Implementing (Un)fair Procedures? Favoritism and Process Fairness when Inequality is Inevitable
Robert J. Schmidt and
No 201-013, Discussion Paper from Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research
We study allocation behavior when outcome inequality is inevitable but a fair process is feasible, as in selecting one person from several candidates for a job or award. We show that allocators may be influenced by inappropriate criteria, impeding the implementation of a fair process. We study four interventions to induce process fairness without restricting the allocator’s decisions: Increasing the transparency of the allocation process; providing a private randomization device; allowing the allocator to delegate to a public randomization device; and allowing the allocator to avoid information on inappropriate criteria. All interventions except transparency have positive effects, but differ substantially in their impact.
Keywords: equality; procedural justice; discrimination (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: D63 D73 J70 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Working Paper: Implementing (Un)fair Procedures? Favoritism and Process Fairness when Inequality is Inevitable (2019)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:tiu:tiucen:125472e2-51a2-4cf9-aab5-151900dd6632
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Discussion Paper from Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Richard Broekman ().