Over the past four decades, the leadership of the American Economic Association (AEA) has increase the number of women and minorities on its program at the annual Allied Social Science Association (ASSA) meetings. There are three reasons to diversifying the participants on the program. First, including women and minorities on the program make the demographic characteristics, or identities, of the meetings’ participants more representative of the demographics of the profession. Second, having more women, people of color and foreign-born economists on the program encourages doubtful members of other minorities to become economists. Third, there is a belief that incorporating a wider range of economists, with different experiences and educational backgrounds, at the meetings will enrich the conversations and spur new ideas. Inclusivity implies an openness and willingness to incorporate different ways of thinking and perspectives. While the ASSA meetings appear to be more diverse with respect to institutional representation and gender, the evidence suggests that there is a structural barrier of hidden beneath the surface of these two demographics that prohibit inclusivity: class as measured by the strength of economists’ top Ph.D. granting institutional connections. To uncover this barrier, this study examines the structure of the ASSA, the diversity of the ASSA Program Committee and the resultant diversity of the AEA program participants over the past 40 years. Findings suggest that increased diversity does not guarantee increased inclusivity.
American Economic Association, ASSA meetings, gender, diversity, inclusivity
How to Cite
Bartlett R. & Denison University, (2017) “The Allied Social Science Meetings”, American Review of Political Economy 11(2). doi: https://doi.org/10.38024/arpe.141