.png){kind=icon}
返回
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
摘要
En 中文
What impact did City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co. (1989) have on minority set-aside programs in terms of dollars spent be ore and after the decision was handed down? This article identifies various administrative responses to Croson. In addition to the wide scale use of disparity studies undertaken to establish a legal basis for the continuation of set-aside programs, cities also (although in some cases temporarily) established more innovative race- and gender-neutral goal programs to circumvent the legal merits of Croson while still directing sizable amounts of contracting dollars to minority-owned and operated businesses. Other cities simply abolished their programs. The findings also suggest that the percentage of black population is the only variable in the equation that comes close to explaining the variance in dollars spent. In the South for instance, only cities with a 25 percent black population or higher had set-aside programs and were the most aggressive in preserving dollars spent on such programs after Croson. However, cities in other regions with significantly lower percentages of black populations maintained set-aside programs.
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取，主要内容包括：简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
