The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

The effectiveness of the EU race equality directive at national level. A comparative study of British and Spanish legislation and policies

The effectiveness of the EU race equality directive at national level. A comparative study of British and Spanish legislation and policies
The effectiveness of the EU race equality directive at national level. A comparative study of British and Spanish legislation and policies
The EU Race Equality Directive (RED) was adopted in 2000 to foster the development of a basic legal framework to address racism and, more generally, to put into effect the principle of equal treatment at national level. However, there are some concerns that the effects of the RED have not been as far-reaching as expected. Through a comparative study between Britain and Spain, this thesis analyses whether the RED has triggered effective legislation and policies in these jurisdictions, and which factors and actors may be relevant to improve the effectiveness of racial equality legislation and policies. Initially, the thesis acknowledges that the RED’s potential to trigger effective regulatory strategies at national level is constrained by its underlying enforcement model, based mainly on individual litigation. Building upon the theory of the Social Working of Law, the concept of effectiveness is defined as the combination of ‘ex-ante effectiveness’, which contributes to preventing discrimination, and ‘ex-post effectiveness’, which minimises the negative effects that discrimination has on victims, once it has occured. This distinction is used to frame the comparative analysis, which is conducted in three building blocks. Firstly, it is argued that formal adjudication has intrinsic limitations because victims bear the burden to initiate legal proceedings but, at the same time, the system deters them from doing so. Secondly, it is submitted that a diverse network of advice-providers (ie equality bodies, trade unions and NGOs) and an appropriate use of Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms can contribute to improving ex-post effectiveness. Finally, this thesis also recognises the importance that employers’ policies can have in preventing discrimination, such as those derived from positive duties, collective bargaining and voluntary initiatives. However, the thesis also concedes that the effectiveness of employers’ policies largely depends on the regulatory framework, social awareness about racial discrimination and workforce participation.
Benedi Lahuerta, Sara
657ceee7-1cbf-42b5-bd45-e3c12d66e465
Benedi Lahuerta, Sara
657ceee7-1cbf-42b5-bd45-e3c12d66e465
Bell, Mark
3e417e51-0e3a-4220-9e93-f665754a6dcb
Golynker, Oxana
545d69ab-4f72-485a-a30c-8d60d3453d37

Benedi Lahuerta, Sara (2015) The effectiveness of the EU race equality directive at national level. A comparative study of British and Spanish legislation and policies. University of Leicester, School of Law, Doctoral Thesis.

Record type: Thesis (Doctoral)

Abstract

The EU Race Equality Directive (RED) was adopted in 2000 to foster the development of a basic legal framework to address racism and, more generally, to put into effect the principle of equal treatment at national level. However, there are some concerns that the effects of the RED have not been as far-reaching as expected. Through a comparative study between Britain and Spain, this thesis analyses whether the RED has triggered effective legislation and policies in these jurisdictions, and which factors and actors may be relevant to improve the effectiveness of racial equality legislation and policies. Initially, the thesis acknowledges that the RED’s potential to trigger effective regulatory strategies at national level is constrained by its underlying enforcement model, based mainly on individual litigation. Building upon the theory of the Social Working of Law, the concept of effectiveness is defined as the combination of ‘ex-ante effectiveness’, which contributes to preventing discrimination, and ‘ex-post effectiveness’, which minimises the negative effects that discrimination has on victims, once it has occured. This distinction is used to frame the comparative analysis, which is conducted in three building blocks. Firstly, it is argued that formal adjudication has intrinsic limitations because victims bear the burden to initiate legal proceedings but, at the same time, the system deters them from doing so. Secondly, it is submitted that a diverse network of advice-providers (ie equality bodies, trade unions and NGOs) and an appropriate use of Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms can contribute to improving ex-post effectiveness. Finally, this thesis also recognises the importance that employers’ policies can have in preventing discrimination, such as those derived from positive duties, collective bargaining and voluntary initiatives. However, the thesis also concedes that the effectiveness of employers’ policies largely depends on the regulatory framework, social awareness about racial discrimination and workforce participation.

Full text not available from this repository.

More information

Published date: 5 June 2015
Organisations: Southampton Law School

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 383905
URI: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/383905
PURE UUID: 077b92ea-a820-497e-8f57-a879fd93e046
ORCID for Sara Benedi Lahuerta: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-2769-372X

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 15 Mar 2016 12:50
Last modified: 06 Jun 2018 12:22

Export record

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×