國立虎尾科技大學 |

Affirmative action reconceived : = A comparative study of constitutional precommitments to group preferences for racial minorities and women.

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Affirmative action reconceived :/
Reminder of title:	A comparative study of constitutional precommitments to group preferences for racial minorities and women.
Author:	Ford, Abdel Rahman.
Description:	1 online resource (326 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-07(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International77-07A(E).
Subject:	Political science. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9781339461656

Affirmative action reconceived : = A comparative study of constitutional precommitments to group preferences for racial minorities and women.
Ford, Abdel Rahman.

Affirmative action reconceived :A comparative study of constitutional precommitments to group preferences for racial minorities and women. - 1 online resource (326 pages)

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-07(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)

Includes bibliographical references

The nation-state's struggle with liberal individualism on the one hand and the recognition of group rights on the other is well documented in the literatures on constitutionalism, constitution-making, comparative politics and racial/ethnic relations. However, the manner in which this conundrum manifests in a state's acceptance or rejection of affirmative action has been under-discussed. Traditional approaches to the study of affirmative action are inadequate because they tend to circumscribe the universe of policies and programs that may qualify as affirmative action by focusing only on certain groups, issue domains or countries. More specifically, current scholarship on affirmative action suffers from several substantive and methodological shortcomings: (1) a neglect of the constitutional foundations of affirmative action, (2) a fundamental definitional uncertainty when it comes to understanding what affirmative action actually is, (3) a lack of a clear analytical framework with which to classify various types of affirmative action policies, (4) a narrow focus on single-case studies, and (5) a paucity of inter-group and intra-group comparisons. To address these lacunae, this study focuses on constitutional precommitments to affirmative action. Prior to any substantive analysis, this study first proposes a consensus definition of affirmative action and develops a universal typology and sub-typology with which to categorize, analyze and compare affirmative action precommitments. Next, this study employs a large N comparative methodology to examine the constitutions of 30 countries and categorize affirmative action precommitments through the use of constitutional textual analysis and secondary source historical materials. Finally, this study compares affirmative action precommitments -- both inter-group and intra-group -- for racial/ethnic minorities and women across the sample. There are three principal substantive findings. First, although liberal individualism remains central to the constitution-making process, all cases exhibited constitutional acknowledgement of some form of group rights and/or preferences. Second, for various reasons, racial/ethnic minorities tend to fare better than women when it comes to the overall prevalence of preferential constitutional precommitments. Third, historical evidence suggests that both endogenous and exogenous political pressures, such as internal ethnic conflicts and global human rights movements, matter when it comes to racial/ethnic minorities' or women's chances of having affirmative action provisions included in constitutions during the constitution-making process.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2018

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9781339461656Subjects--Topical Terms:

558774
Political science.
Index Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Affirmative action reconceived : = A comparative study of constitutional precommitments to group preferences for racial minorities and women.
LDR:04036ntm a2200361Ki 4500 001 911481
005 20180529094434.5
006 m o u
007 cr mn||||a|a||
008 190606s2016 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9781339461656
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10009739
035 $a (MiAaPQ)upenngdas:12031
035 $a AAI10009739
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ
099 $a TUL $f hyy $c available through World Wide Web
100 1 $a Ford, Abdel Rahman. $3 1183326
245 1 0 $a Affirmative action reconceived : $b A comparative study of constitutional precommitments to group preferences for racial minorities and women.
264 0 $c 2016
300 $a 1 online resource (326 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-07(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Rogers Smith.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.) $c University of Pennsylvania $d 2016.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a The nation-state's struggle with liberal individualism on the one hand and the recognition of group rights on the other is well documented in the literatures on constitutionalism, constitution-making, comparative politics and racial/ethnic relations. However, the manner in which this conundrum manifests in a state's acceptance or rejection of affirmative action has been under-discussed. Traditional approaches to the study of affirmative action are inadequate because they tend to circumscribe the universe of policies and programs that may qualify as affirmative action by focusing only on certain groups, issue domains or countries. More specifically, current scholarship on affirmative action suffers from several substantive and methodological shortcomings: (1) a neglect of the constitutional foundations of affirmative action, (2) a fundamental definitional uncertainty when it comes to understanding what affirmative action actually is, (3) a lack of a clear analytical framework with which to classify various types of affirmative action policies, (4) a narrow focus on single-case studies, and (5) a paucity of inter-group and intra-group comparisons. To address these lacunae, this study focuses on constitutional precommitments to affirmative action. Prior to any substantive analysis, this study first proposes a consensus definition of affirmative action and develops a universal typology and sub-typology with which to categorize, analyze and compare affirmative action precommitments. Next, this study employs a large N comparative methodology to examine the constitutions of 30 countries and categorize affirmative action precommitments through the use of constitutional textual analysis and secondary source historical materials. Finally, this study compares affirmative action precommitments -- both inter-group and intra-group -- for racial/ethnic minorities and women across the sample. There are three principal substantive findings. First, although liberal individualism remains central to the constitution-making process, all cases exhibited constitutional acknowledgement of some form of group rights and/or preferences. Second, for various reasons, racial/ethnic minorities tend to fare better than women when it comes to the overall prevalence of preferential constitutional precommitments. Third, historical evidence suggests that both endogenous and exogenous political pressures, such as internal ethnic conflicts and global human rights movements, matter when it comes to racial/ethnic minorities' or women's chances of having affirmative action provisions included in constitutions during the constitution-making process.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2018
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Political science. $3 558774
650 4 $a Women's studies. $3 572871
650 4 $a Law. $3 671705
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0453
690 $a 0398
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a University of Pennsylvania. $b Political Science. $3 1183327
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 77-07A(E).
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10009739 $z click for full text (PQDT)