Search results

This article follows the development of a European Union gender equality regime through three broad periods: equal treatment policies, positive action measures, and Gender Mainstreaming. The policy-making process entails conflict between competing policy frames; unequal resources behind each secures the dominance of an economic frame. Strategical framing practices have been employed by equality advocates to overcome this disadvantage. This article traces the gradual shifts in meaning within each period until equality goals are integrated into the dominant economic policy frame. It concludes that equality advocates need to engage in deeper analyses of power in order to sustain attention to equality goals over longer periods of time.

This article follows the development of a European Union gender equality regime through three broad periods: equal treatment policies, positive action measures, and Gender Mainstreaming. The policy-making process entails conflict between competing policy frames; unequal resources behind each secures the dominance of an economic frame. Strategical framing practices have been employed by equality advocates to overcome this disadvantage. This article traces the gradual shifts in meaning within each period until equality goals are integrated into the dominant economic policy frame. It concludes that equality advocates need to engage in deeper analyses of power in order to sustain attention to equality goals over longer periods of time. Full text available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v5i1.201

The report on the findings of extensive empirical research on equality of educational opportunities carried out in the US on a very large sample of public schools by Coleman and his colleagues has had a major impact on education policy and has given rise to a large amount of research and various interpretations. However, as some interpreters have highlighted, even more important than the findings of the survey themselves has been Coleman's redefinition of equality of opportunity, abandoning the then prevailing conception of equality of educational opportunities as equality of starting points and replacing it with the concept of equality of educational opportunities as equality of educational outcomes. The question is, therefore, whether equality of outcomes really is one of the two types of equality of opportunity. The purpose of the present article is to show that equality of opportunity and equality of outcomes are two different types of equality. If they are different, the interpretation that Coleman has redefined the concept of "equality of educational opportunity" turns out to be incorrect. (DIPF/Orig.)

This paper axiomatizes a utility function for social preferences under risk. In the model, a single parameter captures a preference for equality of opportunity (i.e., equality of exante expected payoffs) relative to equality of outcome (i.e., equality of ex-post payoffs). In a deterministic environment, the model reduces to the model of Fehr and Schmidt (1999). The model is consistent with recent experiments on probabilistic dictator games. (JEL C72, D71, D81)

AbstractAccepting the principles of equal treatment and equality of opportunity as standards means that individuals should have the same chances and receive the same rewards. If there is no reason to maintain that these principles should not be decisive in the domain of sport, the consequences of accepting them must be accepted. Equality of opportunity, in particular, which may with respect to sport be termed 'equality of competition', raises some issues that are examined.