In this book Michel Rosenfeld provides virtually the first interdisciplinary analysis of affirmative action. Rosenfeld offers a critical examination of the major existing philosophical and constitutional theories on affirmative action and elaborates a new theory that strongly defends the justice of affirmative action from both the standpoint of both philosophy and constitutional law.

C. Goals and timetables

This book discusses affirmative action or positive discrimination, defined as measures awarding privileges to certain groups that have historically suffered discrimination or have been underrepresented in specific social sectors. The book’s underlying rationale is that one cannot place at the same starting point people who have been treated differently in the past because in this way one merely perpetuates a state of difference and, in turn, social gaps are exaggerated and social cohesion is endangered. Starting out with an introduction on the meaning and typology of affirmative action policies, the book goes on to emphasise the interaction of affirmative action with traditional values of liberal state, such as equality, meritocracy, democracy, justice, liberalism and socialism. It reveals the affirmative action goals from a legal and sociological point of view, examining the remedial, cultural, societal, pedagogical and economy purposes of such action. After applying an institutional narrative of the implementation of affirmative action worldwide, the book explains the jurisprudence on the issue through syntheses and antitheses of structural and material variables, such as the institutional recognition of the policies, the domains of their implementation and their beneficiaries. The book eventually makes an analytical impact assessment following the implementation of affirmative action plans and the judicial response, especially in relation to the conventional human rights doctrine, by establishing a liaison between affirmative action and social and group rights.. The book applies a multi-disciplinary and comparative methodology in order to assess the ethical standing of affirmative action policies, the public interests involved and their effectiveness towards actual equality. In the light of the above analysis, the monograph explains the arguments considering affirmative action as a theology for substantive equality and the arguments treating this policy as anathema for liberalism. A universal discussion currently at its peak.

South African Human Resource Management focuses on the knowledge and skills that managers at all levels need. The authors integrate contemporary international research and implementation with a South African perspective.

"What makes affirmative action morally (un)justified? That is this book's core question. Its main contribution consists in a meticulous scrutiny of the strength of the six main arguments for-i.e., the compensation, the anti-discrimination, the equality of opportunity, the role model, the diversity, and the integration-based justifications-and the five main objections to affirmative action-i.e., the reverse discrimination, the stigma, the mismatch, the publicity, and the merit-based objections-and of how these arguments relate to one another. The book argues that all of the five main objections to affirmative action are either flawed or quite limited in terms of their implications. With regard to the arguments in favor of affirmative action, the book shows why the anti-discrimination and equality of opportunity-based arguments provide strong justifications for many affirmative action schemes. In light thereof and the fact that the five most influential arguments against affirmative action are all flawed or otherwise weak, the overall claim defended in the book is that many of the schemes that people have in mind when they discuss affirmative action (many of which are presently on the retreat) are justified. However, the book also emphasizes that any definitive answer to the question Is affirmative action morally (un)justified? must rest on a wide range of empirical results in the social sciences etc., e.g., about the likely effects of various affirmative action schemes; and that the question, when posed in such general form (unlike when it is asked about specific schemes of affirmative action), admits of no direct positive or negative answer"--

Bron Taylor unites theoretical and applied social science to analyze a salient contemporary moral and political problem. Three decades after the passage of civil rights laws, criteria for hiring and promotion to redress past discrimination and the sensitive "quota" question are still unresolved issues. Taylor reviews the works of prominent social scientists and philosophers on the moral and legal principles underlying affirmative action, and examines them in light of his own empirical study. Using participant observation, in-depth interviewing, and a detailed questionnaire, he examines the attitudes of four groups in the California Department of Parks and Recreation: male and female, white and nonwhite workers. Because the department has implemented a strong program for ten years, its employees have had firsthand experience with affirmative action. Their views about the rights of minorities in the economy are often surprising. This work presents a comprehensive picture of the cross-pressures-the racial fears and antagonisms, the moral, ethical, and religious views about fairness and opportunity, the rigid ideas-that guide popular attitudes.

A comparative exploration of Western and Chinese understandings of justice and their possible use to reframe Sino-American relations and international governance. The concept of justice is central to politics: it justifies the ordering of society and the distribution of rewards. In Justice and International Order, Richard Ned Lebow and Feng Zhang compare and contrast Western and Chinese conceptions of justice. They argue that justice can almost invariably be reduced to the principles of fairness and equality, although they are developed and expressed differently in the two cultures. Lebow and Zhang show that there has been a noticeable shift in both in favoring equality over fairness in the modern era. They analyze the growing conflict between China and the West in the light of these conceptions of justice and show how they might be deployed to ameliorate it. The authors also offer a critique of what passes for global order and explore ways in which fairness and equality, and trade-offs between them, offer pathways to better and more peaceful worlds.