The situation of social work in the semi-peripheral Hungarian reality
https://doi.org/10.61795/fssr.v26y2024i5.07
Abstract: This research investigates the contemporary state of social work in Hungary by examining the evolution of interest relationships within the socio-economic-political value system, shaped by both national and global economic policies. Utilizing Immanuel Wallerstein’s world-systems theory, which categorizes nations into core, semi-peripheral, and peripheral groups based on their economic and political influence, this study analyzes the effects of Hungary’s historical and economic development on its social work sector. As a semi-peripheral country, Hungary has encountered substantial social and economic challenges following its transition from socialism. The study underscores the implications of global economic trends and the dependency of semi-peripheral and peripheral countries on core nations. Although the unrestricted flow of capital and technology benefits core countries and multinational corporations, it exacerbates inequalities in less developed nations. Hungary’s post-socialist transformation has led to the erosion of the middle class and heightened social inequalities, further aggravated by a shift towards a workfare society that prioritizes economic growth over social welfare.
Keywords: social work; word system theory; welfare; economic policy; workfare; social values.
Introduction
In order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the current state of social work in Hungary through exploratory research, it is essential to consider the evolution of interest relationships based on the interdependence of national and global economic policies. Analyzing causal relationships within the socio-economic-political value system, which encompasses multiple dimensions, can enhance the reliability of conclusions about the current state of social work in Hungary.
Definition of theoretical framework
The diverse structural composition and operational modes of nation-states (e.g., social structure, degree of inequality) are primarily determined by the extent to which a country has gained economic advantages and influence throughout its history. Immanuel Wallerstein (1983), an American sociologist and polymath, conceptualized dynamically changing processes based on the logic of capital accumulation, division of labor, and international exchange relationships as the world-systems approach theoretical model. This model categorizes the world’s independent nation-states into peripheral, semi-peripheral, and core groups based on their historical political and economic influence.[1]
Drawing on Wallerstein’s theoretical approach, capitalist nations where private ownership of the means of production has been historically beneficial increasingly oriented themselves towards industrial development. Due to this economic structural transformation, the social class structure of core countries gradually underwent changes. In economic terms, this transformation meant that in nation-states prioritizing a capitalist perspective, the gradual increase in the number of middle-class individuals contributed to the expansion of the middle class, thereby reducing inequality within the societal structure (Tóth 2016). According to the world-systems theory, at the top of the hierarchy are complexly developed capitalist nation-states that maintain exploitative relationships, primarily representing the interests of core nations, resulting from the unequal distribution of labor and benefits.
At one pole of the linearly represented model, the core states with significant economic and political influence (e.g., USA, Canada, United Kingdom, France, Germany) can be found, while on the opposite pole, in the periphery, there are industrially underdeveloped countries with low economic and political influence (e.g., Afghanistan, Bolivia, Egypt, Uganda), whose societies are characterized by great polarization and inequality (Figure 1). Between the two endpoints of the model, in the semi-periphery, are nation-states that, based on their indicators derived from the division of labor and their level of complex development, cannot be classified into the groups of core or peripheral countries (e.g., Russia, Panama, Hungary, India, Poland).[2] The biggest losers in capitalist market economic processes are primarily and the nation-states in the periphery and semi-periphery as the global economic production chain, due to the unequal distribution of benefits, sustains and increases the evolution of inequality between nations and within societies (e.g., division of labor, technology, economy, production, standard of living). The cooperation between core states and states located in the periphery or semi-periphery is characterized by a vulnerable and subordinate system of interdependence, resulting in further global inequality through asymmetric exchange value and benefit distribution (Éber 2018).
World systems, globality, inequality
The primary goal of global economic processes serving the interests of capitalism for centuries, as well as artificially created globalization processes during the 20th century, is to facilitate the free flow of intellectual capital, labor, means of production, and technology. The global expansion of capitalist economic actors and the regulation of the international market economy have ensured that the core countries and their closely linked investor groups, as well as the trusts of international mega-corporations, benefit most from the per capita gains generated in the periphery and semi-periphery (Szabó 2022). In other words, nation-states or core countries with significant economic policy advantages and structured according to democratic principles exploit, in the spirit of “mutual dependence,” the states located in the semi-periphery and periphery with lesser global economic and political influence.
