Abstract
Much discrimination works through exclusion. Poor access to public goods disadvantages minority individuals before they reach the job market. Market impediments to competition cannot explain exclusionary discrimination, and the question is, what can? This paper draws on two different nonmarket theories of discrimination, ‘discriminatory equilibrium’ and ‘stratification economics’, to address the question. In one, group cognitive biases are (re)generated by the tenor of inter-group interaction, while in the other the majority finds exclusionary discrimination remunerative given its asymmetric power. This paper models these views as different types of bad equilibria. In a couple, Pareto-improving policy interventions are possible as the problem arises from bad intra-group coordination within, respectively, the minority and the majority. Yet, in a third, the majority is in a payoff-dominant strategy game when discrimination pays off irrespective of coordination dynamics. The mitigation of discrimination in this case is more political than a policy problem.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.