Updating the international standard classification of occupations isco 08 12 dating 16
At the major and sub-major level, fewer modifications have been made and they are mostly in the form of further refinement.
However, some of the changes at the more detailed level involve that minor groups are shifted between sub-major groups and occasionally between major groups: despite nominal equivalence at the major and sub-major level, this implies changes in underlying contents.
For this reason recoding 2-digits ISCO-88 into 2-digit ISCO-08, without paying attention to the underlying 3- and 4-digit contents is not a good idea.
Despite its stated raison-detre that ISCO-08 adapts to new divisions of labor as they arise in modernizing societies around the world, many changes relative to ISCO-88 are better interpreted as attempts to repair faults of the previous classification and reintroduce elements that were abolished in the transition from ISCO-68 to ISCO-88.
Note that ISCO is used to classify occupations and does not constitute a sociologically meaningful scale as such.
However, in the near future, international research projects such as PISA and PIAAC, and most likely the 2010 round of national population censuses will use ISCO-08 as their occupational classification tool.
How has the classification of managers changed from ISCO-88 and ISCO-08?
Has the classification of farmers changed between ISCO-88 and ISCO-88?
Many countries maintain national occupational classifications that are often more detailed and may have quite different logics of classifications than ISCO.
Such national classifications need to be converted to ISCO for comparative purposes (which will imply some loss of distortion of the information).How do I handle ambiguous and multiple descriptions?