It is estimated that one in four countries in the world has affirmative action in the admission of students to higher education, in different ways. Analysts heard by the report see difficulties in carrying out comprehensive surveys with this scope precisely due to the lack of consensus on what can fall into this category and how it is applied in practice.
The United States, for example, began to adopt affirmative action in 1965, but 13 years later, the Court prohibited the implementation of racial quotas in selective processes, alleging that the instrument would be discriminatory. Today, public and private centers in various states maintain different types of inclusion policies, but without using quota systems or bonuses for grades on admission tests.
As in Brazil, the discussion in the country is also heated by political polarization. The US Supreme Court – from recent decisions of great repercussion, such as the one that reversed the understanding of the right to abortion -, may decide later this year to end racial affirmative action in universities that receive government funds.
The case came to court in January, when people of Asian descent accused the universities of Harvard and North Carolina (UNC) of passing them down over black candidates. With the collegiate majority being conservative, analysts see the rejection of affirmative action as more likely, which could generate a ripple effect.
Today, each American state has the autonomy to decide on the subject and, even within the same state, the rules can be different between public and private institutions. This level of autonomy prevents comprehensive monitoring of the model applied by the country.
For Erich Dietrich, a professor at New York University, the US can learn from Brazil in this regard. He explains, for example, that American schools do not usually publish lists with the names of candidates selected based on racial criteria, which prevents the monitoring of the academic trajectory of these students. “Brazil has much more data and transparency,” he says.
The problem also occurs in South Africa, which has a system similar to that of the Americans. Since 1997 —three years after the end of apartheid—, the country’s legislation requires public universities to repair past inequalities. Unlike Brazil, however, the government does not stipulate methods and targets to achieve this compensation, and institutions adopt their own criteria.
Still, Teboho Moja, a professor at the University of the Western Cape, says affirmative action in South Africa has been able to change the way universities look. “They’re not like a quota system, we target specific groups and remove obstacles they face. When two students have the same grade, the one chosen tends to be the one who came from marginalized groups,” she says.
Thus, according to her, historically white institutions today have a majority of black students. “This is due to demographics and public policies to create opportunities.” Blacks make up nearly 80% of the South African population.
Even so, there are groups against affirmative action in the country. The most famous of these is the right-wing Freedom Front Plus party, which considers the selection system racist. Its leader, Pieter Groenewald, says that the number of black graduates is high and that the model is already disposable.
Research by professors Laura Jenkins (University of Cincinnati) and Michele Moses (University of Colorado), in 2014, pointed out that 23% of countries have some type of affirmative action in selection processes for higher education. Of these, just under half have some legislation on the subject, like Brazil.
In the proportional comparison, Europe is the continent that most adopts affirmative action, followed by North America, Central America, Oceania and Asia. The explanation, the researchers point out, goes through the level of economic development of the countries. European nations have high levels of basic education and therefore can focus more on higher education – the opposite situation to Africa. The organizational capacity of local minority groups to demand favorable legislation also weighs.
In India, caste-based affirmative action was adopted in various spheres of the country as early as 1950, shortly after independence. But it was only from 2008 onwards that quotas in universities were included in the Constitution. Today, 50% of vacancies in higher education are reserved for underprivileged castes and poor people.
“There were heavy protests throughout the history of quotas in India. People went on hunger strike and even set their own bodies on fire”, explains Luiz Campos, coordinator of the Multidisciplinary Study Group on Affirmative Action (Gemaa), at Uerj.
Affirmative actions in higher education have been the subject of discussions regardless of the country in question, but in most cases they have shown to be effective in changing the appearance of universities. In the case of Brazil, Dietrich goes further: “The policy is working well and not only changes universities, but society. In comparison, I hope we can do better in the US.”