Multinational corporate groups of capitalist nation-states with strong economic and foreign policy influence typically withdraw the investment profits sooner or later from the territory of the producing country, and the surplus tax generated from the withdrawal of capital is utilized in their core countries.[3] Thus, depending on the extent of benefit redistribution and state commitment, additional socio-political developments can take place in core countries that, in a comprehensive sense, can increase, protect, or serve the interests of their society (e.g., reducing social inequality, social welfare, education, or healthcare).[4] Global economic policy is a dynamically changing and artificially sustained dependency relationship that ultimately contributes to regulating and reducing the economic, internal, and foreign policy maneuverability of states located in the periphery and semi-periphery. Wallerstein’s world-systems theory supports the notion that states located in the periphery and semi-periphery are excessively exposed to the dependency influence of capitalist, international transnational mega-corporations from an economic policy perspective, making them much more vulnerable and reactive to external and internal variables affecting the market economy. As it was expressed by Pongrác: “The strategies of companies associated with the consumer societies’ core states ultimately enforce the aspects of global economic exploitation and significantly undermine the socio-cultural and natural environment, which can be demonstrated in the difference between the amount of money paid for labor and cheap raw material prices, as well as the continuous production of environmentally harmful substances.” (Pongrác 2019: 130-131)
Individual choices for the common good
During participation in the value-creating global competitive market, the fundamental institution of the capitalist states’ market economy is served by the protection of private property rights. The operational characteristics of core states are primarily determined by the degree of connection between capital and power, as well as the coherence and direction of the economic, political, and social value system. Capitalist countries with similar market economic interests but varying levels of development are characterized by significant operational differences (e.g., political, economic, degree of state involvement), which directly impact the dynamically evolving socio-political direction of the respective country.[5] The balance in the distribution of economic, political, and social responsibility, as well as the socially established value system throughout history, greatly contributes to determining the principles by which state budget revenue from the market economy will be utilized during redistribution.
Divergent historical influences
Due to industrial development, the gradually expanding and strengthening social middle class has shaped the structure of capitalist societies and contributed to the establishment and strengthening of the foundations of the welfare state in the victorious Western countries following World War II. Depending on the degree of state involvement, political and economic forces in these Western countries gradually created and reinforced the welfare state, ensuring social rights. In contrast to capitalist countries, the transformation of the post-socialist society structure in Hungary only began in the 1980s. The economic paradigm shift introduced in just under a decade, expanding the influence of private capital, significantly reshaped the relationship of micro- and macroeconomic actors in the market. The radical reduction of state responsibility, customary in socialism, following the regime change, rapidly transformed the structure of Hungarian society. The self-perpetuating effects of market economic competition contributed to the emergence and intensification of various inequalities (economic, wealth, social, intellectual, cultural, territorial, etc.), leading to the increasing polarization of Hungarian society through the narrowing of the middle class formed in the socialist system (Éber 2020). The decline of the middle class[6] and the polarizing impact of post-communist capitalism have contributed to the current trend of growing social inequality and the impoverishment of the structure of Hungarian society (Bartha 2013).
The institutionalization of social work’s advancement
The cradle of modern professional social work is primarily considered to be England and the United States. Similar to those of the English model, the roots of the American model can be traced back to the voluntary, civil-based Charity Organization Society, and later, to the Chicago Settlement movements organized from sociological workshops. Political welfare initiatives aimed at meeting social needs, coupled with the development of social work in the United States, later collectively contributed to the establishment of professional social work. The gradual acceptance of the profession and its value in state and societal contexts laid the foundation for the international legitimacy of the profession. This, in turn, facilitated the direct contribution of the social sphere to the post-war reconstruction of Western European social institution systems (Kozma 2007).
