View source for Affirmative action

{{Short description|Policies aiming to increase inclusion of people from marginalized groups}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=November 2022}}
{{EngvarB|date=June 2022}}
'''Affirmative action''' (also sometimes called '''reservations''', '''alternative access''', '''positive discrimination''' or '''positive action''' in various countries' laws and policies){{efn|Attributed to multiple references: <ref>{{cite web |last1=Jarrett |first1=Tim |date=24 October 2011 |title=The Equality Act 2010 and positive action |url=https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06093/SN06093.pdf |access-date=31 March 2023 |website=UK Parliament}}</ref><ref name=":4">{{cite web |title=positive discrimination |url=http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/positive-discrimination?q=positive+discrimination |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140223185155/http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/positive-discrimination?q=positive+discrimination |archive-date=23 February 2014 |access-date=13 February 2014 |work=Oxford Dictionaries |publisher=Oxford University Press}}</ref><ref name=":5">{{cite web |title=affirmative action |url=http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/affirmative-action?q=affirmative+action |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140223185154/http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/affirmative-action?q=affirmative+action |archive-date=23 February 2014 |access-date=13 February 2014 |work=Oxford Dictionaries |publisher=Oxford University Press}}</ref><ref>"positive, adj. and n." ''OED Online''. Oxford University Press, March 2023. Web. 6 May 2023.</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last1=Jenkins |first1=Laura Dudley |last2=Moses |first2=Michele S. |date=2017-08-08 |title=Affirmative action around the world |url=http://theconversation.com/affirmative-action-around-the-world-82190 |access-date=2024-02-20 |website=The Conversation |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Reservation Is About Adequate Representation, Not Poverty Eradication |url=https://thewire.in/law/supreme-court-bench-reservation |first1=Kailash |last1=Jeenger |date=May 18, 2020 |access-date=2024-02-20 |website=The Wire}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=UNESCO IIEP |date=2021 |title=Flexible learning pathways in Finnish higher education |url=https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000377999 |access-date=2024-02-20 |website=UNESCO |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240422022209/https://unesdoc.unesco.org/in/rest/annotationSVC/DownloadWatermarkedAttachment/attach_import_61197fa5-8e7f-4752-879b-cf841bf74dcc?_=377999eng.pdf&to=15&from=1 |archive-date= Apr 22, 2024 }}</ref>}} refers to a set of policies and practices within a government or organization seeking to address systemic discrimination. Historically and internationally, support for affirmative action has been justified by the idea that it may help with bridging inequalities in employment and pay, increasing access to education, and promoting [[diversity (politics)|diversity]], [[social equity]], and [[social inclusion]] and redressing wrongs, harms, or hindrances, also called [[substantive equality]].<ref name=twsL13>{{citation|author1=Nicole Richardt |author2=Torrey Shanks |title= Equal Opportunity|publisher= International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences  |via=Encyclopedia.com|year= 2008|url= http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Equal_Opportunity.aspx|access-date= 2011-09-12}}</ref>

The nature of affirmative-action policies varies from region to region and exists on a spectrum from a hard quota to merely targeting encouragement for increased participation. Some countries use a [[Quotaism|quota system]], reserving a certain percentage of government jobs, political positions, and school vacancies for members of a certain group; an example of this is the [[Reservation in India|reservation system in India]]. In some other jurisdictions where quotas are not used, minority-group members are given preference or special consideration in selection processes. [[Affirmative action in the United States|In the United States]], affirmative action by executive order originally meant selection without regard to race but preferential treatment was widely used in college admissions, as upheld in the 2003 [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] case ''[[Grutter v. Bollinger]]'', until 2023, when this was overturned in ''[[Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard]].''<ref name="SFFA">{{cite court|litigants=[[Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College]]|vol=600|reporter=U.S.|opinion=___|date=2023|url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf}}</ref>

A variant of affirmative action more common in Europe is known as [[positive action]], wherein equal opportunity is promoted by encouraging underrepresented groups into a field. This is often described as being "[[Racial color blindness|color blind]]", but some American sociologists have argued that this is insufficient to achieve [[substantive equality]] of outcomes based on race.<ref>{{cite book |title=Racism Without Racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States |last=Bonilla-Silva |first=Eduardo |date=2014 |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |isbn=978-1-4422-2055-3 |edition=4th |pages=101–102}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|author=Gallagher, Charles A.|date=2003 |title=Color-Blind Privilege: The Social and Political Functions of Erasing the Color Line in Post Race America|journal=Race, Gender & Class|volume=10|issue=4|pages=22–37|jstor=41675099}}</ref>

In the United States, affirmative action is controversial<ref>{{cite web |publisher=Stanford University |title=Affirmative Action |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/affirmative-action/ |access-date=30 October 2022 |quote=When [affirmative-action] steps involve ''preferential'' selection—selection on the basis of race, gender, or ethnicity—affirmative action generates intense controversy. |website=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |orig-date=Dec 28, 2001 |date=Apr 9, 2018 |first1=Robert |last1=Fullinwider |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.today/20220312183751/https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/affirmative-action/ |archive-date= 12 March 2022 }}</ref> and [[public opinion]] on the subject is divided. Supporters of affirmative action argue that it promotes [[substantive equality]] for group outcomes and representation for groups, which are socio-economically disadvantaged or have faced historical discrimination or oppression.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gururaj |first1=Suchitra |last2=Somers |first2=Patricia |last3=Fry |first3=Jessica |last4=Watson |first4=Del |last5=Cicero |first5=Francesca |last6=Morosini |first6=Marilia |last7=Zamora |first7=Jennifer |title=Affirmative action policy: Inclusion, exclusion, and the global public good |journal=Policy Futures in Education |date=January 2021 |volume=19 |issue=1 |pages=63–83 |doi=10.1177/1478210320940139 |hdl=10923/19826 |s2cid=225376002 |hdl-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy">{{cite web |publisher=Stanford University |title=Affirmative Action |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/affirmative-action/ |access-date=30 October 2022 |website=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |orig-date=Dec 28, 2001 |date=Apr 9, 2018 |first1=Robert |last1=Fullinwider |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.today/20220312183751/https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/affirmative-action/ |archive-date= 12 March 2022 }}</ref> Opponents of affirmative action have argued that it is a form of [[reverse discrimination]],<ref name=":2">{{cite magazine |last1=Fish |first1=Stanley |title=Reverse Racism, or How the Pot Got to Call the Kettle Black |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/politics/race/fish.htm |access-date=2 March 2019 |magazine=The Atlantic |date=November 1993 |archive-date=28 August 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200828041855/https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/politics/race/fish.htm |url-status=dead }}</ref> that it tends to benefit the most privileged within minority groups at the expense of the least fortunate within majority groups,<ref name=":3" /> or that—when applied to universities—it can hinder minority students by placing them in courses for which they have not been adequately prepared.<ref name="auto" />

==Origins==
The term "affirmative action" was first used in the United States in [[Executive Order 10925]],<ref>{{cite web | url=http://shfg.org/resources/Documents/FH%202%20(2010)%20MacLaury.pdf | title=President Kennedy's E.O.10925: Seedbed of Affirmative Action | publisher=Society for History in the Federal Government | access-date=20 August 2020 | archive-date=27 October 2020 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201027201202/http://shfg.org/resources/Documents/FH%202%20%282010%29%20MacLaury.pdf | url-status=dead }}</ref> signed by President [[John F. Kennedy]] on 6 March 1961, which included a provision that [[government contractor]]s "take ''affirmative action'' to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated [fairly] during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin".<ref name="oeod.uci.edu">[http://www.oeod.uci.edu/aa.html A Brief History of Affirmative Action] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150512084109/http://www.oeod.uci.edu/aa.html|date=12 May 2015}}, University of California, Irvine (access date 16 May 2015)</ref> In 1965, President [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] issued [[Executive Order 11246]] which required government employers to "hire without regard to race, religion and national origin" and "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin."<ref>Executive Order 11246</ref> The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Neither executive order nor The Civil Rights Act authorized group preferences. The Senate floor manager of the bill, Senator Hubert Humphrey, declared that the bill "would prohibit preferential treatment for any particular group" adding  "I will eat my hat if this leads to racial quotas."
<ref>{{cite web | url=https://ifamnews.com/en/it-is-time-for-senator-humphrey-to-eat-his-hat | title= Today's racial quotas? Senator Humphrey would've eaten his hat | publisher=Family News Network | date=January 20, 2022 | access-date=17 July 2023}}</ref> However affirmative action in practice would eventually become synonymous with preferences, goals and quotas as upheld or struck down by Supreme Court decisions even though no law had been passed explicitly permitting discrimination in favor of disadvantaged groups.{{fact|date=January 2025}} 

Affirmative action is intended to promote the opportunities of defined minority groups within a society to give them equal access to that of the majority population.<ref>{{cite web|title=Affirmative Action |url=http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/sharamkohan1/affirmative-action/ |website=Harvard Blogs |publisher=Harvard Law School |access-date=30 April 2015 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150518061955/http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/sharamkohan1/affirmative-action/ |archive-date=18 May 2015 }}</ref> The philosophical basis of the policy has various rationales, including but not limited to compensation for past discrimination, correction of current discrimination, and the diversification of society.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Tierney |first=William G. |date=1997 |title=The Parameters of Affirmative Action: Equity and Excellence in the Academy |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/1170625 |journal=Review of Educational Research |volume=67 |issue=2 |pages=165–196 |doi=10.3102/00346543067002165 |jstor=1170625 |s2cid=146578304 |issn=0034-6543|url-access=subscription }}</ref> It is often implemented in governmental and educational settings to ensure that designated groups within a society can participate in all promotional, educational, and training opportunities.<ref>{{cite web|title=Equal Opportunity & Affirmative Action Policy Statement|url=http://www.chatham.edu/about/legal_nondiscrimination.cfm|website=chatham.edu|access-date=30 April 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150501102235/http://www.chatham.edu/about/legal_nondiscrimination.cfm|archive-date=1 May 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref>

The stated justification for affirmative action by its proponents is to help compensate for past discrimination, persecution or [[Exploitation of labour|exploitation]] by the ruling class of a culture,<ref name=":3">Sowell, Thomas (2004). Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study, Yale University Press, {{ISBN|0-300-10199-6}}</ref> and to address existing discrimination.<ref name="Affirmative Action">{{cite book|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/affirmative-action/|title=Affirmative Action|publisher=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|date=1 April 2009}}</ref>

==Methods of implementation==
* Quotas<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Morgenroth |first1=Thekla |last2=Ryan |first2=Michelle K. |title=Quotas and affirmative action: U nderstanding group-based outcomes and attitudes |journal=Social and Personality Psychology Compass |date=March 2018 |volume=12 |issue=3 |article-number=e12374 |doi=10.1111/spc3.12374 |hdl=10871/31150 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>
* Specific scholarships and financial aid for certain groups<ref>{{Cite web |title=What Is Affirmative Action? How It Works and Example |url=https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/affirmative-action.asp |access-date=2024-06-02 |website=Investopedia |language=en}}</ref>
* Marketing/advertising to groups that the affirmative action is intended to increase<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Twale |first1=Darla J. |last2=Douvanis |first2=Costas J. |last3=Sekula |first3=Francis J. |title=Affirmative action strategies and professional schools: case illustrations of examplary programs |journal=Higher Education |date=September 1992 |volume=24 |issue=2 |pages=177–191 |doi=10.1007/BF00129440 }}</ref>
* Specific training or emulation actions for identified audiences{{Citation needed|date=September 2024}}
* Relaxation of selection criteria applied to a target audiences<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Rothman |first1=Stanley |last2=Lipset |first2=S. M. |last3=Nevitte |first3=Neil |title=Diversity and affirmative action: The state of campus opinion |journal=Academic Questions |date=December 2002 |volume=15 |issue=4 |pages=52–66 |id={{ProQuest|603595788}} |doi=10.1007/s12129-002-1045-8 |doi-broken-date=11 July 2025 }}</ref>

==Women==
{{See also|Women in government#Quotas|label 1=Women in government (quotas)}}
Several different studies investigated the effect of affirmative action on women. Kurtulus (2012) in her review of affirmative action and the occupational advancement of minorities and women during 1973–2003 showed that the effect of affirmative action on advancing black, [[Hispanic]], and white women into management, professional, and technical occupations occurred primarily during the 1970s and early 1980s. During this period, contractors grew their shares of these groups more rapidly than non-contractors because of the implementation of affirmative action. But the positive effect of affirmative action vanished entirely in the late 1980s, which Kurtulus says may be due to the slowdown into advanced occupation for women and minorities because of the political shift of affirmative action that started with President Reagan. Becoming a federal contractor increased white women's share of professional occupations by 0.183 percentage points, or 9.3 percent, on average during these three decades, and increased black women's share by 0.052 percentage points (or by 3.9 percent). Becoming a federal contractor also increased Hispanic women's and black men's share of technical occupations on average by 0.058 percent and 0.109 percentage points respectively (or by 7.7 and 4.2 percent). These represent a substantial contribution of affirmative action to overall trends in the occupational advancement of women and minorities over the three decades under the study.<ref>Fidan Ana Kurtulus, "Affirmative Action and the Occupational Advancement of Minorities and Women During 1973–2003", ''Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society'' (2012) 51#2 pp 213–246. [https://web.archive.org/web/20140116090925/http://economics.lafayette.edu/files/2011/04/kurtulus.pdf online]</ref> A reanalysis of multiple scholarly studies, especially in Asia, considered the impact of four primary factors on support for affirmative action programs for women: gender; political factors; psychological factors; and social structure. Kim and Kim (2014) found that, "Affirmative action both corrects existing unfair treatment and gives women equal opportunity in the future."<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Kim|first1=Sunhee|last2=Kim|first2=Seoyong|date=March 2014|title=Exploring the effect of four factors on affirmative action programs for women|url=http://itlboard.ewha.ac.kr/ys_board/view.htm?oid=26&mcode=56&page=2&serial=96605|url-status=dead|journal=[[Asian Journal of Women's Studies]]|volume=20|issue=1|pages=30–69|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150904050901/http://itlboard.ewha.ac.kr/ys_board/view.htm?oid=26&mcode=56&page=2&serial=96605|archive-date=4 September 2015}} [http://ajou.ac.kr/~seoyong/paper/2014-Exploring%20the%20Effect%20of%20Four%20Factors Pdf.]  {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150624065556/http://ajou.ac.kr/~seoyong/paper/2014-Exploring%20the%20Effect%20of%20Four%20Factors|date=24 June 2015}}</ref>

==Quotas==
Law regarding [[Quotaism|quotas]] and affirmative action varies widely from nation to nation.

Caste-based and other group-based quotas are used in the [[reservation in India|reservation system]].

In 2012, the [[European Union]] Commission approved a plan for women to constitute 40% of non-executive board directorships in large listed companies in Europe by 2020.<ref>{{cite magazine |title=The EU's Boardroom Quota Battle Is Over, But Women Cannot Yet Rest |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/insead/2012/11/19/the-eus-boardroom-quota-battle-is-over-but-women-cannot-yet-rest/ |magazine=Forbes.com}}</ref> Directive (EU) 2022/2381 requires that EU member states adopt by 28 December 2024 laws to ensure that by 30 June 2026 members of the underrepresented sex hold at least 40% of non-executive director positions and at least 33% of all director positions, including both executive and non-executive directors, for listed companies. Directive (EU) 2022/2381 expires on 31 December 2038.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2022/2381/oj |title=Directive (EU) 2022/2381 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 November 2022 on improving the gender balance among directors of listed companies and related measures |author=<!--Not stated--> |date=2022-12-07 |website=EUR-Lex |access-date=2024-02-26}}</ref>

In [[Sweden]], the Supreme Court has ruled that "affirmative action" ethnic quotas in universities are discrimination and hence unlawful.  It said that the requirements for the intake should be the same for all.  The justice minister said that the decision left no room for uncertainty.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.thelocal.se/20061221/5871 |title=Uppsala discriminated against Swedes |website= The Local |date= 21 December 2006}}</ref>

==National approaches==
{{See also|Reserved political positions}}

In some countries that have laws on racial equality, affirmative action is rendered illegal because it does not treat all races equally. This approach of equal treatment is sometimes described as being "[[Color blindness (race)|color blind]]", in hopes that it is effective against discrimination without engaging in [[reverse discrimination]].

In such countries, the focus tends to be on ensuring equal opportunity and, for example, targeted advertising campaigns to encourage ethnic minority candidates to join the police force. This is sometimes called [[positive action]].

===Africa===
====South Africa====
{{See also|Black Economic Empowerment}}
Between 1948 and 1974, the [[apartheid]] government introduced statutes which enshrined racial discrimination in all areas of life. Individuals were classified in a racial hierarchy which placed whites at the top, followed by "[[Coloureds]]", 
then Asians or Indians, with black Africans at the bottom. Benefits were afforded based on this hierarchy, and favoured white-owned, especially [[Afrikaner]]-owned companies, which marginalised and excluded black people and limited their employment opportunities. Legislation meant that skilled and highly paid jobs were reserved for [[white people]], and black people were largely used as cheap, unskilled labour, creating and extending the "colour bar" in South African labour.<ref name="Thaver 2017">Thaver, Beverly. "Affirmative action in South Africa: The limits of history." In ''Race and Inequality'', pp. 167-186. Routledge, 2017.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.sahistory.org.za/luli-35 |title=White Workers and the Colour Bar |publisher=Sahistory.org.za |access-date=31 May 2015 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140319002102/http://www.sahistory.org.za/luli-35 |archive-date=19 March 2014 |date=3 April 2011 }}</ref><ref name="africa">[https://www.economist.com/international/1999/09/30/race-law-and-poverty-in-the-new-south-africa Race, law and poverty in the new South Africa], The Economist, 30 September 1999</ref> The variation in skills and productivity between groups of people ultimately caused disparities in employment, occupation, and income within labour markets. Following the end of apartheid, affirmative action legislation aimed to address these disparities.<ref name=prob>{{cite web |last=Stokes|first= G. |date=15 March 2010 |title=The problem with affirmative action |url=http://www.fanews.co.za/article.asp?Front_Page_Features~25,Stokes_Stage~1145,The_problem_with_affirmative_action~7618 |publisher=Fanews.co.za}}</ref>

The [[African National Congress]]-led government chose to implement affirmative action legislation to correct previous imbalances (a policy known as employment equity), and fulfil the obligations of the Republic as a member of the International Labour Organisation.<ref name=prob/><ref name=aff>{{cite journal |last=Bergmann |first=B. |year=1999 |title=The continuing need for affirmative action |journal=The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance |volume=39 |issue=5 |pages=757–768 |doi=10.1016/S1062-9769(99)00027-7  |issn = 1062-9769 }}</ref> As a result of the [[Employment Equity Act]] and the [[Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment]] Act, companies were required to employ previously disenfranchised groups (blacks, [[Indian South Africans|Indians]], and Coloureds), as well as women and disabled people.<ref>[http://www.ecsecc.org/files/publications/120307130010.pdf Archived copy] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140318215653/http://www.ecsecc.org/files/publications/120307130010.pdf|date=18 March 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.southafrica.info/services/rights/employmentequity.htm |title=Employment Equity FAQ |publisher=Southafrica.info |access-date=11 April 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120401103321/http://www.southafrica.info/services/rights/employmentequity.htm |archive-date=1 April 2012 }}</ref> 

Many have embraced these acts; others have criticised them.{{efn|<ref name=prob/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mg.co.za/article/2010-02-03-bees-glass-slipper |title=BEE's Glass Slipper |date=3 February 2010 |publisher=Mg.co.za |access-date=11 April 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.moneyweb.co.za/mw/view/mw/en/page292679?oid=346519&sn=2009+Detail+no+image&pid=295799 |title=BEE: A man made disaster |publisher=Moneyweb.co.za |access-date=11 April 2012}}</ref><ref name="fin24.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.fin24.com/articles/default/display_article.aspx?ArticleId=1518-24_2564628 |title='SAB deal to enrich black elite': Fin24: Companies |publisher=Fin24 |access-date=29 July 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111003093857/http://www.fin24.com/articles/default/display_article.aspx?ArticleId=1518-24_2564628 |archive-date=3 October 2011 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=5340048 |archive-url=http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20160516113211/http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=5340048 |url-status=dead |archive-date=16 May 2016 |title=Business Report – Home – Motlanthe warns BEE council has failed |publisher=Busrep.co.za |date=9 February 2010 |access-date=29 July 2010 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mg.co.za/article/2009-11-20-manyi-vows-to-get-tough-over-bee |title=Manyi vows to get tough over BEE – Mail & Guardian Online: The smart news source |date=20 November 2009 |publisher=Mg.co.za |access-date=29 July 2010}}</ref>}} Proponents have said that South African affirmative action legislation aims to promote economic growth rather than to redistribute wealth,<ref>{{cite journal |last=Franchi|first= V. |year=2003 |title=The racialization of affirmative action in organizational discourses: A case study of symbolic racism in post-apartheid South Africa |volume= 27 |issue= 2 |pages= 157–187 |journal= International Journal of Intercultural Relations |doi= 10.1016/S0147-1767(02)00091-3 }}</ref><ref name=info>{{cite web |title=Black economic empowerment. (n.d.) |url=http://www.southafrica.info/business/trends/empowerment/bee.htm |publisher=Southafrica.info |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121101222356/http://southafrica.info/business/trends/empowerment/bee.htm |archive-date=1 November 2012 }}</ref> address [[Wealth inequality in South Africa|vast racial inequalities]] in wealth and income,<ref name="Shai 2019">{{Cite journal|last1=Shai|first1=Lerato|last2=Molefinyana|first2=Comfort|last3=Quinot|first3=Geo|date=2019-12-13|title=Public Procurement in the Context of Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE) in South Africa—Lessons Learned for Sustainable Public Procurement|journal=Sustainability|volume=11|issue=24|pages=7164|doi=10.3390/su11247164|bibcode=2019Sust...11.7164S |issn=2071-1050|doi-access=free}}</ref>  and to restore equal access to the benefits of society.<ref name=prob/> Critics suggest these laws limit the free market, raise costs, reduce economic growth, and advantage the black middle class over poorer blacks and other groups.<ref name=aff/><ref name=dem>{{cite web|last=Edigheji |first=O. |year=2006 |title=Affirmative action and state capacity in a democratic South Africa. Policy: issues & actors, 20(4) |url=http://cps.org.za/cps%20pdf/pia20_4.pdf |website=cps.org.za |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140519150723/http://cps.org.za/cps%20pdf/pia20_4.pdf |archive-date=19 May 2014 }}</ref><ref name=culture>Goga, F. (n.d.). ''A critique of affirmative action: The concept''. Retrieved from {{cite web|url=http://ccms.ukzn.ac.za/index.php |title=Culture, Communication and Media Studies - Home |access-date=5 November 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120622114513/http://ccms.ukzn.ac.za/index.php |archive-date=22 June 2012 }}</ref> The [[Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa]] ruled that while blacks may be favoured in principle, in practice this should not lead to unfair discrimination against others.<ref name="africa" />

====Ghana==== 

The Parliament of Ghana passed the Affirmative Action Bill on July 30, 2024.<ref>{{Cite web |last=admin |date=2024-08-08 |title=Affirmative Action Act, 2024 (Gender Equity ) Passed by Parliament {{!}} Newsroom - Ministry of Information, Ghana |url=https://moi.gov.gh/newsroom/2024/08/affirmative-action-act-2024-gender-equity-passed-by-parliament/ |access-date=2024-09-09 |language=en-US}}</ref> The bill aims to increase the number of women in politics, with a target of 30% by 2026, 35% by 2028 and 50% by 2030. The [[2024 Ghanaian general election]] in December was the first with affirmative action legislation in place. In the election campaign, both the ruling [[New Patriotic Party]] and the main opposition party [[National Democratic Congress (Ghana)|NDC]] voiced their commitment to the targets, in an effort to appeal to women voters. After the election, the number of women remained the same as after the 2020 election (15%).<ref>{{Cite web |title=Ghana's democracy stress tested – three milestones passed - The Nordic Africa Institute |url=https://nai.uu.se/stories-and-events/news/2025-02-06-ghanas-democracy-stress-tested---three-milestones-passed.html |access-date=2025-02-07 |website=nai.uu.se |language=en}}</ref> In his inaugural speech on 7 January 2025, the newly elected President [[John Mahama]] said the NDC was committed to "breaking the glass ceiling" for women in politics.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Effah |first=Evans |date=2025-01-07 |title=Full Text: Read President Mahama's inaugural speech |url=https://3news.com/news/full-text-read-president-mahamas-inaugural-speech/ |access-date=2025-02-07 |language=en-US}}</ref>

===Asia===
====China====
{{main|Affirmative action in China}}
There is affirmative action in education for minority nationalities in China, this may equate to lowering minimum requirements for the National University Entrance Examination, which is a mandatory exam for all students to enter university.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.moe.gov.cn/edoas/website18/30/info26630.htm|title=Graduate Student Admission Ordainment – Ministry of Education, PRC|accessdate=31 March 2023}}{{Dead link|date=April 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mzzjw.gd.gov.cn/mzjy/ShowArticle.asp?ArticleID=541 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090105011631/http://www.mzzjw.gd.gov.cn/mzjy/ShowArticle.asp?ArticleID=541 |url-status=dead |archive-date=5 January 2009 |title=Ethnic and Religious Affairs Commission of Guangdong Province |publisher=Mzzjw.gd.gov.cn |date=15 October 2007 |access-date=11 April 2012 }}</ref> [[Liangshaoyikuan]] refers a policy in China on affirmative action in [[criminal justice]].

