Discrimination and nepotism: The efficiency of the anonymity rule

Chaim Fershtman*, Un Gneezy, Frank Verboven

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

73 Scopus citations

Abstract

We develop an experimental test to distinguish between discrimination against and nepotism. The experiment compares the behavior toward individuals of different groups with the behavior toward anonymous individuals (those having no clear group affiliation). Not only is the distinction between the different types of discrimination important for the study of social segmentation, but it has interesting policy implications regarding the effectiveness and the efficiency of antidiscriminatory legislation. We study two segmented societies: Belgian (Flemish versus Walloons) and Israeli (religious versus secular). In Belgium, we find evidence of discrimination. Both the Walloons and the Flemish treat people of their own group in the same way as anonymous individuals while discriminating against individuals of the other group. In contrast, the behavior of ultraorthodox religious Jews in Israel can be categorized as nepotism: they favor members of their own group while treating anonymous individuals in the same way as secular individuals.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)371-394
Number of pages24
JournalJournal of Legal Studies
Volume34
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Discrimination and nepotism: The efficiency of the anonymity rule'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this