Appendix 1 Case Selection
Socioeconomic statistics allow us to separate the country’s regions in the
1970s into three areas. First comes the area that contains the metropolitan
(the city of Buenos Aires and the greater Buenos Aires metropolitan area) and
Patagonian (Chubut, Santa Cruz, and Tierra del Fuego) regions. Second is the
area that groups together the Pampa (Buenos Aires province, Santa Fe, and
Entre Ríos), Comahue (Río Negro, La Pampa, and Neuquén), Cuyo (Mendoza
and San Juan), and central (Córdoba, San Luis, and La Rioja) regions. Finally,
the third area is formed by the regions of the Northwest (Tucumán, Salta,
Santiago del Estero, Jujuy, and Catamarca) and Northeast (Chaco, Corrien-
tes, Misiones, and Formosa).1 Between 1946 and 1968, the growth of the first
area was above the national average, the second similar to it, and the third
below it. For this reason, I selected a location from each one of these areas.
To better reflect the heterogeneity of the middle classes, I added the vari-
able of population density to the geographical criteria. In 1970, 8,353,000
people lived in cities with more than one million inhabitants, 8,464,000
people in cities that had between ten thousand and one million inhabitants,
and the rest (6,549,000) in cities with fewer than ten thousand inhabitants.
The three locations selected corresponded to a different one of the three types
of population categories in 1970. On average for the entire period, the city of
Buenos Aires, the city of San Miguel de Tucumán, and the town of Correa had
three million, 350,000, and 5,000 inhabitants, respectively.2
Thus, geographic and demographic considerations are two of the four cri-
teria used to establish similarities and differences in this study. Unlike these
criteria—which were selected a priori—the other two, generation and insti-
tutional belonging, arose after the results were obtained. The institutional
distinction refers to whether or not the interviewees belonged to the univer-
Previous Page Next Page