This study examines social inequality in higher education subject choices. While educational expansion is often expected to enhance social inclusion, international research, particularly in European/US contexts, suggests that inequality may persist or be reconfigured through qualitative differentiation (Arum et al., 2007; Sullivan et al., 2018). China provides a unique setting because the state-oriented higher education expansion, rapid social transformation, and pronounced urban-rural and regional disparities create conditions that differ from Western cases (Marginson, 2018), allowing a comparative evaluation of whether mechanisms identified in Europe operate similarly in a non-Western, rapidly changing society.

Among such, subject choice is a particularly interesting dimension of educational stratification shaping academic trajectories, labour market outcomes, and long-term socioeconomic positions. In China, admission to higher education is largely determined by a highly standardised national examination (Gaokao). By contrast, subject choice offers greater agency, yet this decision is embedded within broader social and cultural disparities and intergenerational socioeconomic changes (Vaisey & Valentino, 2018).

The study aims to examine whether and how the mechanisms of subject choice inequalities diverge from established Western evidence while offering insights of international relevance. It focuses on the relative importance of family-based resources versus residential and institutional factors and the long-term trends across cohorts who experienced different stages of China’s reform and socioeconomic development (Hu & Wu, 2019; Kang, Peng & Zhu, 2021). It assesses how subject differentiation simultaneously reproduces social stratification and generates new pathways for inclusion.

In this light, this study addresses the following research questions:

1. How do family background and residential background shape subject choices, and how do these mechanisms differ from those observed in European contexts?

2. How have patterns of inequality in subject choices changed across generations, and how is the higher education expansion playing a role in it?

The research draws on Effectively Maintained Inequality (EMI) and Bourdieu’s theory of social reproduction to engage in comparative dialogue with European scholarship. EMI highlights how, as access to a given educational level becomes widespread, advantaged groups shift strategies toward qualitative distinctions within that level, often reflected in subject choice (Lucas, 2001). Bourdieu’s concepts of capital, habitus, and symbolic hierarchy explain how subjects acquire differential social value aligned with students’ social origins (Bourdieu, 1998, 2002).

Classical European and US studies show that students from privileged families are more likely to pursue culturally prestigious fields, while disadvantaged students are often directed into technical or practical disciplines. The Chinese context provides a different perspective because long-standing egalitarian policies, the Gaokao, and the coexistence of socialist, nationalist, and market-oriented value systems produce dynamics not observed in Western countries. In addition, this study pays particular attention to residential and regional institutional factors, which are less emphasised in Western research. Due to spatial inequalities, such as differences in economic development, educational infrastructure, and local opportunity structures, these factors play an important role in shaping subject choices beyond the influence of family resources. Building on this insight, the study introduces the concept of “public capital” to capture the effects of collectively provided regional resources on students’ educational decision-making.

By integrating EMI and a context-sensitive reading of Bourdieu, this research contributes to the literature by examining how social and institutional mechanisms shape changing subject choice in a rapidly transforming society. It highlights processes of both inclusion and diversion that emerge under conditions of educational expansion, urban-rural disparities, and intergenerational change. In doing so, the research not only provides insights into the Chinese context but also tests and extends theoretical perspectives originally developed in European settings, offering a basis for a more nuanced comparative understanding of educational inequality and intergenerational transformation.

Data This study uses the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS), a nationally representative longitudinal survey conducted by Peking University since 2010. CFPS covers 25 provinces, representing approximately 95% of China’s population, and provides detailed information on individuals’ family background, educational attainment, residential origin, and household characteristics (CFPS, 2023). The sample for this study includes individuals who entered higher education after the reform and opening-up and were born before 2000, yielding 5,494 respondents. Key family background measures include parental education, parental occupational status (ISEI), and parental Communist Party membership, while residential background is captured by urban-rural Hukou and province of origin, reflecting structural disparities in education supply and economic conditions. Regional indicators, including provincial GDP per capita, higher education scale, and intensity of higher education expansion, are also incorporated to assess provincial influences on subject-choices. Descriptive statistics indicate systematic differences in subject choice: students from urban areas and higher-status families disproportionately choose Law, Economics, and Management (LEM) and Humanities, while rural and disadvantaged students are more likely to select STEM fields. Analysis Approach The study examines the impact of ascribed and contextual factors on subject choice in three stages. First, it evaluates the relative influence of family and residential background using joint significance tests and marginal effect estimates to identify how these factors shape subject selection. Second, intergenerational changes are analysed by comparing cohorts who experienced different stages of reform and higher education expansion, highlighting variations in how social origin influences subject choice over time. Third, building on prior research treating the 1999 higher education expansion as a quasi-natural experiment, the study applies a triple-difference approach to distinguish the effects of policy exposure from other structural or economic factors. Cohort differences, Hukou status, and provincial expansion intensity are combined to identify whether shifts in subject choice are driven by expansion, while controlling for regional development and institutional characteristics. Drawing on Ou & Hou (2019) and Guo & Chen (2023), this approach provides more direct causal evidence of how higher education expansion affects intergenerational changes in subject choice. For example, if greater expansion intensity is positively related to greater changes in subject choices, it can be inferred, to some extent, that these changes are driven by the expansion policy.