A short summary of the development of social work in Hungary
The development of social work education in Hungary and the establishment of social work as an independent profession faced obstacles due to the closure of the civil era at the end of the 20th century and the emergence of the socialist state apparatus.[7] During this period, political decision-makers did not agree with the professional legitimacy of the settlement movement. Consequently, they questioned the necessity of social work education and the importance of a professionally functioning service system.[8] The decision-making processes that excluded the professional field gradually led to the dismantling of religious and civil initiatives involved in social care and services, and certain parts of the social care system were integrated under the supervision of the newly emerging state institutions and sectors (Budai et al. 2006). Due to the state policy prioritizing ideology, there was no opportunity for professional social work to emerge as an independent occupation in the Hungarian labor market until 1989. After the regime change, driven by heightened societal demands and the need for professional management of emerging social issues, independent undergraduate social work education was reintroduced in Hungary after nearly 50 years of omission.[9] The primary goal of modern social work, integrated from the practical methodology of capitalist welfare states, focused primarily on addressing and managing suddenly occurring social problems.[10]
Current state of professional social work in Hungary
One factor hindering the credibility of measuring occupational prestige is that only those professions about which respondents have definite knowledge and ideas can provide an authentic picture (Goldthorpe & Hope 1973). The low societal acceptance of the social sphere/work in Hungary and the lack of social knowledge sharply contrast with generally accepted trends in developed Western countries (Erdős 2019). In contrast to the general, comprehensive knowledge of the populations in the United States and the United Kingdom, the majority of the Hungarian public generally defines social workers as individuals with low educational qualifications, working for minimum wage, engaged in physical or unnecessary work (Szoboszlai 2017).
Changes in student numbers
The current perception of the social prestige of occupations is just one of the factors that young people consider when planning their career choices. People’s childhood desires, education, culture, changing internal values, different life stages, the varying socialization environments shaping their personalities, the cumulative effects of physiological changes occurring at different micro, meso, and macro levels, and the societally accepted value system all influence the choice of the educational path. The first two decades following the introduction of social work in 1989 were characterized by a slow but steady increase in the number of students and those employed in social sectors (Balog et al. 2015).
Figure 2. The development of the number of students in Hungary between 2008–2020.
(Source: own edition, based upon the ISCDE statistics by The Hungarian Educational Authority, 2023. International Standard Classification of Education [ISCDE])
According to the statistical data from the Hungarian Education Office, the number of students applying for the social work specialization and those obtaining a degree have been continuously decreasing in Hungary since the global economic crisis in 2008 (see Figures 2 and 3).[11] The currently applied political model tends to support the continuous decrease in social tolerance and stigmatizes marginalized groups, as well as the volunteers and professional helpers who interact with them (Berger 2019). This aligns with the early observations of Keller (2009) and Ball (2001), stating that, alongside the suppression of communal values, postmodern society is characterized by a focus on personal, self-centric individual interests (Temesváry 2018), the pursuit of subjective dreams, existence, identity, and the desire for a quality lifestyle (Bugovics 2012). Taking into account the study by Ágnes Utasi (2018), it is increasingly common nowadays that the majority of the population in developed countries is characterized by a primarily materialistic-individualistic orientation.
The responsibility of politics
According to demographic indicators, it is evident that alongside the declining population in Hungary, the dependency ratio and aging index continue to rise (Central Statistical Office [CSO/KSH] 2023).[12] The decrease in the level of state involvement contradicts the continuously growing clientele and the expectations of the majority society towards quality services,[13] as well as the trends in international social work.[14] The societal perception of social workers largely depends on the extent to which the public is informed about the social sphere, how it is portrayed, and with what meaning and characteristics it attributes to social work (Ferge 2017). The shift away from the welfare model, which prioritizes reducing social inequality, and the content features and symbols of the current unidirectional government communication model do not effectively reflect the utilization and value of social work to society.[15] The distribution and utilization of available resources are primarily determined by the values represented by the political elite in power. The close intertwining of the interests of the current government and economic groups contributes to influencing the dynamic changes in societal values through symbols representing common state power and global economic interests.[16] Symbols promoting profit orientation shape the change in societal values through the formation of interpersonal moral values (e.g., social solidarity, responsibility), thereby influencing the societal esteem and prestige of social work.[17] Regarding the acknowledgment of the social sphere by the state, Géza Gosztonyi (2021), the president of the Hungarian Association of Social Workers, stated that, due to external impacts on society (e.g., COVID-19, migration, the Ukrainian war), the social role of the social sphere has increasingly strengthened in recent years, and the client base in need of assistance has significantly widened. However, social policy often forgets about the social sphere, such as during the pandemic and the prioritization of vaccination schedules (Botás 2021).
The relationship between economic policy, social policy, and social work
Based on the economic policy outlined by the Hungarian government in 2010, the goal is to achieve a workfare society that ensures long-term growth for the Hungarian economy. The key element for the stability of labor-based (workfare) economic policy is to increase the number of available jobs. Due to the absence of geopolitical and economic factors (e.g., capital, military influence, technology, minerals), the government primarily seeks to realize economic development through the attraction of foreign capital and technology.[18] During the investment-supporting measures, the state apparatus proposes numerous regulations based on the coordination of market and government interest mechanisms. These regulations primarily serve the interests of investor conglomerates/multinational corporations closely connected to power and central states, contrary to the interests of the Hungarian majority society. The extent of the shift away from the social welfare model aimed at reducing vertical inequality, as formulated by Nicolas Barr (2009), indicates that the moral values of the current government increasingly align with the profit logic of capitalist ideology.[19] The negative consequence of the shift in economic policy perspective is that government-supported social policy measures directly impact the dominant direction of social policy. By reducing the effective toolbox of social regulations and services supported during redistribution, which would primarily benefit the lower-income and poorer societal strata, the government restricts the means of achieving social justice and equality.
Conclusions
The primary goal of capital investment groups representing the interests of core countries is to maximize profit with minimal risk factors. When approving international investments that appear attractive, it should be borne in mind that the regulations and measures underpinning economic investments can have a negative long-term impact on the structure and values of Hungarian society. Direct state measures that support investment (e.g., environmental regulation, changes in labor laws, tax breaks) and underlying, hidden regulations (e.g., control of NGOs,[20] influence on national media, regulation of interest groups, low-skilled labor/jobs) all facilitate capital inflows but also largely determine the direction of development of the social system.[21]
While the structure of work-based (workfare) is perceived by investors as having decreasing risk factors, parallel to government efforts towards workfare reforms, state support for the social sphere,[22] the structure of social services,[23] and social policies prioritizing welfare foundations are gradually transforming.[24] As in the development of capitalist countries, it was the widespread social prosperity experienced in Hungary as a result of economic development that primarily contributed to the initial change in social values (Molnár 2022). Over the past 30 years, changes in social ideology and values have led to a significant part of society becoming increasingly indifferent to problems that do not directly affect them (Fülöp 2013). The growing indifference and lack of interest towards helping professions (e.g., decreasing social sensitivity, declining solidarity, lack of tolerance) all contribute to the continuous decline in the number of individuals choosing professions such as social work.[25] One of the most significant risks inherent in the economic policy model grounded in capitalist values and dependency relations is that corporations from core countries, positioned at the top of the global hierarchy, possess such considerable economic and political influence that they can exert substantial pressure on the domestic—foreign and development policies of nations located on the periphery. This dynamic severely undermines the economic sovereignty and erodes the competitiveness of these nations. The study concludes that Hungary’s evolving socio-economic landscape and policy decisions significantly influence the development and perception of social work. This highlights the critical need for policies that strike a balance between economic growth and social welfare to effectively address escalating inequalities and support vulnerable populations.
Online resources
Botás, Enikő 2021. A frontvonalban dolgoznak, mégis elfeledkeztek róluk. Ki oltja be a szociális munkásokat? [They work on the front lines, yet they have been forgotten. Who vaccinates the social workers?] Marie Claire. (https://marieclaire.hu/riporter/2021/04/09/szocialis-dolgozok-covid-oltas/)
Gyarmati, Andrea 2021a. A szociális ágazatban dolgozók munkakörülményeinek, járványhelyzettel, szakszervezetekkel kapcsolatos véleményének felmérése.
Ökopolisz. (https://mmaa.hu/review/a-szocialis-agazatban-dolgozok-munkakorulmenyeinek-jarvanyhelyzettel-szakszervezetekkel-kapcsolatos-velemenyenek-felmerese-gyarmati-andrea-okopolisz/)
Gyarmati, Andrea 2021b. Az alacsony bérek oka és következményei a szociális ágazatban. Ellensúly. (https://ellensuly.hu/az-alacsony-berek-oka-es-kovetkezmenyei-a-szocialis-agazatban/)
Központi Statisztikai Hivatal: KSH 2023. Interaktív korfa.
(https://www.ksh.hu/interaktiv/korfak/orszag.html)
Központi Statisztikai Hivatal: KSH 2018. Mikrocenzus 2016. A foglalkozások presztízse.
