Race-neutral vs race-conscious: Using algorithmic methods to evaluate the reparative potential of housing programs

IF 6.5 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Wonyoung So, Catherine D’Ignazio
{"title":"Race-neutral vs race-conscious: Using algorithmic methods to evaluate the reparative potential of housing programs","authors":"Wonyoung So, Catherine D’Ignazio","doi":"10.1177/20539517231210272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The racial wealth gap in the United States remains a persistent issue; white individuals possess six times more wealth than Black individuals. Leading scholars and public figures have pointed to slavery and post-slavery discrimination as root cause factors and called for reparations. Yet the institutionalization of race-neutral ideologies in policies and practices hinders a reparative approach to closing the racial wealth gap. This study models the use of algorithmic methods in the service of reparations to Black Americans in the domain of housing, where most American wealth is built. We examine a hypothetical scenario for measuring the effectiveness of race-conscious Special Purpose Credit Programs (SPCPs) in reducing the housing racial wealth gap compared to race-neutral SPCPs. We use a predictive model to show that race-conscious, people-based lending programs, if they were nationally available, would be two to three times more effective in closing the racial housing wealth gap than other, existing forms of SPCPs. In doing so, we also demonstrate the potential for using algorithms and computational methods to support outcomes aligned with movements for reparations, another possible meaning for the emerging discourse on “algorithmic reparations.”","PeriodicalId":47834,"journal":{"name":"Big Data & Society","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Big Data & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517231210272","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The racial wealth gap in the United States remains a persistent issue; white individuals possess six times more wealth than Black individuals. Leading scholars and public figures have pointed to slavery and post-slavery discrimination as root cause factors and called for reparations. Yet the institutionalization of race-neutral ideologies in policies and practices hinders a reparative approach to closing the racial wealth gap. This study models the use of algorithmic methods in the service of reparations to Black Americans in the domain of housing, where most American wealth is built. We examine a hypothetical scenario for measuring the effectiveness of race-conscious Special Purpose Credit Programs (SPCPs) in reducing the housing racial wealth gap compared to race-neutral SPCPs. We use a predictive model to show that race-conscious, people-based lending programs, if they were nationally available, would be two to three times more effective in closing the racial housing wealth gap than other, existing forms of SPCPs. In doing so, we also demonstrate the potential for using algorithms and computational methods to support outcomes aligned with movements for reparations, another possible meaning for the emerging discourse on “algorithmic reparations.”
种族中立vs种族意识:使用算法方法评估住房项目的修复潜力
美国的种族贫富差距仍然是一个长期存在的问题;白人拥有的财富是黑人的六倍。著名学者和公众人物指出,奴隶制和奴隶制后的歧视是根本原因,并要求赔偿。然而,在政策和实践中将种族中立的意识形态制度化,阻碍了缩小种族贫富差距的补偿性方法。这项研究模拟了在住房领域使用算法方法为美国黑人提供赔偿,这是美国大多数财富的来源。我们研究了一个假设的场景来衡量种族意识特殊目的信贷计划(spcp)在减少住房种族贫富差距方面的有效性,与种族中立的spcp相比。我们使用一个预测模型来表明,如果在全国范围内实施具有种族意识的、以人为基础的贷款项目,在缩小种族住房贫富差距方面的效果将是其他现有形式的spc的两到三倍。在此过程中,我们还展示了使用算法和计算方法来支持与赔偿运动一致的结果的潜力,这是“算法赔偿”新兴话语的另一种可能含义。
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
Big Data & Society
Big Data & Society SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
10.60%
发文量
59
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Big Data & Society (BD&S) is an open access, peer-reviewed scholarly journal that publishes interdisciplinary work principally in the social sciences, humanities, and computing and their intersections with the arts and natural sciences. The journal focuses on the implications of Big Data for societies and aims to connect debates about Big Data practices and their effects on various sectors such as academia, social life, industry, business, and government. BD&S considers Big Data as an emerging field of practices, not solely defined by but generative of unique data qualities such as high volume, granularity, data linking, and mining. The journal pays attention to digital content generated both online and offline, encompassing social media, search engines, closed networks (e.g., commercial or government transactions), and open networks like digital archives, open government, and crowdsourced data. Rather than providing a fixed definition of Big Data, BD&S encourages interdisciplinary inquiries, debates, and studies on various topics and themes related to Big Data practices. BD&S seeks contributions that analyze Big Data practices, involve empirical engagements and experiments with innovative methods, and reflect on the consequences of these practices for the representation, realization, and governance of societies. As a digital-only journal, BD&S's platform can accommodate multimedia formats such as complex images, dynamic visualizations, videos, and audio content. The contents of the journal encompass peer-reviewed research articles, colloquia, bookcasts, think pieces, state-of-the-art methods, and work by early career researchers.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信