====Israel====
A class-based affirmative action policy was incorporated into the admission practices of the four most selective universities in [[Israel]] during the early to mid-2000s. In evaluating the eligibility of applicants, neither their financial status nor their national or ethnic origins are considered; the emphasis is on structural disadvantages, especially neighborhood socioeconomic status and high school rigor, although several individual hardships are also weighed. This policy made the four institutions, especially the echelons at the most selective departments, more diverse than they otherwise would have been. Proponents of this model have said that rising geographic, economic and demographic diversity of the student population suggests the focus on structural determinants of disadvantage yields broad diversity dividends.<ref name="Alon 2011">{{cite journal |author=Alon, Sigal |year=2011 |title=The Diversity Dividends of a Need-blind and Color-blind Affirmative Action Policy |pages=1494–1505 |journal= Social Science Research |volume=40 |issue=6 |doi=10.1016/j.ssresearch.2011.05.005 }}</ref>

In civil service employment, Israeli citizens who are women, Arabs, Blacks or people with disabilities are supported by affirmative action policies.<ref name="moital.gov.il">{{cite web|url=http://www.moital.gov.il/NR/exeres/8C492E47-135C-4B82-84D7-C62254B8BFEF.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130201010211/http://www.moital.gov.il/NR/exeres/8C492E47-135C-4B82-84D7-C62254B8BFEF.htm|url-status=dead|archive-date=1 February 2013|title=משרד הכלכלה והתעשייה|website=משרד הכלכלה והתעשייה|access-date=22 October 2017}}</ref> Israeli citizens who are Arabs, Blacks or people with disabilities are also entitled to full university scholarships from the state.<ref name="che.org.il">[http://che.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/%D7%94%D7%97%D7%9C%D7%98%D7%AA-%D7%95%D7%AA%D7%AA-%D7%9E%D7%A1-1-%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%A2%D7%93.pdf החלטות ישיבת הוועדה לתכנון ולתקצוב מס'1)100] Council for Higher Education (in Hebrew). Retrieved 31 March 2023</ref>

====India====
{{Main|Reservation in India}}

Reservation in India is a form of affirmative action designed to improve the well-being of [[Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes]] (SC/ST), and [[Other Backward Class]]es (OBC), defined primarily by their caste. Members of these categories comprise about two-thirds of the population of India.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011census/hlo/pca/pca_pdf/PCA-CRC-0000.pdf |title=2011 Census Primary Census Abstract |work=Censusindia.gov.in|access-date=1 October 2017}}</ref><ref name="TOI2007">{{cite news|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/OBCs-form-41-of-population-Survey/articleshow/2328117.cms|title=OBCs form 41% of population: Survey|access-date=21 November 2020|work=[[Times of India]]|publisher=[[Bennett, Coleman & Company]]|date=1 September 2007|url-status=live|archive-date=17 April 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200417023834/https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/OBCs-form-41-of-population-Survey/articleshow/2328117.cms}}</ref> According to the [[Constitution of India]], up to 50% of all government-run higher education admissions and government job vacancies may be reserved for members of the SC/ST/OBC-NCL categories, and 10% for those in [[Economically Weaker Section]]s (EWS), with the remaining unreserved.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.deccanherald.com/national/cabinet-approves-10-pc-711767.html|title=Govt OKs 10% job quota for economically weaker sections|date=7 January 2019|website=Deccan Herald|language=en|access-date=7 January 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/big-move-by-modi-government-ahead-of-polls-announces-10-quota-for-upper-castes-reports/articleshow/67418661.cms|title=Modi govt announces 10 per cent quota for economically backward in general category|date=7 January 2019|work=The Economic Times|access-date=7 January 2019}}</ref> In 2014, the [[Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation|Indian National Sample Survey]] found that 12% of surveyed Indian households had received academic scholarships, with 94% being on account of SC/ST/OBC membership, 2% based on financial weakness and 0.7% based on merit.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.rediff.com/news/report/rediff-labs-can-you-guess-how-many-indians-get-merit-based-scholarships/20140901.htm|title=Guess how many Indians get merit-based scholarships|work=Rediff|access-date=3 January 2018}}</ref>

====Indonesia====
Indonesia has offered affirmative action for [[Indigenous people of New Guinea|native Papuans]] in education, government civil worker selection, and police & army selection.<ref>{{Cite web|title=777 Putra Asli Papua Lolos Program Beasiswa ADIK dan ADEM|url=https://kumparan.com/bumi-papua/777-putra-asli-papua-lolos-program-beasiswa-adik-dan-adem-1rUFs1b6OUB|access-date=6 August 2020|website=kumparan|language=id-ID}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Afirmasi Pendidikan Tinggi – Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia|url=https://adik.kemdikbud.go.id/|access-date=6 August 2020|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Debora |first=Yantina |editor-last=Hartanto |editor-first=Agung Dwi |title=Seleksi CPNS KKP 2019–2020: Ada Kekhususan Bagi Orang Papua |url=https://tirto.id/seleksi-cpns-kkp-2019-2020-ada-kekhususan-bagi-orang-papua-ewR4 |access-date=6 August 2020 |website=tirto.id |date=4 February 2020 |language=id}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Rumagit |first=Alfian |date=25 February 2020 |editor-last=Jauhary |editor-first=Andi |title=OAP calon siswa Bintara Noken di Papua capai 2.407 orang |url=https://www.antaranews.com/berita/1319146/oap-calon-siswa-bintara-noken-di-papua-capai-2407-orang |access-date=6 August 2020 |website=Antara News}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Redaksi|title=Gercin Minta Kapolri Akomodir OAP Masuk Akpol {{!}} Papua Today|date=22 March 2019 |url=https://www.papuatoday.com/2019/03/22/gercin-minta-kapolri-akomodir-oap-masuk-akpol/|access-date=6 August 2020|language=id-ID}}</ref> After the [[2019 Papua protests]], many Papuan students chose to abandon their scholarship and return to their respective provinces.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Yunelia |first=Intan |date=3 October 2019 |title=Siswa SMA Penerima Beasiswa Memilih Pulang ke Papua |url=https://www.medcom.id/pendidikan/news-pendidikan/eN4Rz4ok-siswa-sma-penerima-beasiswa-memilih-pulang-ke-papua |access-date=6 August 2020 |website=medcom.id |language=id}}</ref> The program has been subject to criticism, with complaints made towards a lack of sufficient quotas and alleged corruption. [[Prabowo Subianto]], Indonesian [[Ministry of Defense (Indonesia)|defense minister]], has expressed that he will direct more effort towards recruiting Papuans to the [[Indonesian National Armed Forces]].<ref>{{Cite web |last= |title=Prabowo Disebut Bakal Perbanyak Prajurit TNI Asal Papua |url=https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20191212091931-32-456266/prabowo-disebut-bakal-perbanyak-prajurit-tni-asal-papua |access-date=6 August 2020 |website=nasional |language=id-ID}}</ref> Education scholarship by [[Ministry of Education and Culture (Indonesia)|Ministry of Education and Culture]], called ADik to the native Papuans and students from perhipery regions close to Indonesian border.<ref>{{Cite web|last=INDBeasiswa|title=Beasiswa ADik untuk Pelajar Papua dan 3T • INDBeasiswa|date=10 May 2019 |url=https://indbeasiswa.com/2019/05/beasiswa-adik-untuk-pelajar-papua-daerah-3t.html|access-date=24 February 2021|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Nasikhah |first=Nunung |date=10 December 2019 |title=Mengenal ADik, Beasiswa Kuliah S1 dari Pemerintah RI untuk Generasi Papua dan Daerah 3T |url=https://www.urbanasia.com/mengenal-adik-beasiswa-kuliah-s1-dari-pemerintah-ri-untuk-generasi-papua-dan-daerah-3t-U6573 |access-date=24 February 2021 |website=www.urbanasia.com |language=id}}</ref>

====Malaysia====
{{See also|Bumiputera (Malaysia)|Ketuanan Melayu}}

The [[Malaysian New Economic Policy]] (NEP) is a form of ethnicity-based affirmative action aimed at addressing socioeconomic disadvantages among those who are deemed "Bumiputera", which includes the Malay population, [[Orang Asli]], and the indigenous people of [[Sabah]] and [[Sarawak]], who together form a majority of the population.<ref>{{cite web|last=Ravallion1|first=Martin|title=Ethnic Inequality and Poverty in Malaysia|url=http://www.ecineq.org/ecineq_paris19/papers_EcineqPSE/paper_406.pdf|publisher=[[Georgetown University]], [[University of Malaya]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Asia-and-the-Pacific/Malaysia-POVERTY-AND-WEALTH.html |title=Encyclopedia of the Nations, "Malaysia Poverty and Wealth" |publisher=Nationsencyclopedia.com |access-date=11 April 2012}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last1=Mason|first1=Richard|title=The 'Bumiputera Policy': Dynamics and Dilemmas|last2=Omar|first2=Ariffin|publisher=[[Universiti Sains Malaysia]]|year=2004|isbn=|location=Malaysia}}</ref> Within Malaysia, the Malays (representing 58% of the population) have lower incomes than [[Chinese Malaysian]]s (22% of the population) and [[Indian Malaysian]]s (6% of the population), who have traditionally been involved in businesses and industries, and who were also general migrant workers.<ref>{{cite web|last=Ravallion1|first=Martin|title=Ethnic Inequality and Poverty in Malaysia|url=http://www.ecineq.org/ecineq_paris19/papers_EcineqPSE/paper_406.pdf|publisher=[[Georgetown University]], [[University of Malaya]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Asia-and-the-Pacific/Malaysia-POVERTY-AND-WEALTH.html |title=Encyclopedia of the Nations, "Malaysia Poverty and Wealth" |publisher=Nationsencyclopedia.com |access-date=11 April 2012}}</ref> The mean income for Malays, Chinese and Indians in 1957/58 were 134, 288 and 228 respectively. In 1967/68 it was 154, 329 and 245, and in 1970 it was 170, 390 and 300. Mean income disparity ratio for Chinese/Malays rose from 2.1 in 1957/58 to 2.3 in 1970, whereas for Indians/Malays the disparity ratio also rose from 1.7 to 1.8 in the same period.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Perumal |first=M. |year=1989 |title=Economic Growth and Income Inequality in Malaysia, 1957–1984 |journal=Singapore Economic Review |volume=34 |issue=2 |pages=33–46 }}</ref>

