From Affirmative Action Review: Report
to the President, Clinton White House Staff
Chapter 3,
July 19, 1995
Affirmative Action: Empirical Research
Modern affirmative action, then, was established as policymakers
groped for a way to address continuing problems of discrimination. Has it
worked to help eradicate or prevent such discrimination? In a fundamental
sense the question must be posed for the broader society-wide effort of which
federal programs are only an element and, ideally, a model.
3.1 Review of the Empirical Literature, in Summary
Over the past three decades, minorities and women have made real,
undisputable economic progress. Before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the
median black male worker earned only about 60 percent as much as the median
white male worker; (10)
by 1993, the median black male earned 74 percent as much as the median white
male. (11)
The male-female wage gap has also narrowed since the 1960s: median female
earnings relative to median male earnings rose from about 60 percent during
the 1960s to 72 percent in 1993. (12)
This section of the Report addresses three issues: (1) Why has there
been an earnings gap between black and white workers, and what role did anti-discrimination
legislation and affirmative action play in the reduction of that gap? (Earnings
gaps for Hispanics and Asians also exist which have been linked to discrimination.
The wage gaps for African Americans and women are examined here in detail
in order to illustrate the relationship between the problems and historic
solutions.) (2) Why has there also been an earnings gap between men and women,
and what role did government policies play in the reduction of that gap?
(3) Is there any evidence that affirmative action boosted minority or female
employment?
3.2 Effect on Earnings
3.2.1 Anti-Discrimination Policy, the Minority-White Earnings
Gap
The ratio of the average black workers' earnings to the average
white workers' earnings increased significantly in the 1940s, increased slightly
if at all in the 1950s, increased significantly between 1960 and the mid
1970s, and declined somewhat since the late 1970s. (13)
Hispanic men earn 81 percent of the wages earned by white men
at the same education level. Hispanic women earn less than 65 percent of
the income earned by white men with the same education level. (14)
There has not been an improvement in the employment-population
rate of black workers relative to whites since the 1960s. If anything, there
has been a deterioration in the relative employment-population rate. (15)
Education and work experience are the two most reliable predictors
of a worker's earnings. Black workers historically have had much lower education
than white workers. Adjusting for racial differences in education and work
experience can account for about half of the wage gap between black men and
white men, and about one-third of the gap between black women and white women.
Additionally, holding constant differences in individuals' test scores leads
to a further reduction in the black-white earnings gap. For example, in one
study, in 1991, black males earned 29 percent less than white males without
any adjustments, 15 percent less after adjusting for education and experience,
and 9 percent less after additionally adjusting for test scores. For women,
the gap declines from 14 percent to almost zero after making these adjustments.
(16)
There is some controversy as to how to interpret the black-white wage gap
after holding constant differences in education, test scores, and other variables.
In particular, differences in education or test scores may themselves represent
the discrimination. Thus, the reduction in the racial gap after controlling
for these factors may not mean that discrimination is any less, but it may
mean that attention should also focus on discrimination prior to entry into
the labor market.
