Do terrorist attacks affect ethnic discrimination in the labour market? Evidence from two randomized field experiments

Terrorist attacks are known to influence public opinion. But do they also change behaviour? We address this question by comparing the results of two identical randomized field experiments on ethnic discrimination in hiring that we conducted in Oslo. The first experiment was conducted before the 2011 terrorist attacks in Norway; the second experiment was conducted after the attacks. In both experiments, applicants with a typical Pakistani name were significantly less likely to get a job interview compared to those with a typical Norwegian name. But the ethnic gap in call‐back rates were very similar in the two experiments. Thus, Pakistanis in Norway still experienced the same level of discrimination, despite claims that Norwegians have become more positive about migrants after the far‐right, anti‐migrant terrorist attacks of 2011

The impact of youth labour market experiences on later employment opportunities: what roles do ethnicity and gender play?

Youth joblessness often leaves a scar. However, some ethnic groups appear to be more successful in recovering from this than others. Using a unique dataset (ONS Longitudinal Study) linking census records for a 1% sample of the population of England and Wales, we examine the relationship between early labour market experiences and later employment outcomes for men and women from Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Caribbean origins to those of white British individuals. Our results show that, on average, being unemployed or inactive in youth (vs being employed or in education) reduces employment opportunities later in life. However, this varies greatly by ethnicity and gender: Indian and, especially, Bangladeshi men are substantively less affected by previous non-employment compared with white British men; for women, having an ethnic minority background continues to limit their labour market integration. Addressing gender and ethnic labour market inequalities requires a more nuanced understanding of how these disadvantages unfurl over time for different communities

The Gender-Gap in Workplace Authority - a Cross-National-Study

We explore a range of issues concerning the gender gap in workplace authority in seven countries (the United Stares, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, Sweden, Norway and Japan). There are six main empirical conclusions. First, there is considerable cross-national variation in the gender gap in authority: The gap is lowest in the four English-speaking countries (especially the United States and Australia) and highest in Japan. Second, the gender gap in authority within countries and the pattern of cross-national variation do not appear to be the result of gender differences in personal attributes or employment settings. Third, the self-selection hypothesis (that women choose nor to seek authority because of family responsibilities) does not appear to account for much of the gender gap in authority, except perhaps in Canada. Fourth, we find little support for the ''glass-ceiling'' hypothesis that barriers to upward promotions for women in authority hierarchies are greater than the barriers they face in getting into hierarchies in the first place. Fifth, in the United States the barriers faced by women already in hierarchies are weaker than in other countries, and probably weaker than the barriers they faced to enter hierarchies in the first place. Finally we find suggestive evidence that these variations across countries in the gender gap in authority are explained by the interaction between the availability of managerial positions and the capacity of politically organized women's movements to challenge barriers to women gaining authority in the workplace