Welcome to Central Library, SUST
Amazon cover image
Image from Amazon.com
Image from Google Jackets

Gender equality and public policy : measuring progress in Europe / Paola Profeta.

By: Material type: TextTextPublisher: New York : Cambridge University Press, 2020Description: 1 online resourceContent type:
  • text
Media type:
  • computer
Carrier type:
  • online resource
ISBN:
  • 9781108525886
Subject(s): Additional physical formats: Print version:: Gender equality and public policyDDC classification:
  • 305.42094 23
LOC classification:
  • HQ1237.5.E85
Online resources: Summary: "When the introduction of board gender quotas was first discussed in Italy a decade ago, those in favor of quotas relied on nonacademic results from consultancy companies claiming that a higher share of women would "lead" to substantial better performance. The arguments against gender quotas were dominated by the defense of "meritocracy", arguing that quotas contravene meritocracy because they risk promoting less qualified individuals and thus reducing the quality of board members. I was puzzled. The argument in favor was not convincing, since it was based on a simple correlation, which is different from causality. The one against was misplaced: Why do we talk about the quality of women if the quality of men has never been an issue? Moreover, since highly qualified women are abundant, why should the promotion of women reduce quality? At that time, together with some co-authors, I contributed to the production of new evidence in the political sphere, showing in a causal way (i.e., using a rigorous analysis) that the introduction of gender quotas in candidate lists increased - rather than decreased - the quality of elected politicians. The rationale for gender quotas changed: policy-makers stopped using unreliable correlations between female representation and performance to justify gender quotas and realized that gender quotas do not contravene meritocracy but rather enhance it"-- Provided by publisher.
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
No physical items for this record

Includes bibliographical references and index.

"When the introduction of board gender quotas was first discussed in Italy a decade ago, those in favor of quotas relied on nonacademic results from consultancy companies claiming that a higher share of women would "lead" to substantial better performance. The arguments against gender quotas were dominated by the defense of "meritocracy", arguing that quotas contravene meritocracy because they risk promoting less qualified individuals and thus reducing the quality of board members. I was puzzled. The argument in favor was not convincing, since it was based on a simple correlation, which is different from causality. The one against was misplaced: Why do we talk about the quality of women if the quality of men has never been an issue? Moreover, since highly qualified women are abundant, why should the promotion of women reduce quality? At that time, together with some co-authors, I contributed to the production of new evidence in the political sphere, showing in a causal way (i.e., using a rigorous analysis) that the introduction of gender quotas in candidate lists increased - rather than decreased - the quality of elected politicians. The rationale for gender quotas changed: policy-makers stopped using unreliable correlations between female representation and performance to justify gender quotas and realized that gender quotas do not contravene meritocracy but rather enhance it"-- Provided by publisher.

Description based on print version record and CIP data provided by publisher; resource not viewed.

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.