東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Gender equality and public policy : ...

Profeta, Paola, (1972-)

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Gender equality and public policy : = measuring progress in Europe /

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Gender equality and public policy :/ Paola Profeta.
其他題名:	measuring progress in Europe /
作者:	Profeta, Paola,
出版者:	New York :Cambridge University Press, : c2020.,
面頁冊數:	xvii, 211 p. :ill., maps ;24 cm.
標題:	Sex discrimination against women - Europe. -
ISBN:	9781108423359

Gender equality and public policy : = measuring progress in Europe /
Profeta, Paola,1972-

Gender equality and public policy :measuring progress in Europe /Paola Profeta. - New York :Cambridge University Press,c2020. - xvii, 211 p. :ill., maps ;24 cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

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

ISBN: 9781108423359GBP69.99

LCCN: 2019042177Subjects--Topical Terms:

912891
Sex discrimination against women
--Europe.

LC Class. No.: HQ1237.5.E85 / P76 2020

Dewey Class. No.: 305.42094

Gender equality and public policy : = measuring progress in Europe /
LDR:02040cam a2200193 a 4500 001 2193714
008 200521s2020 nyuab b 001 0 eng
010 $a 2019042177
020 $a 9781108423359 $q (hbk.) : $c GBP69.99
020 $a 1108423353 $q (hbk.)
040 $a DLC $b eng $e rda $c DLC $d DLC
042 $a pcc
043 $a e------
050 0 0 $a HQ1237.5.E85 $b P76 2020
082 0 0 $a 305.42094 $2 23
100 1 $a Profeta, Paola, $d 1972- $3 3422992
245 1 0 $a Gender equality and public policy : $b measuring progress in Europe / $c Paola Profeta.
260 # $a New York : $b Cambridge University Press, $c c2020.
300 $a xvii, 211 p. : $b ill., maps ; $c 24 cm.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references and index.
520 # $a "When the introduction of board gender quotas was first discussed in Italy a decade ago, those in favor of quotas relied on nonacademic results from consultancy companies claiming that a higher share of women would "lead" to substantial better performance. The arguments against gender quotas were dominated by the defense of "meritocracy", arguing that quotas contravene meritocracy because they risk promoting less qualified individuals and thus reducing the quality of board members. I was puzzled. The argument in favor was not convincing, since it was based on a simple correlation, which is different from causality. The one against was misplaced: Why do we talk about the quality of women if the quality of men has never been an issue? Moreover, since highly qualified women are abundant, why should the promotion of women reduce quality? At that time, together with some co-authors, I contributed to the production of new evidence in the political sphere, showing in a causal way (i.e., using a rigorous analysis) that the introduction of gender quotas in candidate lists increased - rather than decreased - the quality of elected politicians. The rationale for gender quotas changed: policy-makers stopped using unreliable correlations between female representation and performance to justify gender quotas and realized that gender quotas do not contravene meritocracy but rather enhance it"-- $c Provided by publisher.
650 # 0 $a Sex discrimination against women $z Europe. $3 912891
650 # 0 $a Women $x Employment $z Europe. $3 690151
650 # 0 $a Women's rights $z Europe. $3 782048
650 # 0 $a Sex role $z Europe. $3 1975478