(https://www.ksh.hu/mikrocenzus2016/kiegeszito_foglalkozasok_presztizse)
Oktatási Hivatal FIR Statisztikák. (https://dari.oktatas.hu/firstat.index?fir_stat_ev=2010)
Oktatási Hivatal FIR OSAP (https://firstat.oh.gov.hu/)
Szabó, Milán 2022. Magyarország akkumulátorgyártó nagyhatalom? Új Egyenlőség.
(https://ujegyenloseg.hu/magyarorszag-akkumulatorgyarto-nagyhatalom/)
SzocOkos 2021. Egyházi térnyerés a szociális ágazatban.
(https://tamogatoweb.hu/egyhazi-ternyeres-a-szocialis-agazatban/)
SzocOkos 2022. Egyházi fenntartás. (https://tamogatoweb.hu/egyhazi-fenntartas/)
Totyik, Tamás 2021. Magyarországon a minőségi oktatás tudatos leépítése folyik. Pedagógusok Szakszervezete. (https://pedagogusok.hu/hirek/magyarorszagon-a-minosegi-oktatas-tudatos-leepitese-folyik/#)
Virginia University Press 2021. What does an army social worker do? Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, USA. (https://onlinesocialwork.vcu.edu/blog/army-social-worker/)
Literature
Ball, Richard 2001. Individualism, Collectivism, and Economic Development. SAGE, The ANNALS of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 573. évf. 1. sz. 57–84.
(https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177 /000 2 71620 157300104?journalCode=anna)
DOI:10.1177/0002716201573001004
Balogh, Erzsébet – Budai, István – Goldmann, Róbert – Puli, Edit – Szöllösi, Gábor 2015. Felsőfokú szociális képzések Magyarországon. Párbeszéd, 2. évf. különszám. (https://ojs.lib.unideb.hu/parbeszed/article/view/5817)
Bartha, Eszter 2013. ,,Ez a piacgazdaság minket padlóra küldött.” Munkásság és munkástudat a mai Magyarországon. Replika, 83. évf. 2. sz. 61-76. (https://replika.hu/replika/83-03)
Berger, Viktor 2019. A szociális munka társadalmi presztízse: Beszámoló kerekasztal-beszélgetésről. Szociális Szemle, 12. évf. 1-2. sz. 102-109. (https://doi.org/10.15170)
Budai, István–Csoba, Judit–Goldmann, Róbert 2006. A szociális képzések magyarországi fejlődésének főbb állomásai. Esély, 18. évf. 2. sz. 49-70.
(http://www.esely.org/kiadvanyok/2006_2/CSOBA.pdf)
Bugovics, Zoltán 2012. Szociokulturális és identitási elemek a versenyképességben. In: Rechnitzer, János–Smahó, Melinda (szerk.): Járműipar és regionális versenyképesség. Győr, Széchenyi Egyetem, 314-340. (https://docplayer.hu/16048294-Jarmuipar-es-regionalis-versenykepesseg.html)
Csontos, Tamás Tibor 2023. A magyar felzárkózási modell ágazati alapú, regionális és időbeli összehasonlító elemzése. Közgazdasági Szemle, 70. sz. 167-191. (http://real.mtak.hu/158955/)
Erdős, B. Márta 2019. A kutatómunka jelentősége a szociális munkahivatássá válásában. Szociális szemle, 12. évf. 1-2. sz. 58-76. (https://doi.org/10.15170/SocRev.2019.12.01-02.04)
Éber, Márk Áron 2018. Társadalmi szerkezetek, társadalmi folyamatok I. Előadásjegyzetek. Budapest, Eötvös Kiadó, ELTE TÁTK, 9-105.
(https://www.academia.edu/32451755/T%C3%A1rsadalmi_szerkezetek_t%C3%A1rsadalmi_folyamatok_I_El%C5%91ad%C3%A1sjegyzetek_Budapest_2018)
Éber, Márk Áron 2020. A csepp. A félperifériás magyar társadalom osztályszerkezete. Budapest, Napvilág Kiadó.
Ferge, Zsuzsanna 2017. Előszó. In: Vojtek, Éva–Borda, Viktória (szerk.): Reflexiók. A szociális munka korszerű oktatási kérdései: Tanulmányok Szöllősi Gábor 65. születésnapjára. Pécs, PTE, 73-93.
