Diversity, Harassment, and the AEA

The American Economic Association (AEA) is one of the most prominent associations in economics and publisher of multiple academic journals, the most widely known being the American Economic Review (AER).  The AEA routinely works to aid economists in their work, providing vast resources of academic literature and generally advance the respectability of the field.  They've even gone so far as to create a portal on their website to help streamline economists' entry into the workforce, putting all the opportunities in one spot, instead of having the new grads go hunting down postings on multiple job sites.  The AEA also hosts conferences, helping economists stay up to date in the literature as well as network with other economists.  As part of their work, the AEA will occasionally send out surveys to its members about their personal experiences in their jobs and in the profession as a whole.  

Their most recent survey has brought alarming conclusions to the AEA's attention.  A large number of their female members (48 percent) reported personally experiencing discrimination or unfair treatment based on their sex over the past ten years, or during their time in the economic field, if they've been in less than ten years.  To compare, only three percent of male respondents responded experiencing this treatment.  The responses were evenly split along racial lines, with 17 percent of white and 16 percent non-white respondents reporting experiencing discrimination or unfair treatment.  This suggests that women, specifically, are the targets of discrimination and unfair treatment.  

There are three examples of this treatment that most of the female respondents reported experiencing.  These are:

1. "Felt socially excluded at a meeting or event in the field"

2. "Felt disrespected by your economist colleagues"

3. "Felt that your work was not taken as seriously as that of your economist colleagues"

The AEA is right to be concerned about these results.  These experiences, as reported by the respondents, have led to the respondents to take a number of actions to avoid them, including avoiding presenting ideas at conferences, work, or school; not applying for or taking employment positions; or not attending social events after class, at work, or at conferences.  This is detrimental to a career in economics.  If your ideas are not being put out their for others to view and criticize, you do not grow your skills.  If you pass on applying for positions in the field, that only guarantees that you will not work in that field.  If these behaviors persist, the AEA cannot realize its goals of creating a "professional environment with equal opportunity and fair treatment for all."

In response to the survey, AEA past-president Olivier Blanchard, President Ben Bernanke, and President-elect Janet Yellen released a letter on March 18, 2019 addressed to AEA members.  In it, the three expressed grave concern over the results of the survey.  They outlined the steps the AEA took last year and plan to take this year, to combat  this.  I initially experienced trepidation reading through the letter, as the establishing of a "Committee on Equity, Diversity, and Professional Conduct (CEDPC)" brings to my mind the events taking place in institutions dedicated to Equity and Diversity.  Evergreen College, among others, are firmly at the forefront.  

However, my concern was lifted somewhat after seeing the professional codes of conduct laid out and adopted by the AEA in April 2018.  In these codes, the AEA has a lot of fairly common prohibitions, such as physical assault and real or implied threats made to colleagues.  These are common sense, and anybody taking part in these actions deserve to be ostracized from the field.  It should go without saying. 

There are several clauses in the policy that require much more positive attention.  The AEA explicitly prohibits "Prejudicial actions or comments that undermine the principles of equal opportunity, fair treatment, or free academic exchange."  Additionally, the AEA prohibits "Sustained or aggressive disruption of talks or other activities that undermine free academic exchange."  In a world where free speech on college campuses is continually under attack by protesters and professors giving the "heckler's veto," these two rules are greatly welcome.  Economics is the field connecting the soft sciences of psychology and sociology with the hard sciences of the STEM fields. Many individuals, myself included, consider Economics to be the next logical stop for the spread of "social justice" and other toxic ideologies that have taken over the softer sciences.  

What makes the codes of conduct even more profound is that the AEA have given these rules teeth.  The AEA has reserved the right to take disciplinary action against members violating the codes of conduct.  I've posted the entire paragraph below, emphasis mine:

"Individuals violating this policy may be subject to disciplinary action.  The AEA reserves the right to take such actions including, but not limited to, removing an individual from an AEA activity without warning, prohibiting an individual from participating in any future AEA activities, terminating an individual's AEA membership, and notifying an individual's employer.  Retaliation against any person who files a complaint, or assists in the investigation of such a complaint, is also a violation of this policy and may likewise be subject to disciplinary action."  

The policy ends with a call on AEA members to be proactive in mitigating or preventing harm  when they witness any unacceptable behavior. 

The AEA notifying an individual's employer is a huge deal, as is barring transgressors from future activities.  This is social isolation in action.  On its own, this would be cause for alarm for AEA members, but with the balanced rules seem to be a genuine effort to make the economics field more professional and more open to "equal opportunity, fair treatment, and free academic exchange."  I sincerely hope the AEA stays true to these words, and that their goals are successful.