This study shows that in China’s higher education subject choice, residential background often exerts a stronger influence than parental socioeconomic status. The urban-rural divide, institutionalised through the Hukou system, structures access to educational resources, opportunities, and career pathways with a distinctive form of “public capital”. While Bourdieu’s framework, developed in European contexts, emphasises the transmission of family cultural capital and habitus, the Chinese case demonstrates that institutional and regional factors can override family advantages. This may be partly due to its standardised examination system (Bai et al., 2024), highlighting the context-specific mechanisms of educational stratification and extending Bourdieu’s theory to non-Western, rapidly transforming societies. The three subject categories reveal distinct patterns of change: STEM shows a widening gap, with rural students increasingly choosing them; LEM exhibits a converging pattern, where urban students’ previous-expansion advantage persists but is gradually narrowing; and Humanities show a reversing trend, with urban students now more likely to choose these subjects than previously rural-dominated cohorts. Educational expansion mediates these patterns: in areas with more opportunities growing, urban students maintain advantages in LEM, whereas in regions with less expansion intensity, rural students’ access to Humanities pathways increases. Subgroup analyses further show that STEM serves as a channel of upward mobility for disadvantaged students, while LEM largely reproduces elite advantages, consistent with patterns observed in European and US studies. Overall, China’s experience illustrates how educational expansion can generate dual pathways of stratification and inclusion. By integrating the European-derived Bourdieu’s social reproduction with a context-sensitive analysis, this study offers a comparative perspective on educational inequality. Unlike the European context, where family cultural capital is often decisive, in China, institutional structures, public capital, and the expansion policy strongly shape subject choice (Li, 2022), demonstrating that mechanisms of stratification and mobility are sensitive to national and historical contexts.

Arum, R., Gamoran, A., & Shavit, M. Y. (2007). More Inclusion Than Diversion: Expansion, Differentiation, and Market Structure in Higher Education. In Y. Shavit, R. Arum, & A. Gamoran (Eds.), Stratification in Higher Education: A Comparative Study (pp. 1–36). Stanford University Press. Bai, Y., Wang, Y., & Ding, B. (2024). Institutional determination or teacher bias? Examining the mechanisms of cultural capital in China. European Journal of Education, 59(2), e12634. Bourdieu, P. (1998). The State Nobility: Elite Schools in the Field of Power. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press. Bourdieu, P. (2002). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste (11. print). Harvard Univ. Press. Guo, J., & Chen, J. (2023). Can China’s Higher Education Expansion Reduce the Educational Inequality between Urban and Rural Areas?. The Journal of Higher Education, 94(5), 638-663. Hu, A., & Wu, X. (2019). Science or liberal arts? Cultural capital and college major choice in China. The British Journal of Sociology, 70(1), 190-213. Kang, L., Peng, F., & Zhu, Y. (2021). Returns to higher education subjects and tiers in China: evidence from the China Family Panel Studies. Studies in Higher Education, 46(8), 1682-1695. Li, Y. (2022). Social Inequality in Educational Attainment in China. In Y. Li, & Y. Bian (Eds.), Social Inequality in China (pp. 77-106). World Scientific Publishing Europe Ltd. Lucas, S. R. (2001). Effectively maintained inequality: Education transitions, track mobility, and social background effects. American journal of sociology, 106(6), 1642-1690. Marginson, S. (2018). Higher education, economic inequality and social mobility: Implications for emerging East Asia. International Journal of Educational Development, 63, 4-11. Mullen, A. L. (2014). Gender, social background, and the choice of college major in a liberal arts context. Gender & Society, 28(2), 289-312. Ou, D., & Hou, Y. (2019). Bigger pie, bigger slice? The impact of higher education expansion on educational opportunity in China. Research in Higher Education, 60, 358-391. Sullivan, A., Parsons, S., Green, F., Wiggins, R. D., & Ploubidis, G. (2018). Elite universities, fields of study and top salaries: Which degree will make you rich?. British Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 663-680. Vaisey, S., & Valentino, L. (2018). Culture and choice: Toward integrating cultural sociology with the judgment and decision-making sciences. Poetics, 68, 131-143.