2022/12/24 by Subhasish M. Chowdhury, Patricia Esteve‐González, Anwesha Mukherjee · 54 citations
Economics, Econometrics and Finance · Psychology · Social Sciences · #Action (physics) #Affirmative action #Balance (ability) #CONTEST #Competition (biology) #Diversity (politics) #Economics #Empirical evidence #Epistemology #Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies #Field (mathematics) #Inequality #Law #Level playing field #Merger and Competition Analysis #Microeconomics #Multitude #Political science #Positive economics #Psychology #Public economics #Public relations #Sports Analytics and Performance
paper · pdf · doi:10.1002/soej.12618
published in Southern Economic Journal 89(3), 924-974 (Wiley)
openalex publication_date 2022/12/24 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/29
Abstract The heterogeneous abilities of players in various competitive contexts often lead to undesirable outcomes such as low effort provision, a lack of diversity, and inequality. A range of policies is implemented to mitigate such issues by enforcing competitive balance, that is, by leveling the playing field. Some of those policies, known as affirmative action (AA) policies, are practiced in ethical response to historical discrimination against particular social groups, and are also aimed at increasing competition. This survey summarizes the rapidly growing literature on contest theory regarding AA and other policies that level the playing field. Using a general theoretical structure, we outline the theoretical, experimental, and empirical research findings on contest outcomes under a multitude of policy mechanisms, and in doing so, we touch upon some of the common debates in the AA literature.