Suchergebnisse

Some have criticized government antidiscrimination programs for causing efficiency losses both by devoting public resources to monitoring and enforcement and by distorting personnel decisions. This paper examines the efficiency consequences of such programs when discrimination is caused by a market failure and when regulators are imperfectly informed about individual firms' personnel policies.This paper outlines a simple model of "statistical discrimination" and shows that an equal opportunity rule, which constrains employers from offering different wage schedules to different groups, will improve the efficiency of this economy. Employers will attempt to evade such regulation, and the paper describes an evasion strategy in which employers search for worker "qualifications" that can act as proxies for race or sex. The paper discusses problems involved in monitoring and enforcing compliance, and considers two possible responses by the regulatory agency. The first is analogous to "disparate impact" judgments in which the type of information that employers can use in personnel decisions is regulated. The second is an affirmative action‐type policy that monitors the outcomes, rather than the process, of hiring and compensation decisions. Affirmative action policies have some advantages since they permit employers to use information more efficiently than do policies that attempt to regulate personnel decisions directly. However, affirmative action policies are likely to lead to charges of preferential treatment.

Data from the 1990 US Census are drawn on to estimate the effects of policies against sexual orientation-based discrimination on individual earnings & household income. Results suggest that the policies have been adopted in places with higher earnings, & same-sex couples are more likely to live in areas that have adopted antidiscrimination policies. However, after controlling for individual & location characteristics, results show no evidence of a direct effect of antidiscrimination policies on average earnings or income for members of same-sex couples. Antidiscrimination policies may be more important both for a small number of individuals & as symbols of full citizenship & legitimacy for gays & lesbians. 5 Tables, 1 Appendix, 34 References. Adapted from the source document.

Estimates effects on income for married, unmarried different-sex, male same-sex, and female same-sex couples, using data from the 1990 US census; US.

AbstractMadrid is the first region in Spain whose government has managed to dismantle an already existing LGBTI legal framework, going against the recently voted Legal Gender Identity and LGBTI Law that applies at a State level (4/2023). The conservative government of Madrid has modified two regional laws to re‐establish gatekeeping and gender surveillance, thus putting the depathologization and self‐determination of gender identity at stake. LGBTI minors are particularly exposed to this measure, as the partial derogation of aspects of the Madrid law directly affects their autonomy and self‐determination. Our policy analysis examines the contradictions and severe effects of this law reform. We employ a cross‐reading of the State and regional statutory terms that are being jeopardized, to reveal the different levels of policy making in which the Spanish trans community is obliged to obey. We further call for further analysis and follow up of the consequences of these law reforms and the impact on LGBTI people of all ages.

In this article, the author compares the way in which anti-(ethnic) discrimination policies regarding access to social housing are implemented on the ground in Britain and France through case studies in Birmingham and Marseilles. Beyond sharp differences in the conceptions and "philosophies" of antidiscrimination policies in those two national "models" (a differentialist conception in Britain versus a universalist conception in France), the author shows the limits of these policies on the ground in both cases. In particular, the author shows how (a) the way in which ethnic discrimination is locally constructed as a public issue and (b) the constraints and contradictions faced by local institutions and street-level bureaucrats dealing with social housing on a day-to-day basis contribute to their failure.

The enactment and implementation of European Union Directives on antidiscrimination have received substantial scholarly attention. However, there is little knowledge about whether and how antidiscrimination measures influence citizens' experiences and perceptions of discrimination. This study investigates the relationship between antidiscrimination policies, citizens' knowledge in this policy area, and their handling of discrimination. Using data from a standardized policy indicator and repeated cross-sectional survey waves of EU countries, I first examine the relationship between antidiscrimination policy and societal levels of knowledge about victims' rights. Subsequently, multilevel models test how differences in policy and knowledge levels predict individuals' reported levels of experienced and perceived discrimination. The results show that people who live in countries with effective antidiscrimination laws know more about their rights to equal treatment than those from countries with less effective policies. For the most part, policy differences across countries are unsystematically related to discrimination-related outcomes. However, an increase in knowledge levels over time is associated with higher reports about witnessed discrimination, lower sociotropic perceptions of discrimination, and less individual self-identification with a discriminated group. The findings suggest that, to the extent that antidiscrimination policies foster knowledge of the law, they contribute to citizens' awareness and empowerment against discrimination.

This article assesses the economic efficiency of race-based antidiscrimination and affirmative action policies with a view to assessing relevant Canadian and American constitutional law. The article reviews economic arguments about why antidiscrimination laws may be efficient in addressing externalities, in hastening the exit of bigoted employers from the market, and in preventing the potentially inefficient use of race as a proxy for information; affirmative action may be efficient in accounting for differential signaling costs across race. The article concludes that economic analysis supports the approach in section 15 of the Charter which generally bans discriminatory government action, but recognizes that affirmative action is not inconsistent with the pursuit of substantive equality.

This introduction to a pluridisciplinary comparative analysis of European antidiscrimination policies and practices provides a critical assessment of current European empirical developments and the analytical issues that they raise. The authors' argument builds upon the tension between the improvement of the protection of rights to equal treatment and the intensification of xenophobia in the European Union. Can proequality policies developed in a hostile context make a difference? The first part of the introduction provides an analytical framework to account for the emergence and implementation of an antidiscrimination policy framework in the European Union. The second part assesses the limits of this new paradigm in particular as far as the categorization and measurement of discrimination are concerned. It focuses on the broader impact of the development of antidiscrimination policies and jurisprudence and on the way "vulnerable populations" have made use of it.

This introduction to a pluridisciplinary comparative analysis of European antidiscrimination policies and practices provides a critical assessment of current European empirical developments and the analytical issues that they raise. The authors' argument builds upon the tension between the improvement of the protection of rights to equal treatment and the intensification of xenophobia in the European Union. Can proequality policies developed in a hostile context make a difference? The first part of the introduction provides an analytical framework to account for the emergence and implementation of an antidiscrimination policy framework in the European Union. The second part assesses the limits of this new paradigm in particular as far as the categorization and measurement of discrimination are concerned. It focuses on the broader impact of the development of antidiscrimination policies and jurisprudence and on the way "vulnerable populations" have made use of it.