We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.

Durham e-Theses
You are in:

Superficially Similar but Fundamentally Different: A Comparative Analysis of US and UK Affirmative Action

HERRON, RACHEL,CLARE (2010) Superficially Similar but Fundamentally Different: A Comparative Analysis of US and UK Affirmative Action. Masters thesis, Durham University.

PDF - Accepted Version


This thesis compares affirmative action in the United States of America (US) and the United Kingdom (UK) and reveals that despite superficial similarities in how the US and UK have sought to achieve equal opportunities through the use of positive action the nature and impact of the laws are fundamentally different in each country. These differences flow from the multi-layered impact of the context – social, political and economic – within which each country’s laws have developed. The context has in turn led to the formation of different principles upon which affirmative action has been founded and varying uses to which it has been put. This thesis also argues that, particularly in light of the most recent developments in positive action, the differing nature of the legal provision for affirmative action in each country may offer the opportunity for cross-referencing between the two countries. This could include learning lessons from problems encountered in the other country, and even borrowing some aspects of positive action policy. In this way the fundamentally different nature of the law between the two countries may direct the course of the future development of positive action, so that legal provisions that are currently mismatched to their contexts are loosed from their country-specific moorings and used to better effect on the opposite side of the Atlantic.

Item Type:Thesis (Masters)
Award:Master of Jurisprudence
Faculty and Department:Faculty of Social Sciences and Health > Law, Department of
Thesis Date:2010
Copyright:Copyright of this thesis is held by the author
Deposited On:15 Mar 2011 15:28

Social bookmarking: del.icio.usConnoteaBibSonomyCiteULikeFacebookTwitter