Institutional Racism, Organizations & Public Policy

Tables

3.1Ineligible Borrower—DTI < 31%

3.2Request Incomplete

3.3Statistically Significant Regional Findings for Denial Reason 2: Ineligible Borrower—Current DTI Less than 31%

3.4Statistically Significant Regional Findings for Denial Reason 13: Request Incomplete

3.5Incidence of Unreported Race and Ethnicity Data by Region

4.1Resolution on Ku Klux Klan

4.2Highlights from the Resolution on Racial Reconciliation

6.1Ramsey County’s Community Human Services Anti–Racism Initiative—Accomplishments and Lessons Learned

6.2Nonprofit Leadership and Client Distribution in Raw Numbers

7.1Where Is Racial Profiling Banned?

7.2National Estimate of Racial Profiling Victims (U.S.) ← ix | x →← x | xi →

Acknowledgments

Our grateful thanks go to the editors, copy writing and production professionals, and others at Peter Lang for their invaluable assistance in making this book project possible. Our appreciation is most especially extended to the Series Editor, Black Studies and Critical Thinking, at Peter Lang Publishing.

Author order in this fully coauthored text acknowledges Professor Ward’s role in conceiving of, initiating, and leading completion of the book project.

James D. Ward and Mario A. Rivera ← xi | xii →← xii | 1 →

Chapter One

Introduction: Institutional Racism and Its Multiple Dimensions

What makes this book unique, from our perspective, is that it addresses the phenomenon of institutional racism in the public sector, in relation to the allied academic and professional fields of public administration, public policy, and political science, a topic which in our view has received scant research focus across these disciplines. On the other hand, we do recognize the work done in other social and behavioral science research, including disciplinary subfields such as social work and community psychology, sociology, social psychology, social cognitive theory, public management theory, critical leadership studies, critical race theory, and ethics (public ethics, in particular).

We are especially cognizant of research efforts in public administration, public policy, and political science that attempt to explain or predict the influence of race on political performance and behavior, to consider the role of diversity advocacy (such as affirmative action) in public sector employment, and to explore contemporary issues of diversity and cultural competence. Such work often approaches the issues of race and diversity as tangible entities that are readily available for empirical analysis. In our own research, however, institutional racism is defined as a complex of embedded, systemic practices that disadvantage racial and ethnic minority groups, and, in consequence, needs to be assessed indirectly as well—for instance, in analyses of historically patterned discrimination and of the unintended, but still discernible, adverse impact of public policies and programs.

Studies touching on diversity in the public administration literature often address the subject as a matter of education and training—especially with regard to the competencies needed by professional administrators. However, racism and discrimination, as underlying determinative factors, are seldom addressed, at least not in a sustained and probing way. We contend that discussions of institutional racism are most relevant today, when emphasis on diversity and cultural competency is becoming more salient in both research and practice. Institutional racism is often found in the interstices of avowed commitments to diversity and regressive practices that too often prevail in public organizations in particular. Institutional racism would then ← 1 | 2 → account for the lack of salutary diversity and equity outcomes in public sector organizations.

Notwithstanding its importance, institutional racism has been largely ignored by public policy and administration scholars. This may be because the concept forces investigative emphasis on hidden factors that are as difficult to define operationally in research as they are painful to recognize in practice.

In sum, in this text we attempt to fill these gaps by considering a number of dimensions of systemic, institutional racism, including the following:

1.‘Cognitive complexity,’ ‘intersectionality,’ and the social relations of race, constructs from psychology and social psychology. These distinctive features of our central topic point to its cognitive dimensionality, considering the argument that integrative complexity is a hallmark of real diversity and cultural competency. Integrative, cognitive complexity is a construct from psychology and social psychology, referencing dispositions toward others that combine elements of cosmopolitanism (in the ethical sense, an openness to different cultures and ways of life with a kind of humility before others, sometimes called ‘cultural humility’). We also consider the psychological impact of racism in complex contexts, for instance at the intersection of race and gender, using intersectionality analysis as a fulcrum. We are therefore interested in exploring relational aspects of race and ethnicity, inasmuch as these impact the lived experience of men and women of color, for instance in the professions—including the academic professions.

2.The legal and political lineaments of institutional racism, including trends toward retrenchment on affirmative action, equal employment opportunity, social policy and provision for human services, and even (most recently) voting and other fundamental rights.

3.The sociocultural ascription of meaning, which too often translates into the devaluation of subordinate ways of life. What is operative here is the ascription of disparate social outcomes to the cultural norms, traditions, values, and behaviors of racial and ethnic minorities, an ethnocentric exercise that masks the interest–driven quality of institutional racism. Culture is about the way a group decides what does and does not matter, but since racial and ethnic groups experience large power differences, cultural expression often translates into denigration of other races and life ways. We examine how jaundiced cultural outlooks impact people of color, in various ← 2 | 3 → domains that include institutions of higher learning, religious organizations, and government programs.

4.Institutional/organizational factors that exclude people of color—for instance, in the insularity of professional recruitment and hiring networks. Here the focus is on those long–set organizational mores and practices that systematically disadvantage people of color. In this connection, we also consider best practices in various professional fields, including that of social work, which demonstrate that organizational energies can be harnessed to progressive, rather than reactionary, ends.

5.‘Hysteresis,’ or socioeconomic historicity, a construct from institutional economics that points to the entrenchment of privilege in the historic accretion of self–serving policies and practices.

6.And implications for professional and public ethics. We consider ethical dimensions of racism at various levels of analysis, from public ethics to the situated ethics of a hypothetical encounter (in Chapter Nine) between a public servant and an aggrieved individual making a claim to equity.