Robert Browne and the Caucus of Black Economics

Under-represented minority (URM) faculty can expand the range of perspectives taught to students, but only if they are hired, granted tenure, and promoted. Their career paths can be constrained due to a stratification process that appears to legitimate a non-Hispanic White male set of rules and practices, including value neutrality and objectivity. This article measures specific aspects of human and social capital and their relationship to academic stratification in two social science disciplines, economics and sociology. Here, we measure stratification by the distribution of academic rank and examine differences based on discipline, institution type, race/ethnicity, gender, and publications in terms of academic career success. Our data are unique because they are gathered from multiple secondary sources. One contribution of this article is to measure social capital as a "two worlds" phenomenon, taken from W. E. B. Du Bois. Not surprisingly, we find that "publish or perish" still rules. Conversely, URM-oriented social capital, which can provide a safe space and opportunities to collaborate on scholarly work, is not significant. But, it may be related to feelings of satisfaction and inclusion. The only exceptions are URM-oriented sections in sociology. The article concludes with a series of policy recommendations to support URM faculty members in their careers.

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who Climbs the Academic Ladder? Race and Gender Stratification in a World of Whiteness

Moore

Cid-Martinez

Toney

et al. 2018

“… 2. See Alexis et al (2008) and “Summer Program in Economics for Minority Students” (1975). Later funding was provided by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Federal Reserve System.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The National Economic Association at 50: Where Have We Come From and Where Are We Going?

Simms

2020

Jobs and Freedom Now! Functional Finance, Full Employment, and the Freedom Budget

Forstater

2012

Forty-five years ago, the A. Philip Randolph Institute issued “The Freedom Budget,” in which a program for economic transformation was proposed that included a job guarantee for everyone ready and willing to work, a guaranteed income for those unable to work or those who should not be working, and a living wage to lift the working poor out of poverty. Such policies were supported by a host of scholars, civic leaders, and institutions, including the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; indeed, they provided the cornerstones for King's “Poor Peoples’ Campaign” and “economic bill of rights.” This paper proposes a “New Freedom Budget” for full employment based on the principles of functional finance. To counter a major obstacle to such a policy program, the paper includes a “primer” on three paradigms for understanding government budget deficits and the national debt: the deficit hawk, deficit dove, and functional finance perspectives. Finally, some of the benefits of the job guarantee are outlined, including the ways in which the program may serve as a vehicle for a variety of social policies.