To address these inequalities, following the sectarian violence of the [[13 May incident]] in 1969, the NEP was introduced as a time-limited policy, which was supposed to expire after 20 years but remains policy to this day. Although the NEP has succeeded in creating a significant urban Malay and [[Borneo|Native Bornean]] middle class, it has been less effective in eradicating poverty among rural communities.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U47j2dS6C_I|title=Malaysia ethnic tribes 'forced to convert'|date=7 August 2010 |via=www.youtube.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXLHBZvUhrQ|title=Quickiepedia &#124; Outcasts in their own land – The Orang Asli|date=22 August 2018 |via=www.youtube.com}}</ref> Critics say it has widened disparities between the wealthy and middle classes, and those who are poorest.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/492357|title=The real issue is intra-Malay economic inequality|first=Nik Nazmi Nik|last=Ahmad|date=18 September 2019|website=Malaysiakini}}</ref> It has also been described as racially discriminatory.<ref>{{cite news|title=A Never Ending Policy|url=https://www.economist.com/briefing/2013/04/27/a-never-ending-policy|access-date=20 April 2019|newspaper=The Economist|date=27 April 2013}}</ref>

====Taiwan====
A 2004 legislation requires that, for a firm with 100 employees or more wishing to compete for government contracts, at least 1 percent of its employees must be [[Taiwanese aborigines]].<ref>{{cite journal|url=http://minorityrights.org/minorities/indigenous-peoples-7/|title=Taiwan: Indigenous peoples |website = Minority Rights Group International|date=19 June 2015 }}</ref> Ministry of Education and [[Council of Indigenous Peoples|Council of Aboriginal Affairs]] announced in 2002 that Taiwanese Aboriginal students would have their high-school or undergraduate entrance exams boosted by 33% for demonstrating some knowledge of their tribal language and culture.<ref name="HolsingerJacob2009">{{cite book|author1=Donald B. Holsinger|author2=W. James Jacob |title=Inequality in Education: Comparative and International Perspectives|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=-lIGaO2-aq4C&pg=PA295 |date=29 May 2009|publisher=Springer Science & Business Media|isbn=978-90-481-2652-1|page=295}}</ref> The percentage of boost have been revised several times, and the latest percentage is 35% in 2013.<ref>{{Cite web | url= http://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawOldVer.aspx?Pcode=H0020031&LNNDATE=20130819&LSER=001 | title=原住民學生升學保障及原住民公費留學辦法(民國 102 年08月19 日 )|trans-title=Aboriginal Students Enrollment Guarantee and Public Funding for Aboriginal Study Abroad Act | publisher=[[Ministry of Justice (Taiwan)]] | language=zh}}</ref>

===Europe===

==== Denmark ====
Greenlanders have special advantages when applying for university, college or vocation university degrees in Denmark. With these specific rules, Greenlanders can get into degrees without the required grade averages by fulfilling certain criteria. They need to have a grade average of over 6,0 and have lived a certain number of years in Greenland. These rules have been in force since 1 January 2014.<ref>{{Cite web|last=lok|title=Optagelse af grønlandske ansøgere — Uddannelses- og Forskningsministeriet|url=https://ufm.dk/uddannelse/videregaende-uddannelse/sogning-optag-og-vejledning/optagelse/optagelse-af-gronlandske-ansogere|access-date=29 August 2020|website=ufm.dk|language=da}}</ref>

==== Finland ====
In certain university education programs, including legal and medical education, there are quotas for persons who reach a certain standard of skills in the [[Swedish language]]; for students admitted in these quotas, the education is partially arranged in Swedish.<ref name="Helsinki med">{{cite web|title=Hakuopas 2011. Lääketieteen ja hammaslääketieteen opiskelijavalinnat |url=http://www.med.helsinki.fi/peruskoulutus/docs/opiskelijaksi/hakuopas_2011.pdf |publisher=Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki |access-date=4 June 2011 |language=fi |year=2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111002143806/http://www.med.helsinki.fi/peruskoulutus/docs/opiskelijaksi/hakuopas_2011.pdf |archive-date=2 October 2011 }}</ref><ref name="Helsinki law">{{cite web|title=Oikeustieteellinen tiedekunta. Hakuopas 2011|url=http://www.helsinki.fi/oikeustiede/opiskelijaksi/valintakokeet/2011/hakuopas_2011.pdf|publisher=Faculty of Law, University of Helsinki|access-date=4 June 2011|page=3|language=fi|year=2011}}</ref> The purpose of the quotas is to guarantee that a sufficient number of professionals with skills in Swedish are educated for nationwide needs.<ref name="Helsinki med" />

==== France ====
No distinctions based on race, religion or sex are allowed under the 1958 [[French Constitution]].<ref>{{cite web|author=Jonathan D. Mott, PhD |url=http://thisnation.com/library/france.html |title=The French Constitution of 1958 and its Amendments |publisher=Thisnation.com |date=7 February 1992 |access-date=28 April 2014}}</ref> Since the 1980s, a French version of affirmative action based on neighborhood is in place for primary and secondary education. Some schools, in neighborhoods labeled "Priority Education Zones", are granted more funds than the others. Students from these schools also benefit from special policies in certain institutions (such as [[Sciences Po]]).<ref>{{Cite journal | doi=10.3989/chdj.2015.016|title = Esencia colonial de una política contemporánea: Por un enfoque fanoniano de la discriminación positiva en Francia| journal=Culture & History Digital Journal| volume=4| issue=2| pages=e016|year = 2015|last1 = Ghorbal|first1 = Karim| doi-access=free}}</ref>

The French Ministry of Defence tried in 1990 to make it easier for young French soldiers of North-African descent to be promoted in rank and obtain driving licenses. After a strong protest by a young French lieutenant in the Ministry of Defence newspaper (''Armées d'aujourd'hui''), the driving license and rank plan was cancelled.<ref>Jean-Pierre Steinhofer, "Beur ou ordinaire", ''Armée d'ajourd'hui'', 1991.</ref> After the Sarkozy election, a new attempt in favour of Arab-French students was made, but Sarkozy did not gain enough political support to change the French constitution.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.lemonde.fr/politique/article/2008/12/17/le-plan-sarkozy-pour-favoriser-l-egalite-reelle-des-chances_1132074_823448.html#ens_id=1128487° |title=Le Plan Sarkozy |work=Le Monde  |date=17 December 2008 |access-date=11 April 2012|last1=Eeckhout |first1=Laetitia Van }}</ref>

After 27 January 2014, following the Norwegian example, women had to represent at least 20% of board members in all stock-exchange-listed or state-owned companies. After 27 January 2017, the proportion increased to 40%. All appointments of men as directors were deemed invalid as long as the quotas were not met, and monetary penalties may apply for other directors.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.vie-publique.fr/actualite/panorama/texte-discussion/proposition-loi-relative-representation-equilibree-femmes-hommes-au-sein-conseils-administration-surveillance-egalite-professionnelle.html |title=Vie Publique |publisher=Vie-publique.fr |date=25 June 2002 |access-date=11 April 2012}}</ref>

==== Germany ====
Article 3 of the [[Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany|German Basic Law]] provides for equal rights of all people regardless of sex, race or social background. There are programs stating that if men and women have equal qualifications, women have to be preferred for a job; moreover, the disabled should be preferred to non-disabled people. This is typical for all positions in state and university service {{as of|2007|lc=y}}, typically using the phrase "We try to increase diversity in this line of work". In recent years, there has been a long public debate about whether to issue programs that would grant women a privileged access to jobs in order to fight discrimination. Germany's ''[[The Left (Germany)|Left Party]]'' brought up the discussion about affirmative action in [[Education in Germany|Germany's school system]]. According to Stefan Zillich, quotas should be "a possibility" to help working class children who did not do well in school gain access to a ''[[Gymnasium (Germany)|Gymnasium]]'' (University-preparatory school).<ref>Susanne Vieth-Entus (29. December 2008): "Sozialquote: Berliner Gymnasien sollen mehr Schüler aus armen Familien aufnehmen". Der Tagesspiegel</ref> Headmasters of ''Gymnasien'' have objected, saying that this type of policy would "be a disservice" to poor children.<ref>Martin Klesmann (23 February 2009). "'Kinder aus Neukölln würden sich nicht integrieren lassen' – Ein Politiker und ein Schulleiter streiten über Sozialquoten an Gymnasien". Berliner Zeitung</ref>

==== Norway ====
The boards of all [[Allmennaksjeselskap|public stock companies (ASA)]] in Norway should have at least 40% of either gender.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.lovdata.no/all/tl-19970613-045-032.html#6-3 |title=LOV-1997-06-13-45 Lov om allmennaksjeselskaper (allmennaksjeloven) |publisher=Lovdata.no |access-date=29 July 2010}}</ref> This affects roughly 400 companies of over 300,000 in total.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nettavisen.no/nyheter/27-000-flere-bedrifter-i-norge/1874337.html |title=27.000 flere bedrifter i Norge |date=27 May 2004 |publisher=nettavisen.no |access-date=31 May 2015}}</ref> In their study of the effects of affirmative action on presence, prominence, and social capital of women directors in Norway, researchers Seierstad & Opsahl found that, when the affirmative action policy was first implemented, only 7 prominent directors were women and 84 were men. By August 2009, this had risen to 107 women compared to 117 men. The proportion of boards led by a woman remained low overall, but increased from 3.4% to 4.3%. By applying more restrictive definitions of prominence, the proportion of directors who were women generally increased. If only considering directors with at least three directorships, 61.4% of them were women. When considering directors with seven or more directorships, all of them were women.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Seierstad |first1=Cathrine |last2=Opsahl |first2=Tore |title=For the few not the many? The effects of affirmative action on presence, prominence, and social capital of women directors in Norway |journal=Scandinavian Journal of Management |date=March 2011 |volume=27 |issue=1 |pages=44–54 |doi=10.1016/j.scaman.2010.10.002 }}</ref> A 2016 study found no effect of the ASA representation requirement on either valuation or profits of the affected companies, and also no correlation between the requirement and the restructuring of companies away from ASA.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://e24.no/makro-og-politikk/norges-handelshoeyskole/studie-kjoennskvotering-ingen-effekt-paa-loennsomhet/23783217 |title=Studie: Kjønnskvotering ingen effekt på lønnsomhet |date=2 September 2016 |publisher=e24.no |access-date=5 June 2018 }}{{Dead link|date=June 2025 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Eckbo |first1=B. Espen |last2=Nygaard |first2=Knut |last3=Thorburn |first3=Karin S. |title=Valuation effects of Norway's board gender-quota law revisited |journal=Management Science |date=18 August 2021 |volume=68 |issue=6 |pages=4112–4134 |doi=10.1287/mnsc.2021.4031 |hdl=11250/3046314 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

==== Romania ====
[[Romani people]] are allocated quotas for access to public schools and state universities.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mmuncii.ro/old/ro/domenii-politici-familiale-incluziune-si-asistenta-sociala-romii---progrese-inregistrate-in-romania-in-perioada-2007---2008-540-view.html |title=Romii – PROGRESE ÎNREGISTRATE ÎN ROMÂNIA ÎN PERIOADA 2007–2008 |access-date=30 January 2013 }}{{dead link|date=June 2016|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref>

