Affirmative action

Affirmative action (or, in British English, positive discrimination) is a policy or a program whose stated goal is to redress past or present discrimination through active measures to ensure equal opportunity, as in education and employment.

Purpose

Affirmative action began as a corrective measure for governmental and social injustices against demographic groups that have been said to be subjected to discrimination in areas such as employment and education. The stated goal of affirmative action is to counteract past and present discrimination sufficiently that the power elite will reflect the demographics of society at large, at which point such a strategy will no longer be necessary.

Some groups who are targeted for affirmative action are characterized by race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or handicap. In India, the focus has mostly been on undoing caste discrimination. In South Africa, the focus has been primarily race-based and, to a lesser extent, sex-based discrimination. When members of targeted groups are actively sought or preferred, the reason given is usually that this is necessary to compensate for advantages that other groups are said to have had (such as through institutional racism or institutional sexism or historical circumstances).

The theory is that a simple adoption of meritocratic principles along the lines of race-blindness or gender-blindness—or simply relying on elites to behave fairly—will not suffice to change the situation for several reasons:

• Discrimination practices of the past preclude the acquisition of 'merit' by limiting access to educational opportunities and job experiences.
• Ostensible measures of 'merit' may well be biased toward the same groups who are already empowered.
• Regardless of overt principles, people already in positions of power are likely to hire people they already know, and/or people from similar backgrounds.

Controversy

Proponents of affirmative action generally advocate it either as a means to address past discrimination or to enhance racial, ethnic, gender, or other diversity. They may argue that the end result — a more diversified student body, police-force or other group — justifies the means.

Many claim that it has unintended and undesirable side-effects and that it fails to achieve its goals. They argue that it can act as a form of discrimination, perpetrate new wrongs to counter old ones, and instill a sense of victimhood in the majority. It may increase racial tension and benefit the more privileged people within minority groups (such as middle to upper class blacks) at the expense of the disenfranchised within majority groups (such as poor whites). In the British 2001 Summer Of Violence Riots in Oldham, Bradford, Leeds and Burnley, one of the major complaints voiced in poor white areas was alleged discrimination in council funding which favoured minority areas. Some also claim that in college or professional admissions, it hurts those it intends to help, since it causes a "mismatch" effect by admitting minority students who are less qualified than their peers into more rigorous programs wherein they cannot keep up.

How the media portrays affirmative action and affirmative action cases plays a role in how the public responds to affirmative action. There are claims that the practice is itself racist and/or sexist, depending on how one defines those concepts. Others believe that programs may be motivated by political considerations. Some members of races 'assisted' by affirmative action feel that the program is an insult to them, because they feel that their race is good enough to get jobs without the government's help. Finally critics and supporters disagree on the economic effects of affirmative action .

International human rights law

The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination stipulates (in Article 2.2) that affirmative action programs may be required of states that have ratified the convention, in order to rectify systematic discrimination. It states however that such programs "shall in no case entail as a consequence the maintenance of unequal or separate rights for different racial groups after the objectives for which they were taken have been achieved". Positive discrimination, on the other hand, even if intended to improve the lot of disadvantaged groups, is considered illegal in international human rights law, as is any kind of discrimination in article 5 of the same agreement.

An in-depth examination of the legal status of affirmative action, and the different kinds of programs that exist and their pros and cons, can be found in a paper written for the United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights by one of its members, Marc Bossuyt.

Implementation worldwide

In some countries which have laws on racial equality, affirmative action is rendered illegal by a requirement to treat all races equally. This approach of equal treatment is sometimes described as being "race-blind", in hopes that it is effective against discrimination without engaging in reverse discrimination.

In such countries, the focus tends to be on ensuring equal opportunity and, for example, targeted advertising campaigns to encourage ethnic minority candidates to join the police force. This is sometimes described as "positive action", as opposed to "positive discrimination".

United States

Main article: Affirmative action in the United States

In the United States, affirmative action occurs in school admissions, job hiring, and government and corporate contracts. Its intended beneficiaries are ethnic minorities, women, people with disabilities and veterans. Affirmative action has been the subject of numerous court cases, and has been contested on constitutional grounds. A recent ruling in Michigan against some forms of affirmative action has required some colleges to set new admissions criteria.

India

Main article: Reservation in India

Affirmative action has historically been implemented in India in the form of reservation or quotas in government positions, employment and education for lower castes and minorities. The first records of these policies are seen in the late 19th century in the princely states of Mysore in South India and Baroda and Kolhapur in western India. Reservations in government jobs were introduced in 1918 in Mysore in favor of a number of castes and communities that had little share in the administration. In another instance, upon petition from the Muslim community, the British government at facilities. In the communal award of 1935, legislative seats were reserved for members of the Muslim, Sikh, Maratha, Parsi, Christian, European and Anglo-Indian communities. In addition seats were reserved for depressed classes within the Hindu community. The scheduled castes were given 8.5 reservation in central services and other facilities in 1942. In independent India, provision for reservation in legislature was made in the constitution until 1960, recently extended until 2010. Provision for public services was made at the same time with no time limit. More recently in 1990, the implementation of the Mandal commissions' recommendations have been in the social and political limelight. Despite widespread agitation (mostly among students), reservation for the backward classes were upheld to the extent of 27 per cent (this was in addition to the 22.5% already reserved for scheduled castes and tribes, bringing the total of 'open' seats to only 50%).

There have been recent attempts to introduce it into the private job sector and for Muslims. Many people disagree with affirmative action which has led to a lot of controversy.