Historically there have been great differences in the quality
of education between black and white students. In South Carolina in 1920,
for example, black students attended schools with class sizes twice those
of white schools. Partly as a result of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and the Green decision,
schools became increasingly integrated in the late 1960s. The improvement
in the quality and quantity of education of black workers since the 1960s
accounts for about 20 percent of the gain in black workers' relative earnings. (17)
There is near-unanimous consensus among economists that the government
anti-discrimination programs beginning in 1964 contributed to the improved
income of African Americans. Nevertheless, it is difficult to draw conclusions
about which specific anti-discrimination programs were most effective. And
it may well be that the programs collectively helped even though no single
program was overwhelmingly effective. (18)
3.2.2 Anti-Discrimination Policy and the Male-Female Earnings Gap
The female-to-male ratio of earnings of full-time, year-round
workers was roughly stable at around 60 percent from the early 1900s until
the mid 1970s. In 1993, earnings of women who worked full-time, year-round
had risen to 72 percent as much as men. After adjusting for differences in
education, experience, and other factors, the wage gap is reduced by about
half (i.e., the adjusted ratio is approximately 85 percent). (19)
An increase in women's work experience and a shift into higher-wage
occupations are the major causes of their improved economic position relative
to men. The decline in higher-paying manufacturing jobs, which is partly
responsible for the decline in the earnings of less-skilled men, has also
contributed to the narrowing of the male-female wage gap. Nevertheless, a
substantial part of the improved earnings of women cannot be explained by
these factors, and probably reflects a decline in discrimination. (20)
The relative roles in this story of anti-discrimination laws
and affirmative action, in education and the workplace, are unclear. The
major equal opportunity laws covering women were passed in the mid-1960s,
and the most rapid growth in women's earnings and occupational status did
not begin for another decade. The lag between the change in law and the increase
in earnings may be due to time it took for women to acquire education and
training for traditionally male-dominated occupations. The rapid growth in
the number of female graduates from professional schools coincided with increased
anti-discrimination efforts. (21)
3.3 Effect on Employment
The Labor Department's Office of Federal Contract Compliance
Programs (OFCCP) administers Executive Order 11246, which imposes nondiscrimination
and affirmative action obligations on most firms that contract to do business
with the Federal government. According to five academic studies, active enforcement
by OFCCP during the 1970s caused government contractors to moderately increase
their hiring of minority workers. (22)
According to one study, for example, the employment share of black males
in contractor firms increased from 5.8 percent in 1974 to 6.7 percent in
1980. In non-contractor firms, the black male share increased more modestly,
from 5.3 percent to 5.9 percent. For white males, the employment share fell
from 58.3 percent to 53.3 percent in contractor firms, and from 44.8 percent
to 41.3 percent in non-contractor firms.(23)
The literature also finds that contractor establishments that
underwent an OFCCP review in the 1970s subsequently had faster rates of white
female and of black employment growth than contracting firms that did not
have a review. (24)
Other than studies comparing employment records of government
contractors with non-government contractors, it is hard to separate the effects
of affirmative action from broader civil rights enforcement. Non-government
contractors often took active steps to ensure diversity and compliance with
equal opportunity laws, even though they were not covered by the OFCCP. Some,
or perhaps much, of this behavior may be attributable to government anti-discrimination
efforts. Also, the recruitment efforts of both contractors and non-contractors
may have bid up the wages of minorities and women, reducing wage disparities
regardless of the effect on occupational disparities.
OFCCP enforcement was greatly scaled back during the 1980s. For
example, the real budget and staffing for affirmative action programs was
reduced after 1980. Over the same period, fewer administrative complaints
were filed and back-pay awards were phased out. Perhaps not surprisingly,
available evidence suggests that OFCCP did not have a noticeable impact on
the hiring of minority workers by contractor firms in the early and mid 1980s. (25)
Although the literature clearly shows that, when actively enforced,
affirmative action can lead to an increase in minority employment in contractor
firms, some have questioned whether this employment represents a net gain
or merely a shift of minority employees from non-contractors to contractors.
The extent to which affirmative action has expanded minority
employment in skilled positions is unclear. The academic literature suggests
that before 1974, minority employment growth in contractor firms was predominately
in unskilled positions. Since 1974, there is evidence of modest occupational
advance in contractor firms. But some researchers think this may be the result
of biased reporting. (26)
There is no systematic qualitative evidence that productivity
is lower in contracting firms as a result of OFCCP. The one systematic study
found that contractors do not appear to have lower productivity, suggesting
that OFCCP has not caused firms to hire or promote less qualified workers. (27)
Notes
10 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey.
11 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey.
12 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey.