==== Soviet Union and Russia ====
Soon after the 1918 revolution, [[Inessa Armand]], [[Lenin]]'s secretary and lover, was instrumental in creating [[Zhenotdel]], which functioned until the 1930s as part of the international egalitarian and affirmative action movements.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Stites |first1=Richard |title=Zhenotdel: Bolshevism and Russian Women, 1917–1930 |journal=Russian History |date=1976 |volume=3 |issue=1 |pages=174–193 |doi=10.1163/187633176X00107 |jstor=24649711 |quote=These egalitarian and affirmative action movements—in other words, early "communism"—receive short shrift in most Western studies... }}</ref><ref>{{cite thesis |last1=Patterson |first1=Michelle Jane |title=Red 'Teaspoons of Charity': Zhenotdel, Russian Women, and the Communist Party, 1919–1930 |date=29 February 2012 |hdl=1807/32159 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |doi=10.1057/9780230501799_11 |chapter=Socialism in One Gender: Masculine Values in the Stalin Revolution |title=Russian Masculinities in History and Culture |year=2002 |last1=Schrand |first1=Thomas G. |pages=194–209 |isbn=978-1-349-42592-1 }}</ref> Quota systems existed in the [[USSR]] for various social groups including [[ethnic minorities]], women and factory workers. Before 1934 ethnic minorities were described as [[cultural backwardness|culturally backward]], but in 1934 this term was found inappropriate.<ref name="q189">{{cite book |first = Terry Dean |last = Martin |title = The Affirmative Action Empire: Nations and Nationalism in the Soviet Union, 1923-1939| year = 2001| publisher = [[Cornell University Press]]| location = United States| isbn = 978-0-8014-8677-7 }}</ref> In 1920s and early 1930s [[Korenizatsiia]] applied affirmative action to ethnic minorities.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Nicolaïdis |first1=Kalypso |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=T9SLDwAAQBAJ |title=Echoes of Empire: Memory, Identity and Colonial Legacies |last2=Sebe |first2=Berny |last3=Maas |first3=Gabrielle |date=2014-12-23 |publisher=[[Bloomsbury Publishing]] |isbn=978-0-85773-896-7 |language=en |quote=Elsewhere in the USSR, the late 1930s and the outbreak of World War II also saw some significant changes: elements of korenizatsiya were phased out... the Russians were officially anointed as the 'elder brothers' of the Soviet family of nations, whilst among historians Tsarist imperialism was rehabilitated as having had a 'progressive significance' |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Chang |first=Jon K. |title=Tsarist continuities in Soviet nationalities policy: A case of Korean territorial autonomy in the Soviet Far East, 1923–1937 |url=https://www.academia.edu/17823472 |journal=Eurasia Studies Society of Great Britain & Europe Journal}}</ref> Quotas for access to university education, offices in the Soviet system and the Communist Party existed: for example, the position of First Secretary of a Soviet Republic's (or Autonomous Republic's) Party Committee was always filled by a representative of this republic's "[[titular ethnicity]]".{{citation needed|date=February 2025}} Russia retains this system partially. Quotas are abolished, but preferences for some ethnic minorities and inhabitants of certain territories remain.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://sakhapress.ru/archives/207211|title=Представители коренных малочисленных народов Севера имеют право получить бесплатную юридическую помощь|date=18 February 2016}}</ref>

==== Serbia ====
The Constitution of the Republic of Serbia from 2006 established the principles of equality and the prohibition of discrimination on any grounds. It also allows affirmative action as "special measures" for certain marginalized groups, such as national minorities, by specifically excluding it from the legal definition of discrimination.<ref>[https://advokatiubeogradu.rs/legislation/constitution-of-the-republic-of-serbia.pdf Constitution of The Republic of Serbia] (Constitution of The Republic of Serbia), 2006.</ref> The Roma national minority is enabled to enroll in public schools under more favorable conditions.<ref>[http://www.upis.mpn.gov.rs/Cir/Pravilnici Pravilnik ministarstva prosvete o upisu u srednje škole] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200806034147/http://www.upis.mpn.gov.rs/Cir/Pravilnici |date=6 August 2020 }} (Regulation of the Ministry of Education on enrollment in secondary schools), 2021.</ref>

==== Slovakia ====
The [[Constitutional Court of Slovakia|Constitutional Court]] declared in October 2005 that affirmative action—i.e., "providing advantages for people of an ethnic or racial minority group"—was against its [[Constitution of Slovakia|Constitution]].<ref>{{cite web|last=Goldirova |first=Renata |url=http://euobserver.com/9/20123 |title=Slovakia bans positive discrimination |date=19 October 2005 |publisher=Euobserver.com |access-date=11 April 2012}}</ref>

==== United Kingdom ====
{{See also|Independent Commission on Policing for Northern Ireland}}
In the [[United Kingdom]], hiring someone simply because of their [[Protected group|protected-group]] status, without regard to their performance, is illegal. By default, so is any other form of discrimination, quota or favouritism based on such "protected characteristics" in education, in employment, during commercial transactions, at private clubs or associations, and while using public services.<ref name="cre" /><ref name="govuk">{{cite web |author=GOV.UK |author-link=Gov.uk |date=4 April 2013 |title=Types of discrimination |url=https://www.gov.uk/discrimination-your-rights/types-of-discrimination |access-date=7 April 2013 |work=Discrimination: your rights |publisher=GOV.UK}}</ref><ref name="personneltoday.com">{{Cite web |last=Millar |first=Michael |date=17 January 2006 |title=Is there a case for positive discrimination? |url=https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/is-there-a-case-for-positive-discrimination/ |access-date=13 July 2022 |website=Personnel Today |language=en-GB}}</ref> 

The [[Equality Act 2010]] does allow for membership in a protected and disadvantaged group to be considered in hiring and promotion when the group is under-represented in a given area and if the candidates are of equal merit (in which case membership in a disadvantaged group can become a "tie-breaker").<ref name="xperthr.co.uk">{{Cite web |title=What "positive action" is permitted under discrimination legislation? &#124; FAQs &#124; Tools &#124; XpertHR.co.uk |url=https://www.xperthr.co.uk/faq/what-positive-action-is-permitted-under-discrimination-legislation/103008/ |website=www.xperthr.co.uk}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15 |title=Equality Act 2010 |publisher=Legislation.gov.uk |access-date=11 April 2012}}</ref> Under Section 159 of the Equality Act 2010, an employer must "reasonably think that people with the protected characteristic suffer a disadvantage or are under-represented in that particular activity" and any [[positive action]] must be "a proportionate means of enabling or encouraging people to overcome the disadvantage or to take part in the activity".<ref name="xperthr.co.uk" /> Specific exemptions include:
* As part of the [[Northern Ireland Peace Process]], the [[Good Friday Agreement]] and the resulting [[Patten report]], the [[Police Service of Northern Ireland]] are requires to recruit 50% of its numbers from the [[Catholic Church|Catholic]] community and 50% from the [[Protestantism|Protestant]] and [[Ethnic minorities in Northern Ireland|other communities]], in order to reduce any possible bias towards Protestants. This was later referred to as the "50:50" measure.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/1540861.stm |title= Police recruitment 'will be 50:50' |work=BBC News |date=12 September 2001 }}</ref>
* The [[Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002]] allowed the use of [[all-women shortlists]] to select more women as election candidates.<ref>{{Cite book|url=http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-05057.pdf|title=All-women shortlists|publisher=House of Commons Library|id=SN/PC/05057|date=29 April 2009|author=Richard Kelly and Isobel White|access-date=23 June 2009}}</ref>

In a 2019, an [[employment tribunal]], found that "while positive action can be used to boost diversity, it should only be applied to distinguish between candidates who were all equally well qualified for a role".<ref>{{Cite news | url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-47335859 |title = Force discriminated against white male|work = BBC News|date = 22 February 2019}}</ref>

=== North America ===

==== Canada ====
{{Further|Employment equity (Canada)|Federal Contractors' Program}}
The equality section of the [[Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms]] explicitly permits affirmative action legislation, although the Charter does not ''require'' legislation that gives preferential treatment. Subsection 2 of [[Section Fifteen of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms|Section 15]] states that the equality provisions do "not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Heritage |first=Canadian |date=2017-10-23 |title=Guide to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms |url=https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/how-rights-protected/guide-canadian-charter-rights-freedoms.html |access-date=2024-02-07 |website=www.canada.ca}}</ref>

The Canadian [[Employment Equity Act]] requires employers in federally-regulated industries to give preferential treatment to four designated groups: women, persons with disabilities, aboriginal peoples, and [[visible minorities]]. Less than one-third of Canadian Universities offer alternative admission requirements for students of aboriginal descent. Some provinces and territories also have affirmative action policies. For example, in the [[Northwest Territories]] in the Canadian north, aboriginal people are given preference for jobs and education and are considered to have P1 status. Non-aboriginal people who were born in the NWT or have resided half of their life there are considered a P2, as well as women and people with disabilities.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hr.gov.nt.ca/employment/affirmativeaction/ |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120803122042/http://www.hr.gov.nt.ca/employment/affirmativeaction/ |url-status=dead |archive-date=3 August 2012 |title=GNWT – Human Resources – Affirmative Action |publisher=Hr.gov.nt.ca |date=3 April 2012 |access-date=11 April 2012}}</ref>

==== United States ====
{{Main|Affirmative action in the United States}}
The United States' policy of affirmative action dates to the [[Reconstruction Era]] in the United States.<ref name="Melvin 2020">Melvin I. Urofsky,  ''The Affirmative Action Puzzle: A Living History From Reconstruction to Today'' (2020).</ref> Current policy was introduced in the early 1960s in the United States, as a way to combat [[racial discrimination]] in the hiring process, with the concept later expanded to address gender discrimination.<ref name="clinton2.nara.gov">{{cite web |date=19 July 1995 |title=Affirmative Action: History and Rationale |url=http://clinton2.nara.gov/WH/EOP/OP/html/aa/aa02.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110527065435/http://clinton2.nara.gov/WH/EOP/OP/html/aa/aa02.html |archive-date=27 May 2011 |access-date=6 December 2018 |publisher=Clinton Administration's Affirmative Action Review: Report to the President}}</ref> During this time, the legal and [[United States Constitution|constitutional]] legitimacy of affirmative action has been the subject of several court cases.<ref name="indystar.com">[http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080205/LOCAL/80205048 Indy fire-fighters sue city, charge bias; also see] [[Norma M. Riccucci]]. Managing Diversity in Public Sector Workforces. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2002</ref>

Affirmative action was first created from [[Executive Order 10925]], which was signed by President [[John F. Kennedy]] on 6 March 1961 and required that government employers "not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, or national origin" and "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin" but did not require or permit group preferences.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://shfg.org/shfg/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/4-MacLaury-design4-new_Layout-1.pdf|title=President Kennedy's E.O.10925: Seedbed of Affirmative Action|publisher=Society for History in the Federal Government|access-date=27 September 2015|archive-date=4 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304083942/http://shfg.org/shfg/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/4-MacLaury-design4-new_Layout-1.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
| publisher = U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
| title = Executive Order 10925 – Establishing The President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity
| url = http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/history/35th/thelaw/eo-10925.html
| access-date = 5 February 2010
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20100527213307/http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/history/35th/thelaw/eo-10925.html
| archive-date = 27 May 2010
| url-status = dead
}}</ref>

On 24 September 1965, President [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] signed [[Executive Order 11246]], thereby replacing [[Executive Order 10925]], but continued to use the same terminology that did not require or permit group preferences.<ref name="The Federal Register">{{cite web |title=Executive Order 11246—Equal employment opportunity |url=https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/11246.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100330083544/http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/11246.html |archive-date=30 March 2010 |access-date=5 February 2010 |work=The Federal Register}}</ref> Affirmative action was extended to sex by [[Executive Order 11375]] which amended Executive Order 11246 on 13 October 1967, by adding "sex" to the list of protected categories. In the U.S., affirmative action's original purpose was to pressure institutions into compliance with the nondiscrimination mandate of the [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]].<ref name="Affirmative Action"/><ref>{{cite web|url=https://lcrm.lib.unc.edu/blog/index.php/2012/09/24/executive-order-11246-and-affirmative-action/|title=Executive Order 11246 and Affirmative Action « Publishing the Long Civil Rights Movement|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141019155311/https://lcrm.lib.unc.edu/blog/index.php/2012/09/24/executive-order-11246-and-affirmative-action/|archive-date=19 October 2014}}</ref> The Civil Rights Acts do not cover discrimination based on veteran status, disabilities, or age that is 40 years and older. These groups may be protected from discrimination under different laws.<ref name="EmployeeIssues.com">{{cite web|url=http://employeeissues.com/discrimination_laws.htm|title=Federal Employment Discrimination Laws|publisher=EmployeeIssues.com|access-date=18 May 2010}}</ref> 