Fülöp, Márta 2013. A versengés, a győzelem és a vesztés pszichológiája és kulturális különbségei. MTA doktori értekezés. (http://real-d.mtak.hu/657/)
Goldthorpe, John–Hope Keith 1977. A foglalkozások minősítése és a foglalkozáspresztízs. In: Léderer, Pál (szerk.): A foglalkozások presztízse. Gondolat Kiadó, Budapest, 250-268.
Keller, Tamás 2009. Magyarország helye a világ értéktérképén. Tárki.
(https://mek.oszk.hu/13400/13433/13433.pdf)
Kozma, Judit 2007. A szociális munka professzionalizáció a jólléti államokban II. Kapocs, 4. évf. 3 sz. 36-77. (https://www.kapocsfolyoirat.hu/kapocs/archives/2007-6-3-30.pdf)
Major, Iván (dátum nélkül). A kapitalista piacgazdaság néhány modellje és a magyar gazdaság mozgástere. In: NKFI Tanulmányok, helyzetkép a TEP makro- forgatókönyveihez, Közgazdaságtudományi Kutató Központ, MTA.
(https://nkfih.gov.hu/hivatalrol/hivatali-kiadvanyok/tanulmanyok-helyzetkep)
Molnár, Zsófia 2022. A New Age mozgalom egy értelmezési kísérlete posztmodern szemszögből. Kaleidoscope, 12.évf. 24. sz. 162-180. (https://www.epa.hu/02300/02316/00024/pdf/EPA02316_kaleidoscope_2022_24_162-180.pdf)
Mrázik, Julianna 2019. A szociálismunkás-képzés oktatói kompetenciái egy tartalomelemzés tükrében. Szociális Szemle, 12 .évf. 1-2. sz. 91-101. (https://doi.org/10.15170)
Nicolas Barr, Adrian 2009. A jóléti állam gazdaságtana: A nagy ellátórendszerek működésének összefüggései. Budapest, Akadémia Kiadó.
(https://opac.elte.hu/Record/opac-EUL01-000692240)
Olsen, Gregg M.– Benjaminsen, Lars 2018: Homelessness and social policy. In: Greve, Bent (ed.): Routledge Handbook of the Wealfer State. 393-407.
Pongrác, Alex 2019. Nemzetállamok és új szabályzó hatalmak a globális erőtérben, avagy megszelídíthető-e a globalizáció. Budapest, Dialóg Campus.
(https://nkerepo.uni-nke.hu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/14231/web_PDF_ Nemzetallamok_uj_szabalyozo_hatalmak.pdf?sequence=1)
Pontsho, J. M. (2022). A Reason for choosing social work as profession: a case study of prospective students at the University of Limpopo. Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 58. évf. 3. sz. 239-253. (DOI: 10.15270/58-3-1055)
Reisinger, Adrienn 2012. A társadalmi részvétel a helyi fejlesztési politikában Magyarországon, fókuszban a civil/nonprofit szervezetek. Civil Szemle, 9. évf. 1. sz. 23-44.
(https://matarka.hu/cikk_list.php?fusz=106235)
Szoboszlai, Katalin 2017. Mi lesz veled, szociális munkás? Gondolatok a szakmáról, képzésről. In: Vojtek, Éva–Borda, Viktória (szerk.): Reflexiók. A szociális munka korszerű oktatási kérdései: Tanulmányok Szöllősi Gábor 65. születésnapjára. Pécs, PTE, 25-36.
Temesváry, Zsolt 2010. A szociális szakképzések helyzete a mai magyar felsőoktatásban. Kapocs, 9. évf. 1 sz. 34-41. (https://epa.oszk.hu/02900/02943/00044/pdf/)
Tóth, István György 2016. Középosztály(ok) Magyarországon és Európában. Makro sokkok, mikro válaszok: sikeres és sikertelen háztartási alkalmazkodás a válság idején Magyarországon. In: Kolosi, Tamás–Tóth, István Görgy (szerk.): Társadalmi Riport 2016.
Budapest, Tárki, 74-97. (DOI: http// 10.61501/TRIP.2016.4)
Utasi, Ágnes 2018. Társadalmi bizalom és szolidaritás. Educatio, 27. évf. 4. sz. 678-691.
(https://doi.org/10.1556/2063.27.2018.4.10)
Valuch, Tibor 2015. A jelenkori magyar társadalom. Budapest, Osiris.
Wallerstein, Immanuel 1983. A modern világgazdasági rendszer kialakulása. Budapest, Gondolat Könyvkiadó.