Other countries

• Belgium. The Flemish government proposed in January 2006 a measure that will make some job opportunities available exclusively to immigrants, disabled and elderly people for the first three weeks.
• Bosnia-Herzegovina. Women must represent at least 29% of all politicians.
• Brazil. Some Brazilian Universities (State and Federal) have created systems of preferred admissions (quotas) for racial minorities (blacks and native Brazilians), the poor and the handicapped. There are efforts to create quotas for the disabled in the civil public services.
• Brunei. The Bumiputeras of Brunei are accorded special benefits through a variety of affirmative action programs. For instance, the Royal Brunei Armed Forces enlist only Bumiputeras.
• China. The People's Republic allows non-Han ethnic groups (around 9% of the population) to be exempt from the One-child policy, and there is a quota for minority representatives in the National Assembly in Beijing, as well as other realms of government. In addition the certain State run Universities, such as the Central University for Nationalities, located in Beijing, operate on a quota system, with spots reserved for members of all of China's state recognized "Nationalities".
• France. The French Ministry of Defense tried in 1990 to give more easily higher ranks and driving licenses to young French soldiers with Arabian origins. After a strong protest by a young French lieutenant in the Ministry of Defense newspaper ("Armées d'aujourd'hui"), this driving license and rank project was canceled. (article: Jean-Pierre Steinhofer: "Beur ou ordinaire"). It is called "la discrimination positive", there.
• Germany. Article 3 of the German constitution provides for equal rights of all people regardless of sex or race. In recent years there has been a long public debate about whether to issue programs that would grant women a privileged access to jobs in order to fight discrimination. There were programs stating that if men and women had equal qualifications, women had to be preferred for a job. The Government agreed on the details of an anti-discrimination law (Antidiskriminierungsgesetz; ADG) in May 2006, that aims at improving the protection of minorities. The draft follows EU-standards and has passed the German Parliament in August 2006.
• Greece. has quotas setting a lower limit for women participating in election lists of political parties for most of the election processes.
• Japan. Spot for universities as well as all the government position (including teachers) are determined by the entrance exam, which is extremely competitive at the top level. It is illegal to include sex, ethnicity or other social background (but not nationality) in criteria. However, there are informal policies to provide employment and long term welfare (which is usually not available to general public) to Burakumin at municipality level.
• Macedonia. Minorities, most notably Albanians, are allocated quotas for access to state universities, as well as in civil public services.
• Malaysia. The bumiputra laws are a form of affirmative action meant to provide more opportunity for the majority ethnic Malay population versus the historical financial dominance of the Chinese population.However,Tun Dr Mahathir said that previous approach did not help them but spoiled them and scolded them during his tenure as a Prime Minister. He added that they should not rely on tongkat(cruthes) but their own effort to suceed in life.
• New Zealand. Individuals of Māori or other Polynesian descent are often afforded preferential access to university courses, and scholarships.
• Norway. All public company (ASA) boards with more than five members, must have at least 40 % women (can not be made up of more than 60% of one sex). This affects roughly 400 companies.
• Philippines. State universities implement a modified version of Affirmative Action. Secondary schools, both private and public schools, are each assigned a quota on how many students from that high school are accepted for admission, in addition to each student's score during the entrance examination. This was done to address the situation wherein a majority of the university school population was composed mostly of students who came from well-off families and private schools.
• Slovakia. The Constitutional Court declared in October 2005 that affirmative action i.e. "providing advantages for people of an ethnic or racial minority group" as being against its Constitution. [1] This is seen as an anti-gipsy decision immediately following Roma hunger riots, which protested curtailing of social aids in Slovakia.
• South Africa. The Employment Equity Act and the Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment Act aim to promote and achieve equality in the workplace (in South Africa termed "equity"), by not only advancing people from designated groups but also specifically disadvancing the others. By legal definition, the designated groups include all non-whites, females, people with disabilities, and people from rural areas. The term "black economic empowerment" is somewhat of a misnomer, therefore, because it covers empowerment of any member of the designated groups, regardless of race. It is quota-based, with specific required outcomes. By a relatively complex scoring system, which allows for some flexibility in the manner in which each company meets its legal commitments, each company is required to meet minimum requirements in terms of representation by previously disadvantaged groups. The matters covered include equity ownership, representation at employee and management level (up to board of director level), procurement from black-owned businesses and social investment programs, amongst others.
• Southeast Asia. In countries such as Indonesia, affirmative action programs give natives/Pribumi preference over Han Chinese who have immigrated into the country.
• Turkey. Affirmative action programs give Bulgarian immigrants and other minorities preference over natives.
• United Kingdom. Positive Discrimination is unlawful in the UK and quotas/selective systems are not permitted. A singular exception to this is a provision made under the 1998 Good Friday Agreement which requires that the Police Service of Northern Ireland recruit equal numbers of Catholics and non Catholics.

"Consultations"

Another, more indirect form of affirmative action works through "consultations", whereby institutions such as schools or health-care facilities are viewed as majority-based, making consultations with other ethnic groups a remedy for the situation. This can cause accusations of double-standards, as in practice representatives of all ethnic groups except the majority receive consultation on institutional workings. Detractors claim that this is irrelevant, as they claim consultation with the majority group is completely pointless, as the institution's management is centered on the white majority's culture anyway, therefore making it unecessary to have consultations with them..

See also

• Race and intelligence
• Equality of opportunity vs equality of results
• Jewish quota (historically restricting number of Jews)
• Legacy preferences
• Affirmative action in the United States
• Reservation in India
• Economic discrimination
• Minority groups
• Minority rights
• Women's rights

External links

• Affirmative Action at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
• US Census Bureau: Definition of Race
• Washington Post Section on Affirmative Action