Some colleges use financial criteria to attract racial groups that have typically been under-represented and typically have lower living conditions. Some states such as California ([[California Civil Rights Initiative]]), Michigan ([[Michigan Civil Rights Initiative]]), and Washington ([[Initiative 200]]) have passed constitutional amendments banning public institutions, including public schools, from practicing affirmative action within their respective states.<ref name="pew">{{cite web |last1=DeSilver |first1=Drew |title=Supreme Court says states can ban affirmative action; 8 already have |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/22/supreme-court-says-states-can-ban-affirmative-action-8-already-have/ |website=Pew Research Center |publisher=The Pew Charitable Trusts |access-date=24 October 2021 |date=22 April 2014}}</ref> 

Since the 1990s, conservative groups have increasingly suggested that college quotas have been used to illegally discriminate against people on the basis of race and have launched numerous lawsuits to stop them.<ref>{{cite book|author=Steven M. Teles|title=The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MTps-NK20jAC&pg=PA235|year=2010|publisher=Princeton University Press|pages=235–37|isbn=978-1400829699}}</ref> In 2003, a Supreme Court decision regarding affirmative action in higher education (''[[Grutter v. Bollinger]]'', 539 US 244 – Supreme Court 2003) permitted educational institutions to consider race as a factor when admitting students.<ref name="Supct.law.cornell.edu">{{cite web |date=27 June 2002 |title=Highlights of the 2002–2003 Supreme Court Term |url=https://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/03highlts.html#2 |access-date=1 September 2013 |publisher=Supct.law.cornell.edu}}</ref> In 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court held that "States may choose to prohibit the consideration of racial preferences in governmental decisions". By that time, eight states (Oklahoma, New Hampshire, Arizona, Colorado, Nebraska, Michigan, Florida, Washington, and California) had already banned affirmative action.<ref name="pew" /> On 29 June 2023, the Supreme Court ruled 6–2 that the use of race in college admissions is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment in ''[[Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard]]''.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-06-29 |title=Supreme Court bans colleges from considering race in admissions |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/supreme-court-strike-affirmative-action-university-b2366556.html |access-date=2025-02-27 |website=The Independent |language=en}}</ref>

=== Oceania ===

==== New Zealand ====
Individuals of [[Māori people|Māori]] or other [[Polynesia]]n descent are often afforded improved access to university courses, or have scholarships earmarked specifically for them. Such access to University courses have in the past faced criticism, particularly at the University of Auckland due to a phenomenon known as Mismatch theory, accusations of setting the kids up to fail have been made due to a lack of transparency as to the preferred groups graduation rates and the university informing the students of such historical statistics dating back to the 1970s.<ref>Sowell, T. (1990). Preferential policies: An international perspective. William Morrow and Company.</ref><ref name=cre>{{cite web|title=Affirmative action around the world|url=http://www.catalystmagazine.org/Default.aspx.LocID-0hgnew0l0.RefLocID-0hg01b001006009.Lang-EN.htm|work=Catalyst|publisher=Commission for Racial Equality|author=Commission for Racial Equality|author-link=Commission for Racial Equality|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070125034907/http://www.catalystmagazine.org/Default.aspx.LocID-0hgnew0l0.RefLocID-0hg01b001006009.Lang-EN.htm|archive-date=25 January 2007|date=29 September 2006}} [http://www.juliushonnor.com/catalyst/Default.aspx.LocID-0hgnew0l0.RefLocID-0hg01b001006009.Lang-EN.htm Alt URL] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161014071745/http://www.juliushonnor.com/catalyst/Default.aspx.LocID-0hgnew0l0.RefLocID-0hg01b001006009.Lang-EN.htm |date=14 October 2016 }}</ref> 

Affirmative action is provided for under section 73 of the [[Human Rights Act 1993]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/DLM304672.html |title=Human Rights Act 1993 No 82 (as of 1 July 2013), Public Act 73 Measures to ensure equality – New Zealand Legislation |publisher=Legislation.govt.nz |date=1 July 2013 |access-date=1 September 2013}}</ref> and section 19(2) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/DLM225519.html |title=New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 No 109 (as of 1 July 2013), Public Act 19 Freedom from discrimination – New Zealand Legislation |publisher=Legislation.govt.nz |date=1 July 2013 |access-date=1 September 2013}}</ref> Affirmative action in New Zealand is most often carried out indirectly by encouraging those in groups favored by affirmative action to get jobs in sectors they are underrepresented in.<ref name=":6">{{Cite web |date=2022-04-13 |title=Is positive discrimination lawful in New Zealand? |url=https://www.laneneave.co.nz/news-events/is-positive-discrimination-lawful-in-new-zealand/ |access-date=2023-11-26 |website=Lane Neave |language=en-US}}</ref> Diversity Awards NZ is an organization in New Zealand whose goal is to " celebrate excellence in workplace diversity, equity and inclusion."<ref>{{Cite web |last=DiversityWorks |title=Diversity Awards NZ™ |url=https://diversityworksnz.org.nz/diversity-awards-nz/ |access-date=2023-11-26 |website=DiversityWorks |language=en-nz}}</ref>

Under section 73 of the Human Rights Act 1993, affirmative action would be permissible if:<ref name=":6" />

# Done in good faith;
# For the purpose of assisting individuals or groups with a characteristic pertaining to a prohibited ground of discrimination; and
# The individuals or groups in question need (or may reasonably be supposed to need) assistance in order to achieve an equal place with other members of the community.

=== South America ===

==== Brazil ====
{{Further|Vestibular exam#Racial quotas}}

Some Brazilian universities (state and federal) have created systems of preferred admissions (quotas) for racial minorities (blacks and Amerindians), the poor and people with disabilities. There are also quotas of up to 20% of vacancies reserved for people with disabilities in the civil public services.<ref>{{cite web|last =Plummer|first= Robert|url = https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5357842.stm |title = Black Brazil Seeks a Better Future|work = BBC News|location = São Paulo|date= 25 September 2006}}</ref> The [[Democrats (Brazil)|Democrats]] party, accusing the board of directors of the [[University of Brasília]] for "resurrecting Nazist ideals", appealed to the [[Supreme Federal Court]] against the [[constitutionality]] of the quotas the university reserves for minorities.<ref>{{cite web|author=Por Rodrigo Haidar e Filipe Coutinho |url=http://www.conjur.com.br/2009-jul-20/dem-unb-ressuscitou-ideais-nazistas-suspensao-matriculas |title=DEM entra com ADPF contra cotas raciais |date=20 July 2009 |language=pt |publisher= Conjur.com.br |access-date=11 April 2012}}</ref> The Supreme Court unanimously approved their constitutionality on 26 April 2012.<ref>{{cite web | author= Débora Santos |url =http://g1.globo.com/vestibular-e-educacao/noticia/2012/04/stf-decide-por-unanimidade-pela-constitucionalidade-das-cotas-raciais.html | title=Supremo decide pro unanimidade pela constiucionalidade das cotas |language=pt| publisher=g1.globo.com | access-date=3 June 2012|date =26 April 2012 }}</ref>

== International organizations ==

=== United Nations ===
The International [[Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination]] stipulates (in Article 2.2) that affirmative action programs may be required of countries that ratified the convention, in order to rectify systematic discrimination. It states, however, that such programs "shall in no case entail as a consequence the maintenance of unequal or separate rights for different racial groups after the objectives for which they were taken have been achieved".<ref name="unhchr.ch">United Nations Committee on Human Rights, [http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/3888b0541f8501c9c12563ed004b8d0e?Opendocument General Comment 18 on Non-discrimination, Paragraph 10]</ref>

The [[United Nations Human Rights Committee]] states that "the principle of equality sometimes requires States parties to take affirmative action in order to diminish or eliminate conditions which cause or help to perpetuate discrimination prohibited by the Covenant. For example, in a State where the general conditions of a certain part of the population prevent or impair their enjoyment of human rights, the State should take specific action to correct those conditions. Such action may involve granting for a time to the part of the population concerned certain preferential treatment in specific matters as compared with the rest of the population. However, as long as such action is needed to correct discrimination, in fact, it is a case of legitimate differentiation under the Covenant."<ref name="unhchr.ch"/>

== Responses ==
Proponents of affirmative action say it aims to promote societal equality through the preferential treatment of socioeconomically disadvantaged people. Often, these people are disadvantaged for historical reasons, such as oppression or slavery.<ref name="Christophe Jaffrelot pg. 321">Christophe Jaffrelot, India's Silent Revolution: The rise of lower castes in northern India, p. 321. 2003</ref>
Historically and internationally, support for affirmative action has sought to achieve a range of goals: bridging inequalities in employment and pay; increasing access to education; enriching state, institutional, and professional leadership with the full spectrum of society; redressing apparent past wrongs, harms, or hindrances, in particular addressing the apparent social imbalance left in the wake of slavery and slave laws.<ref name=twsL13 /><ref name="Melvin 2020" /><ref name="clinton2.nara.gov" /> Critics of affirmative action have suggested that affirmative action hinders reconciliation, replaces old wrongs with new wrongs, undermines the achievements of minorities, and encourages individuals to identify themselves as disadvantaged, even if they are not. It may increase racial tension and benefit the more privileged people within [[minority group]]s at the expense of the least fortunate within majority groups.<ref name="Cultural Whiplash 2006">''Cultural Whiplash: Unforeseen Consequences of America's Crusade Against Racial Discrimination'' / Patrick Garry (2006) {{ISBN|1-58182-569-2}}</ref> 

A 2017 study of temporary federal affirmative action regulation in the United States estimated that the regulation "increases the black share of employees over time: in 5 years after an establishment is first regulated, the black share of employees increases by an average of 0.8 percentage points. Strikingly, the black share continues to grow at a similar pace even after an establishment is deregulated. [The author] argue[s] that this persistence is driven in part by affirmative action inducing employers to improve their methods for screening potential hires."<ref name="Miller 2017">{{Cite journal|title=The Persistent Effect of Temporary Affirmative Action|journal=American Economic Journal: Applied Economics|volume=9|issue=3|pages=152–190|doi=10.1257/app.20160121|year=2017|last1=Miller|first1=Conrad|doi-access=free}}</ref>

Journalist [[Vann R. Newkirk II]] says that critics of affirmative action often claim court cases such as ''[[Fisher v. University of Texas (2016)|Fisher v. University of Texas]]'', which held that colleges have some discretion to consider race when making admissions decisions, demonstrate that discrimination occurs in the name of affirmative action. He says this is one of several "misconceptions" often used to engender "white resentment" in opposition to affirmative action.<ref>{{cite magazine |last1=Newkirk |first1=Vann R. |title=The Myth of Reverse Racism: The idea of white victimhood is increasingly central to the debate over affirmative action |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/08/myth-of-reverse-racism/535689/ |access-date=2 March 2019 |magazine=The Atlantic |date=5 August 2017}}</ref> 

According to scholar George Sher, some critics of affirmative action say that it devalues the accomplishments of individuals chosen only based on the social groups to which they belong rather than their qualifications.<ref name="Sher, George 1983, p.40">Sher, George, "Preferential Hiring", in Tom Regan (ed.), Just Business: New Introductory Essays in Business Ethics, Philadelphia, Temple University Press, 1983, p. 40.</ref><ref name=sowell>{{cite book |last1=Sowell |first1=Thomas |title=Affirmative Action Around the World |date=2004 |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0300107753|title-link=Affirmative Action Around the World }}</ref> Legal scholar Tseming Yang and others have discussed the challenges of fraudulent self-identification when implementing affirmative action policies. Yang suggests that because some individuals from non-preferred groups may designate themselves as members of preferred groups to access the benefits of such programs, this requires the "necessary evil" of verifying individuals' race to prevent this.<ref name=sowell/><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Yang |first1=Tseming |title=Choice and Fraud in Racial Identification: The Dilemma of Policing Race in Affirmative Action, the Census, and a Color-Blind Society |journal=Michigan Journal of Race and Law |date=2006 |volume=11 |pages=367 |url=https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1718&context=facpubs |access-date=2 March 2019}}</ref> Critics of affirmative action also suggest that programs may benefit the members of the targeted group that least need the benefit—that is, those who have the greatest social, economic and educational advantages within the targeted group—or may lead the beneficiaries of affirmative action to conclude that it is unnecessary to work as hard, and those who do not benefit may perceive hard work as futile.<ref name=sowell/> Political scientist [[Charles Murray (political scientist)|Charles Murray]] has said that beneficiaries are often wholly unqualified for the opportunity made available, citing [[The Bell Curve|his belief]] in [[scientific racism|the innate differences between races]]. He reaffirmed these views in his essay "The Advantages of Social [[Apartheid]]", in which he advocates separation of people based on [[race and intelligence]].<ref name=murray>{{cite web |title=Charles Murray |url=https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/charles-murray |website=Southern Poverty Law Center |access-date=2 March 2019}}</ref> 