13 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey. For a time-series discussion of black/white earnings rations, see Donohue, John and James Heckman, 1991. "Continuous versus Episodic Change: The Impact of Federal Civil Rights Policy on the Economic Status of Blacks," Journal of Economic Literature, 29:1603-43. See also, Bound, John and Richard Freeman, 1989, "Black Economic Progress: Erosion of Black Americans" in The Question of Discrimination.
14 EEOC, Office of Communication, The Status of Equal Opportunityin the American Workforce (1995). For a discussion of empirical evidence on earnings gaps and discrimination for Hispanics, see Gregory DeFreitas, Inequality at Work: Hispanics in the U.S. LaborForce (New York: Oxford Press, 1991).
15 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey.
16 Rogers, Bill, 1994,"What Does the AFQT Really Measure: Race, Wages, Schooling and the AFQT Score," mimeo., William and Mary. The figures cited here adjust for racial geographic differences.
17 See Card, David and Alan Krueger, 1992, "School Quality and Black-White Relative Earnings: A Direct Assessment." The Quarterly Journal of Economics, p.151-200.
18 An important study that points out the near unanimous opinion among economists of the positive impact of government anti-discrimination programs on improved income of African-Americans is Donohue, John and James Heckman, 1991, "Continuous versus Episodic Change: The Impact of Federal Civil Rights Policy on the Economic Status of Blacks, "Journal of Economic Literature, 29:1603-43. Freeman, Richard, 1973, "Changes in the Labor Market for Black Americans, 1948-72," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, vol. 1 was among the first to identify government anti-discrimination programs as a source of progress.
19 See Blau, Francine and Marianne Ferber, 1992. The Economics of Women, Men and Work, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, p.129.
20 See Blau, Francine, and Lawrence Kahn, 1994, "Rising Wage Inequality and the U.S. Gender Gap." American Economic Review 84:23-28, for a discussion of the large decline in male-female wage differentials that occurred from the mid 1970s to the late 1980s.
21 Department of Education, National Center of Education Statistics.
22 The five studies are: (1) Leonard, Jonathan, 1984, "The Impact of Affirmative Action on Employment," Journal of Labor Economics, 2:439-463; (2) Leonard, Jonathan, 1984, "Employment and Occupational Advance Under Affirmative Action," The Review of Economics and Statistics; (3) Ashenfelter, Orley and James Heckman, 1976, "Measuring the Effect of an Anti-discrimination Program, in Estimating the Labor Market Effects of Social Programs, Eds: Orley Ashenfelter and James Blum. Princeton NJ: pp.46-89; (4) Heckman, James and Kenneth Wolpin, 1976, "Does the Contract Compliance Program Work? An Analysis of Chicago Data," Industrial and Labor Relations Review 29:544-64; (5) Goldstein, Morris and Robert Smith, 1976, "The Estimated Impact of Anti-discrimination Laws Aimed at Federal Contractors," Industrial and Labor Relations Review.
23 Leonard, Jonathan, 1984, "The Impact of Affirmative Action Regulation and Equal Employment Law on Black Employment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, 4:47-64.
24 See above studies plus Donohue and Heckman, Continuous versus Episodic, 29, Journal of Economic Literature, p.1631.
25 For a full discussion of the impact of weakened affirmative action enforcement during the 1980s, see Leonard, Jonathan, 1990, "The Impact of Affirmative Action Regulation and Equal Employment Law on Black Employment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, 4:47-64.
26 For a discussion of the impact of affirmative action on minority employment in skilled positions, see Leonard 1990, The Impact of Affirmative . . . .," 4 J. of Econ. Perspectives 47.
27 See Leonard, Jonathan, 1984, "Anti-discrimination or Reverse Discrimination: The Impact of Changing Demographics, Title VII and Affirmative Action on Productivity," Journal of Human Resources, vol. 19, No.2, pp.145-74.
This document is not necessarily
endorsed by the Almanac of Policy Issues. It is being preserved
in the Policy Archive for historic reasons.