Assessing Affirmative Action

H. Holzer, D. Neumark
{"title":"Assessing Affirmative Action","authors":"H. Holzer, D. Neumark","doi":"10.1257/JEL.38.3.483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although the debate over Affirmative Action is both high-profile and high-intensity, neither side's position is based on a well-established set of research findings. Economics provides an extensive, well-known literature on which to draw regarding the existence and extent of labor market discrimination against women and minorities, although views may often conflict, and a less extensive but also well-known literature on the effects of Affirmative Action on the employment of women or minorities. However, research by economists provides much less evidence and even less of a consensus on the question of whether Affirmative Action improves or impedes efficiency or performance, which is perhaps the key economic issue in the debate over Affirmative Action. This review focuses on all of these issues regarding Affirmative Action, but the major focus is on the efficiency/performance question. All in all, the evidence suggests to us that it may be possible to generate Affirmative Action programs that entail relatively little sacrifice of efficiency. Most importantly, there is at this juncture very little compelling evidence of deleterious efficiency effects of Affirmative Action. This does not imply that such costs do not exist, nor that the studies we review have captured the overall welfare effects of Affirmative Action. It does imply, though, that the empirical case against Affirmative Action on the grounds of efficiency is weak at best.","PeriodicalId":407537,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Empirical Studies of Employment & Labor Law (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"447","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Empirical Studies of Employment & Labor Law (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1257/JEL.38.3.483","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 447

Abstract

Although the debate over Affirmative Action is both high-profile and high-intensity, neither side's position is based on a well-established set of research findings. Economics provides an extensive, well-known literature on which to draw regarding the existence and extent of labor market discrimination against women and minorities, although views may often conflict, and a less extensive but also well-known literature on the effects of Affirmative Action on the employment of women or minorities. However, research by economists provides much less evidence and even less of a consensus on the question of whether Affirmative Action improves or impedes efficiency or performance, which is perhaps the key economic issue in the debate over Affirmative Action. This review focuses on all of these issues regarding Affirmative Action, but the major focus is on the efficiency/performance question. All in all, the evidence suggests to us that it may be possible to generate Affirmative Action programs that entail relatively little sacrifice of efficiency. Most importantly, there is at this juncture very little compelling evidence of deleterious efficiency effects of Affirmative Action. This does not imply that such costs do not exist, nor that the studies we review have captured the overall welfare effects of Affirmative Action. It does imply, though, that the empirical case against Affirmative Action on the grounds of efficiency is weak at best.
评估平权行动
尽管关于平权法案的争论既高调又激烈,但双方的立场都没有建立在一套完善的研究结果基础上。经济学提供了广泛而知名的文献,可以借鉴劳动力市场对妇女和少数民族歧视的存在和程度,尽管观点可能经常冲突,以及关于平权行动对妇女或少数民族就业的影响的不那么广泛但也是众所周知的文献。然而,经济学家的研究提供的证据要少得多,在平权法案是否提高或阻碍效率或绩效的问题上,甚至没有达成共识,这可能是关于平权法案辩论的关键经济问题。这篇评论集中在所有关于平权法案的问题上,但主要关注的是效率/绩效问题。总而言之,证据向我们表明,有可能制定出相对较少牺牲效率的平权行动计划。最重要的是,在这个关键时刻,几乎没有令人信服的证据表明平权法案对效率产生了有害的影响。这并不意味着这些成本不存在,也不意味着我们回顾的研究已经抓住了平权法案的整体福利效应。不过,这确实意味着,以效率为基础反对平权法案的实证案例充其量是站不住脚的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信