=== Mismatching ===
''Mismatching'' is the proposed negative effect affirmative action has when it places a student into a college that is too difficult for them based on meeting quotas, which may increase the chance they drop out or fail the course, thus hurting the intended beneficiaries of affirmative action. According to this theory, in the absence of affirmative action, a student may be admitted to a college that matches their academic ability and therefore has a better chance of graduating.<ref name="latimes.com">[https://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-sander26sep26,0,3998908.story?coll=la-opinion-center Does affirmative action hurt minorities?], ''Los Angeles Times'', 26 September 2007</ref><ref name="Quotas on trial">[http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell010803.asp Quotas on trial], by Thomas Sowell, 8 January 2003</ref><ref name="auto">{{cite journal |last1=Heriot |first1=Gail L. |author-link1=Gail Heriot |title=Want to Be a Doctor? A Scientist? An Engineer? An Affirmative Action Leg Up May Hurt Your Chances |journal=Engage |date=December 2010 |volume=11 |issue=3 |pages=18–25 |ssrn=3112683 |doi=10.2139/ssrn.3112683 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name=murray/><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20121004223026/https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/10/the-painful-truth-about-affirmative-action/263122/ The Painful Truth About Affirmative Action], The Atlantic, 2 October 2012</ref> 

In 2017, researcher Andrew J. Hill found that affirmative action bans resulted in a reduction in minority students completing four-year STEM degrees, and suggests this indicates that the mismatch hypothesis is unfounded. He says this is evidence that affirmative action may be effective in "some circumstances", such as in encouraging greater minority engagement in STEM degrees.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hill |first1=Andrew J. |title=State affirmative action bans and STEM degree completions |journal=Economics of Education Review |date=1 April 2017 |volume=57 |pages=31–40 |doi=10.1016/j.econedurev.2017.01.003 }}</ref> In 2020, researcher Zachary Bleemer found that an affirmative action ban in California (Prop 209) had resulted in average wage drops of 5% annually among underrepresented minorities aged 24–34 in STEM industries, especially effecting Hispanic people.<ref>{{cite thesis |last1=Bleemer |first1=Zachary |title=Affirmative Action, Mismatch, and Economic Mobility after California's Proposition 209 |date=2020 |ssrn=3484530 }}</ref><ref name="auto"/>

In 2007, [[Gail Heriot]], a professor of law at the [[University of San Diego]] and a member of the [[U.S. Commission on Civil Rights]], discussed the evidence in support of mismatching in law courses. She pointed to a study by [[Richard Sander]] which suggests there were 7.9% fewer Black attorneys than if there had been no affirmative action.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Heriot |first1=Gail |title=Affirmative Action Backfires |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118792252575507571 |work=[[The Wall Street Journal]] |date=24 August 2007 }}</ref> Sander suggests that mismatching meant Black students were more likely to drop out of law school and fail bar exams.<ref name=Sander>{{cite journal |last1=Sander |first1=Richard H. |title=A Systemic Analysis of Affirmative Action in American Law Schools |journal=Stanford Law Review |date=2004 |volume=57 |issue=2 |pages=367–483 |url=https://www.stanfordlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2010/01/Sander.pdf |jstor=40040209 }}</ref> Sander's paper on mismatching has been criticized by several law professors, including [[Ian Ayres]] and Richard Brooks from Yale, who argue that eliminating affirmative action would actually reduce the number of
Black lawyers by 12.7%. Furthermore, they suggest that students attending higher ranking colleges do better than those who don't.<ref>{{cite web|last=Fisman |first=Ray |url=http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2005/04/sanding_down_sander.html |title=Slate.com |publisher=Slate.com |access-date=11 April 2012|date=29 April 2005 }}</ref> A 2008 study by [[Jesse Rothstein]] and Albert H. Yoon said Sander's results were "plausible", but said that eliminating affirmative action would "lead to a 63 percent decline in black matriculants at all law schools and a 90 percent decline at elite law schools". They dismissed the mismatch theory, concluding that "one cannot credibly invoke mismatch effects to argue that there are no benefits" to affirmative action.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/09/03/affirm | title=Attacking the 'Mismatch' Critique of Affirmative Action | work=Inside Higher Education | date=3 September 2008 | access-date=27 January 2016 | author=Jaschik, Scott | archive-date=13 December 2017 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171213085052/https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/09/03/affirm | url-status=dead }}</ref> In a 2016 review of previous studies by [[Peter Arcidiacono]] and Michael Lovenheim, they suggested that more African-American students attending less-selective schools would significantly improve first-attempt pass rates at the [[State bar association|state bar]], but cautioned that such improvements could be outweighed by decreases in law school attendance.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Arcidiacono |first1=Peter |last2=Lovenheim |first2=Michael |title=Affirmative Action and the Quality–Fit Trade-off |journal=Journal of Economic Literature |date=1 March 2016 |volume=54 |issue=1 |pages=3–51 |doi=10.1257/jel.54.1.3 |s2cid=1876963 }}</ref>

A 2011 study of data held by Duke University said there was no evidence of mismatch, and proposed that mismatch could only occur if a selective school possessed private information about students' prospects at the college which it failed to share. Providing such information to prospective students would avoid mismatch because the students could choose another school that was a better match.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Arcidiacono |first1=Peter |last2=Aucejo |first2=Esteban M. |last3=Fang |first3=Hanming |last4=Spenner |first4=Kenneth I. |title=Does affirmative action lead to mismatch? A new test and evidence |journal=Quantitative Economics |date=November 2011 |volume=2 |issue=3 |pages=303–333 |doi=10.3982/QE83 |doi-access=free |hdl=10419/150323 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> A 2016 study on affirmative action in India said there was no evidence for the mismatching hypothesis.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bagde |first1=Surendrakumar |last2=Epple |first2=Dennis |last3=Taylor |first3=Lowell |title=Does Affirmative Action Work? Caste, Gender, College Quality, and Academic Success in India |journal=American Economic Review |date=1 June 2016 |volume=106 |issue=6 |pages=1495–1521 |doi=10.1257/aer.20140783 |url=https://www.aeaweb.org/articles/attachments?retrieve=_ipe5iZhjGakTC0SaPxwDx2piOS0fkOa }}</ref>

=== Polls ===
According to a poll taken by ''[[USA Today]]'' in 2005, the majority of Americans supported affirmative action for women, while views on [[minority group]]s were more split.<ref name="usatoday.com">{{cite web |date=20 May 2005 |title=Usatoday.Com |url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/polls/tables/live/0623.htm |access-date=28 April 2014 |publisher=Usatoday.Com}}</ref> Men are only slightly more likely to support affirmative action for women, though a majority of both do.<ref name="usatoday.com"/> However, a slight majority of Americans do believe that affirmative action goes beyond ensuring access and goes into the realm of preferential treatment.<ref name="usatoday.com"/> Also in 2005, a [[The Gallup Organization|Gallup]] poll showed that 72% of black Americans and 44% of white Americans supported racial affirmative action (with 21% and 49% opposing), with support and opposition among [[Hispanic people]] falling between those of black people and white people. Support among black people, unlike among white people, had almost no correlation with political affiliation.<ref>{{cite web |last=Jones |first=Jeffrey M. |date=23 August 2005 |title=Race, Ideology, and Support for Affirmative Action |url=http://www.gallup.com/poll/18091/race-ideology-support-affirmative-action.aspx |access-date=11 March 2013 |publisher=[[The Gallup Organization|Gallup]]}}</ref>

A Quinnipiac poll from June 2009 found that 55% of Americans felt that affirmative action, in general, should be discontinued, though 55% supported it for people with disabilities.<ref name="june32009">{{cite web |date=3 June 2009 |title=U.S. Voters Disagree 3-1 With Sotomayor On Key Case, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Most Say Abolish Affirmative Action |url=https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1307 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210424203526/https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1307 |archive-date=Apr 24, 2021 |publisher=Quinnipiac University Poll}}</ref> The [[Quinnipiac University Polling Institute]] survey found 65% of American voters opposed the application of affirmative action to homosexuals, with 27% indicating they supported it.<ref name="june32009"/>

A Leger poll taken in 2010 found 59% of Canadians opposed considering race, gender, or ethnicity when hiring for government jobs.<ref>{{cite news |last=Akin |first=David |author-link=David Akin |date=12 August 2010 |title=Canadians against job hiring quotas |url=http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/08/12/14998311.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121104145049/http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/08/12/14998311.html |archive-date=4 November 2012 |newspaper=Toronto Sun}}</ref>

A 2014 [[Pew Research Center]] poll found that 63% of Americans thought affirmative action programs aimed at increasing minority representation on college campuses were "a good thing", compared to 30% who thought they were "a bad thing".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Drake |first=Bruce |date=22 April 2014 |title=Public strongly backs affirmative action programs on campus |url=http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/22/public-strongly-backs-affirmative-action-programs-on-campus/ |access-date=16 March 2017 |website=Pew Research Center}}</ref> The following year, [[Gallup (company)|Gallup]] released a poll showing that 67% of Americans supported affirmative action programs aimed at increasing female representation, compared to 58% who supported such programs aimed at increasing the representation of racial minorities.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=Riffkin |first=Rebecca |date=26 August 2015 |title=Higher Support for Gender Affirmative Action Than Race |url=http://www.gallup.com/poll/184772/higher-support-gender-affirmative-action-race.aspx |access-date=16 March 2017 |website=Gallup}}</ref>

A 2019 Pew Research Center poll found 73% of Americans believe race or ethnicity should not factor into college admissions decisions.<ref>{{cite web |date=8 June 2023 |title=More Americans Disapprove Than Approve of Colleges Considering Race, Ethnicity in Admissions Decisions |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/06/08/more-americans-disapprove-than-approve-of-colleges-considering-race-ethnicity-in-admissions-decisions/}}</ref> A few years later in 2022, a Pew Research Center poll found that 74% of Americans believe race or ethnicity should not factor into college admissions decisions.<ref>{{cite web |date=26 April 2022 |title=As courts weigh affirmative action, grades and test scores seen as top factors in college admissions |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/04/26/u-s-public-continues-to-view-grades-test-scores-as-top-factors-in-college-admissions/}}</ref>

==See also==
{{div col|colwidth=28em}}
* [[Achievement gap in the United States]]
* [[Affirmative action bake sale]]
* [[Anti-discrimination law]]
* [[Anti-racism]]
* [[Coate–Loury model]]
* [[Civil and political rights]]
* [[Civil liberties]]
* [[History of civil rights in the United States]]
** [[Civil rights movement]]
* [[Disability rights movement]]
* [[Discrimination in the United States]]
** [[Racism in the United States]]
** [[Religious discrimination in the United States]]
* [[Diversity, equity, and inclusion]], the successor policy which replaced Affirmative Action
** [[Diversity (business)]]
** [[Diversity training]]
* [[Economic discrimination]]
* [[Equal opportunity]]
* [[Ethnic penalty]]
* [[Gender equality]]
** [[Women's rights]]
* [[Legacy preferences]]
* [[Men's rights movement]]
* [[Minority rights]]
* [[Multiculturalism]]
* [[Multiracialism]]
* [[Numerus clausus]]
** [[Jewish quota]]
* [[Political correctness]]
* [[Positive liberty]]
* [[Progressive stack]]
* [[Quotaism]]
** [[Racial quota]]
* [[Race and intelligence]]
* [[Gerrymandering#Racial gerrymandering 2|Racial gerrymandering]]
* [[Reasonable accommodation]]
* [[Reverse racism]]
* [[Special measures for gender equality in the United Nations]]
* [[Strong-basis-in-evidence standard]]
* [[Social justice]]
* [[Substantive equality]]
* [[Tokenism]]
* [[White backlash]]
** [[Angry white male]]
* [[White guilt]]
** [[Reparations for slavery]]
{{div col end}}

