Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2507.17191

Quotas for scholarship recipients: an efficient race-neutral alternative to affirmative action?

Abstract

Since 2018, France's centralized higher education platform, Parcoursup, has implemented quotas for scholarship recipients, with program-specific thresholds based on the applicants' composition. Using difference-in-differences methods, I find that these quotas enabled scholarship students to access more selective programs, although the intention-to-treat effects remain modest. Matching methods reveal that the policy improved the scholarship students' waiting list positions relative to those of comparable non-scholarship peers, and simulations suggest that the modest effect could be attributed to the low intensity of the treatment. However, I detect no robust or lasting effects on the extensive margin of higher education access. Despite high policy salience, quotas did not affect the application behavior or pre-college investment of scholarship students, even among high achievers. These findings align with research on affirmative action, suggesting that such policies primarily benefit disadvantaged students who access selective institutions, rather than expanding total enrollment. Nevertheless, scholarship quotas demonstrate that race-neutral alternatives can effectively promote socioeconomic diversity in prestigious programs.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Louis Gleyo. 2025-08-17. Quotas for scholarship recipients: an efficient race-neutral alternative to affirmative action?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.17191

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN