milieus.

The primary sources of information for this study will be the World Values Survey (WVS) rounds 3 (1995-1999), 5 (2005-2009), 6 (2010-2014), and 7 (2017-2022, combined with the European Values Study). Complementary data may come from the Central and Eastern Eurobarometer waves 3, 5, 6, and 7, which cover the period from 1992 to 1997. Additional sources include the EU Neighborhood Barometer waves 1 to 6 (2012-2014) and the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) yearly waves, divided thematically from 2013 to 2018.

On the Y-axis, we will represent class or objective indicators, which include:

• Class indicators (employment, education, income, area)  
• National, religious, and other identities 9

On the X-axis, we will display value-attitude or subjective class indicators, which encompass:

• Political orientations, tastes, and behaviors (elections, sense of belonging, attitudes toward democracy, the role of the state, and views on the EU)  
• Materialism vs. Post-Materialism, autonomy values
• Value orientations (Schwartz Human Value Scale, national and religious values, family and gender roles)  
• Leisure and work
• Lifestyle and everyday life (including life satisfaction, interpersonal relations, adaptation to technology and the digital world, and general lifestyle)

The following procedures encompass the harmonization of data across various surveys and within individual waves, followed by applying K-means cluster analysis on the Y-axis to assess the distance between results pertaining to continuous variables associated with class indicators. This analysis aims to facilitate the potential categorization of results into two or three subgroups on the Y-axis. About the value-attitude and opinion measures on the X-axis, factor analysis should be employed to minimize subjectivity and delineate value-attitude dimensions. This methodology also captures nuanced hybrid identities. Subsequently, the probability of specific attitudes within each class should be evaluated through Latent Class Analysis (LCA), as it is posited that individuals within the same class may exhibit similar probabilities regarding certain attitudes. Given the unclear delineation of potential milieus, LCA can illuminate groups and subgroups based on value orientation. In the final stage, conducting in-depth interviews or focus groups with representatives from the identified milieus is feasible.

In addition, the cross-country nature of the research gives the research an extra layer of analysis to compare social milieus and characteristics of Georgian society with other European countries and identifies common or different patterns. In the course of such analyses, it should also become possible to evaluate how well Georgian society 鈥榝its鈥� into existing comparative classifications of countries, e.g., in terms of welfare regimes of the Esping-Anderson type (Scandinavian; Continental; Southern European), or religious-cultural zones.

Potential Outcome:

The primary outcome of this study will be a fresh depiction of Georgian society, highlighting any divergences or similarities to other post-soviet societies. In the social sciences, as well as in related disciplines and professions, such a classification can be helpful in properly planning and carrying out future research activities. The research has the ambition to create a broad picture of Georgian social structure, which will help to overcome the false alienation that can be reduced to liberal and conservative groups.

This paper aims to develop a two-dimensional map of Georgian society during the transition period, focusing on socio-economic factors and value-oriented attitudes. A comparable analysis has been conducted by the Sinus-Institute, as illustrated in the accompanying image.

The use of data-driven stratification is a crucial tool in drafting policy papers and creating new action plans. This approach enables policymakers to tackle the distinct challenges faced by different segments of society and promote greater equity and inclusivity with conviction.

Exploring the social dynamics of Georgian society can play a crucial role in fostering a stronger sense of national identity, self-awareness, and consciousness, particularly in a nation that is still in the process of transition. By drawing comparisons between established and emerging societies, this study offers valuable insights into Georgia鈥檚 European aspirations.