== Notes ==
{{notelist}}

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==Further reading==
{{Further|Diversity, equity, and inclusion#Further reading}}
* {{Cite journal | last = Anderson | first = Elizabeth S. | author-link = Elizabeth S. Anderson | title = Integration, affirmative action, and strict scrutiny | journal = [[New York University Law Review|NYU Law Review]] | volume = 77 | pages = 1195–271 | year = 2002 | url = http://www.nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-77-number-5/integration-affirmative-action-and-strict-scrutiny | ref = none }} [https://web.archive.org/web/20150402131822/http://www.nyulawreview.org/sites/default/files/pdf/NYULawReview-77-5-Anderson.pdf Pdf.]
* {{cite book |last=Anderson |first=Kristin J. |title=Benign Bigotry: The Psychology of Subtle Prejudice |date=2010 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge, UK |isbn=978-0-52-187835-7 |pages=278–334 |chapter='Affirmative Action is reverse racism': The myth of merit |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_STPJNHE5fAC&q=%22reverse+racism%22&pg=PA278}}
* {{cite book | last = Anderson | first = Terry H. | title = The pursuit of fairness: a history of affirmative action | publisher = Oxford University Press | location = Oxford New York | year = 2004 | isbn = 9780195157642 | url-access = registration | url = https://archive.org/details/pursuitoffairnes00ande }}, a standard scholarly history
* Bernstein, David E. (2022) Classified: The untold story of racial classification in America. Bombardier Books, NY. ISBN 1637581734.
* {{citation | last1 = Boxill | first1 = Bernard | last2 = Boxill | first2 = Jan | contribution = Affirmative action | editor1-last = Frey | editor1-first = R.G. | editor2-last = Heath Wellman | editor2-first = Christopher | title = A companion to applied ethics | pages = [https://archive.org/details/companiontoappli0000unse/page/89 89–101] | publisher = Blackwell Publishing | series = Blackwell Companions to Philosophy | location = Oxford, UK Malden, Massachusetts | year = 2005 | doi = 10.1002/9780470996621.ch9 | isbn = 9781405133456 | ref = none | postscript = . | url = https://archive.org/details/companiontoappli0000unse/page/89 }}
* {{cite encyclopedia |last=Bolick |first=Clint |author-link= Clint Bolick |editor-first=Ronald |editor-last=Hamowy |editor-link=Ronald Hamowy |encyclopedia=The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism |chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=yxNgXs3TkJYC |year=2008 |publisher= [[SAGE Publishing|Sage]]; [[Cato Institute]] |location= Thousand Oaks, California |doi= 10.4135/9781412965811.n5|isbn= 978-1-4129-6580-4 |oclc=750831024| lccn = 2008009151 |pages=6–8 |chapter=Affirmative Action }}
* {{cite web | last = Bossuyt | first = Marc | author-link = Marc Bossuyt | title = United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20151016080556/http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/TestFrame/0aaa7775daf0bcebc1256c0c0031c5bd?Opendocument | archive-date = 16 October 2015 | url = http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/TestFrame/0aaa7775daf0bcebc1256c0c0031c5bd?Opendocument | publisher = [[United Nations Economic and Social Council|UN Economic and Social Council]] | date = 17 June 2002 }} E/CN.4/Sub.2/2002/21 [https://web.archive.org/web/20140319035719/http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/0/0aaa7775daf0bcebc1256c0c0031c5bd/%24FILE/G0214014.pdf Pdf.]
* {{Cite journal | last1 = Condit | first1 = Deirdre M. | last2 = Condit | first2 = Celeste M. | last3 = Achter | first3 = Paul J. | title = Human equality, affirmative action, and genetic models of human variation | journal = Rhetoric & Public Affairs | volume = 4 | issue = 1 | pages = 85–108 | doi = 10.1353/rap.2001.0003 | jstor = 41939651 | date =Spring 2001 | s2cid = 144851327 | ref = none }}
* Dobbin, Frank. ''Inventing equal opportunity'' (Princeton UP,  2009), scholarly history argues that Congress and the courts followed the lead of programs created by corporations.
* {{cite book | editor1-last = Featherman | editor1-first = David L. | editor2-last = Hall | editor2-first = Martin | editor3-last = Krislov | editor3-first = Marvin | title = The next twenty-five years: affirmative action in higher education in the United States and South Africa | url = https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780472033775 | url-access = registration | publisher = University of Michigan Press | location = Ann Arbor | year = 2010 | isbn = 9780472033775 }}  [http://www.press.umich.edu/titleDetailDesc.do?id=229720 Details.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100607194017/http://www.press.umich.edu/titleDetailDesc.do?id=229720 |date=7 June 2010 }}
* {{Cite journal | last1 = Ghorbal | first1 = Karim | title = Essence coloniale d'une politique contemporaine: pour une approche fanonienne de la discrimination positive en France | journal = Culture & History Digital Journal | volume = 4 | issue = 2 | pages = e016 | doi = 10.3989/chdj.2015.016 | date = 2015 | ref = none | doi-access = free }}
* Gillon, Steven M.  "The strange career of affirmative action: the Civil Rights Act of 1964" in his '' "That's Not What We Meant to Do": Reform and Its Unintended Consequences in Twentieth-Century America'' WW Norton, 2000) pp.&nbsp;120–162. 
* {{cite thesis | degree = PhD | last = Golland | first = David Hamilton | date = 2008 | title = Constructing affirmative action: federal contract compliance and the building construction trades, 1956–1973 |publisher= [[City University of New York]] | oclc = 279305174 }} Order No. DA3325474.
* {{Cite journal | last = Harpalani | first = Vinay | title = Diversity within racial groups and the constitutionality of race-conscious admissions | journal = [[University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law]] | volume = 15 | issue = 2 | pages = 463–537 | date = November 2012 | url = http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/jcl/vol15/iss2/3/ | ref = none }}
* {{Cite journal | last = Harpalani | first = Vinay | title = Fisher's fishing expedition | journal = [[University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law]] | volume = 15 | issue = 1 | pages = 57–74 | date = February 2013 | url = http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/jcl_online/vol15/iss1/5/ | ref = none }} [https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/1687-harpalani15upajconstlheightscrutiny572013pdf Pdf]
* Harper, Shannon, and Barbara Reskin. "Affirmative action at school and on the job." ''Annual Review of Sociology'' . 31 (2005): 357-379. [https://scholar.archive.org/work/5cntzwetj5ahvmm3s6ko2u4cwu/access/wayback/http://www.uiowa.edu/~c07b154/harper_and_reskin.pdf online]
* {{cite journal |last1=Heriot |first1=Gail L. |last2=Somin |first2=Alison |title=Affirmative Action for Men?: Strange Silences and Strange Bedfellows in the Public Debate Over Discrimination Against Women in College Admissions |date=November 28, 2011 |journal=Engage |volume=12 |issue=3 |ssrn=2891107 }}
* {{cite thesis |last1=Hubbard |first1=William Gary |title=Affirmative action : the law and politics of equality |date=1978 |url=https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dissertations/AAI7910502/ }}
* Katznelson, Ira. ''When Affirmative Action Was White: An Untold History of Racial Inequality in Twentieth-Century America'' (W. W. Norton, 2006)
* Okechukwu, Amaka. ''To fulfill these rights: Political struggle over affirmative action and open admissions'' (Columbia UP, 2019).
* Parashar, Sakshi. "Affirmative Action and Social Discrimination: A Functional Comparative Study of India, USA and South Africa." in ''Comparative Approaches in Law and Policy'' (Springer Nature Singapore, 2023) pp.&nbsp;171–187.
* Pierce, Jennifer. ''Racing for innocence: Whiteness, gender, and the backlash against affirmative action'' (Stanford University Press, 2012).[https://books.google.com/books?id=TvyGv9JbRs0C&dq=Affirmative&pg=PR7 online]
* {{Cite journal | last = Pollak | first = Oliver B. | title = Antisemitism, the Harvard Plan, and the roots of reverse discrimination | journal = Jewish Social Studies | volume = 45 | issue = 2 | pages = 113–22 | date = 1983 | jstor = 4467214 | ref = none }}
* Rubio, Philip F. ''A History of Affirmative Action, 1619-2000'' (University Press of Mississippi, 2001) [https://archive.org/details/historyofaffirma0000rubi_j5h1 online]
*  [[Thomas Sowell|Sowell, Thomas.]] ''Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study'' (Yale University Press) analysis by a conservative
* {{cite journal |last1=Stohler |first1=Stephan |title=Untangling the Partisan Roots of Affirmative Action |journal=Polity |date=January 2021 |volume=53 |issue=1 |pages=41–74 |doi=10.1086/712211 }}
* Thurber, Timothy M. "Racial Liberalism, Affirmative Action, and the Troubled History of the President's Committee on Government Contracts." ''Journal of Policy History'' 18.4 (2006): 446-476.
* {{cite book | last = Vieth-Entus | first = Susanne | title = Sozialquote: Berliner Gymnasien sollen mehr Schüler aus armen Familien aufnehmen | date = 29 December 2008 }} Der Tagesspiegel
* {{cite book |last1=Weiss |first1=Robert J. |title='We Want Jobs': A History of Affirmative Action |date=1997 |publisher=Garland Pub. |isbn=978-0-8153-2750-9 }}
* {{cite journal |id={{ERIC|EJ360259}} |last1=Weiss |first1=Robert J. |title=Affirmative Action: A Brief History |journal=Journal of Intergroup Relations |date=1987 |volume=15 |issue=2 |pages=40–53 }}

===Primary sources===
* Robinson, Jo Ann, ed. ''Affirmative action : a documentary history'' (2001)

==External links==
{{Commons category}}
* [https://archive.org/details/ERIC_EJ682488/mode/2up?view=theater "Affirmative Action: History and Analysis" (2003)] for secondary and middle schools
* {{cite SEP |url-id=affirmative-action |title=Affirmative Action}}, for graduate students
* [https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/affirm/affirm.htm Affirmative Action] collected news and commentary at ''[[The Washington Post]]''
* [https://archive.today/20130113061528/http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/434/index.html Does the success of Barack Obama mean we no longer need affirmative action?] NOW on PBS investigates
* [http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20160518092243/http://cle.ens-lsh.fr/29902590/0/fiche___pagelibre/&RH=CDL_ANG020000 An interview with Professor Randall Kennedy about the presidency of Barack Obama and affirmative action] Clifford Armion for La Clé des langues.
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20070615173751/http://www.minorityrights.org/admin/Download/pdf/MRG_RomaBriefing2006.pdf Substantive Equality, Positive Action and Roma Rights in the European Union], Report by Minority Rights Group International
* [[Intelligence Squared]] debate: [http://intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/past-debates/item/1054-affirmative-action-on-campus-does-more-harm-than-good Affirmative Action on Campus Does More Harm than Good] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160723005625/http://intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/past-debates/item/1054-affirmative-action-on-campus-does-more-harm-than-good |date=23 July 2016 }}
{{Discrimination}}{{Employment}}
{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Affirmative Action}}
[[Category:Affirmative action| ]]
[[Category:Discrimination]]
[[Category:Egalitarianism]]
[[Category:Industrial and organizational psychology]]
[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Liberalism in the United States]]
[[Category:Liberalism in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Majority–minority relations]]
[[Category:Race and law]]
[[Category:Social justice]]