2020/08/05 by Saad Gulzar, Nicholas Haas, Benjamin Pasquale · 1 voice · 1 citation
Economics, Econometrics and Finance · Engineering · Social Sciences · #Affirmative action #Collective action #Development economics #Disadvantaged #Economic growth #Economics #Engineering #Income, Poverty, and Inequality #Inequality #Microfinance and Financial Inclusion #Political science #Politics #Poverty, Education, and Child Welfare #Public economics #Public good #Work (physics) #Workfare
paper · doi:10.1017/s0003055420000532
openalex publication_date 2020/08/05 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/01
Does political affirmative action undermine or promote development? We present the first systematic analysis of Scheduled Areas in India, home to 100 million citizens, where local political office is reserved for the historically disadvantaged Scheduled Tribes. A newly constructed dataset of 217,000 villages allows us to probe conflicting hypotheses on the implementation of the world’s largest workfare program, the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. We find that reservations deliver no worse overall outcomes, that there are large gains for targeted minorities, and that these gains come at the cost of the relatively privileged, not other minorities. We also find improvements in other pro-poor programs, including a rural roads program and general public goods. Reservations more closely align benefits to each group’s population share, allaying concerns of overcompensation for inequalities. Contrary to the expectations of skeptics, results indicate that affirmative action can redistribute both political and economic power without hindering overall development.