Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/33452 
Kompletter Metadatensatz
DublinCore-FeldWertSprache
dc.contributor.authorMyers, Caitlin Knowlesen
dc.date.accessioned2005-10-14-
dc.date.accessioned2010-07-07T09:11:55Z-
dc.date.available2010-07-07T09:11:55Z-
dc.date.issued2005-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/33452-
dc.description.abstractProposition 209, enacted in California in 1996 and made effective the following year, ended state affirmative action programs not only in education, but also for public employment and government contracting. This paper uses CPS data and triple difference techniques to take advantage of the natural experiment presented by this change in state law to gauge the labor market impacts of ending affirmative action programs. Employment among women and minorities dropped sharply, a change that was nearly completely explained by a decline in participation rather than by increases in unemployment. This decline suggests that either affirmative action programs in California had been inefficient or that they failed to create lasting change in prejudicial attitudes.en
dc.language.isoengen
dc.publisher|aInstitute for the Study of Labor (IZA) |cBonnen
dc.relation.ispartofseries|aIZA Discussion Papers |x1674en
dc.subject.jelJ71en
dc.subject.jelJ78en
dc.subject.ddc330en
dc.subject.keywordeconomics of gender and minoritiesen
dc.subject.keywordaffirmative actionen
dc.subject.keywordProposition 209en
dc.subject.keyworddiscriminationen
dc.titleA cure for discrimination? Affirmative action and the case of California Proposition 209-
dc.type|aWorking Paperen
dc.identifier.ppn501149112en
dc.rightshttp://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungenen

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
267.16 kB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.