682 records matched your query
03289aam a2200481 i 4500 001 94F44A9C403511EB87AA299C42ECA4DB 003 SILO 005 20201217010015 008 191017t20202020enkab b 001 0 eng 010 $a 2019042177 020 $a 110843746X 020 $a 9781108437462 020 $a 1108423353 020 $a 9781108423359 035 $a (OCoLC)1124782270 040 $a DLC $b eng $e rda $c DLC $d OCLCO $d OCLCF $d YDX $d UKMGB $d YDX $d CHVBK $d OCLCO $d SILO 042 $a pcc 043 $a e------ 050 00 $a HQ1237.5.E85 $b P76 2020 100 1 $a Profeta, Paola, $d 1959- $e author. 245 10 $a Gender equality and public policy : $b measuring progress in Europe / $c Paola Profeta. 264 1 $a Cambridge, United Kingdom ; $b Cambridge University Press, $c 2020. 300 $a xvii, 211 pages : $b illustrations, 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. 650 0 $a Women $x Employment $z Europe. 650 0 $a Women's rights $z Europe. 650 0 $a Sex role $z Europe. 650 7 $a Sex discrimination against women. $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst01114376 650 7 $a Sex role. $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst01114598 650 7 $a Women $x Employment. $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst01176715 650 7 $a Women's rights. $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst01178818 651 7 $a Europe. $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst01245064 650 7 $a Diskriminierung $g Motiv $2 gnd 650 7 $a Gleichberechtigung $2 gnd 650 7 $a Lohnstruktur $2 gnd 650 7 $a Politik $2 gnd 651 7 $a Europa $2 gnd 776 08 $i Online version: $a Profeta, Paola, $t Gender equality and public policy $d New York : Cambridge University Press, 2020. $z 9781108525886 $w (DLC) 2019042178 941 $a 1 952 $l OVUX522 $d 20231017014835.0 956 $a http://locator.silo.lib.ia.us/search.cgi?index_0=id&term_0=94F44A9C403511EB87AA299C42ECA4DBInitiate Another SILO Locator Search