How structural inequalities are impeding Americans’ aspirations for cross-racial cooperation

Economic Security & Mobility Race in Public Policy Social Equity & Inclusion

经济安全与公共政策中的流动性竞赛 社会公平与包容

Earlier this year, Brookings published the results of a Gallup survey and an accompanying analysis that revealed surprising trends regarding the state of interracial relations in the United States.

今年早些时候，布鲁金斯学会公布了盖洛普调查的结果以及随附的分析，揭示了美国种族关系状况的令人惊讶的趋势。

Even amid a media and political narrative of deteriorating race relations—from the murder of George Floyd and ensuing Black Lives Matter protests to the anti-diversity backlash of the current administration—the survey found Americans overwhelmingly resist any tendency toward racial bias in their personal and professional relationships.

即使在媒体和政治叙述种族关系恶化的情况下——从乔治·弗洛伊德被谋杀和随后的“黑人生命也是命”抗议活动到现任政府的反多元化强烈反对——调查发现，美国人绝大多数抵制个人和职业关系中的任何种族偏见倾向。

Rather than the conventional account of a country hopelessly marred by racial antagonism, the Gallup survey told a more hopeful story: Not only do the majority of Americans socialize comfortably across racial lines, but they also display an even greater willingness to work and do business with others regardless of race.

盖洛普调查讲述了一个更有希望的故事：大多数美国人不仅能够轻松地跨越种族界限进行社交，而且还表现出更愿意与他人合作和做生意，无论种族如何。

These results are encouraging.

这些结果令人鼓舞。

Yet the report also acknowledges some sobering facts.

然而该报告也承认了一些发人深省的事实。

Despite the high rates of self-reported cross-racial tolerance, racial inequality remains a stubborn feature of American life.

尽管自我报告的跨种族宽容率很高，但种族不平等仍然是美国生活的一个顽固特征。

This inequality continues to exist even in business and employment, where survey respondents displayed the most willingness to engage across race.

即使在商业和就业领域，这种不平等仍然存在，而受访者在这两个领域表现出最愿意跨种族参与的意愿。

How can these two opposing realities coexist?

这两个对立的现实如何共存？

Why does the survey reveal attitudes reflecting high levels of racial harmony and cohesion, while the empirical data suggest a country still defined by widespread racial inequality?

为什么调查显示的态度反映了高度的种族和谐和凝聚力，而实证数据表明一个国家仍然存在广泛的种族不平等？

In trying to reconcile the idealized picture of racial cooperation as self-reported among survey respondents with the reality of persistent racial inequality across society, the Brookings analysis identifies an important phenomenon that is unaccounted for in the survey, but that may help us better understand this gap: structural inequalities.

在试图调和调查受访者自我报告的种族合作的理想化景象与整个社会持续存在的种族不平等的现实时，布鲁金斯学会的分析发现了一个在调查中没有得到解释的重要现象，但这可能有助于我们更好地理解这种差距：结构性不平等。

Structural inequalities are systemic; they determine social outcomes irrespective of individual factors and operate separate and apart from the self-reported racial attitudes that are the subject of the Gallup survey.

结构性不平等是系统性的；他们决定社会结果，不考虑个人因素，并且与盖洛普调查的主题自我报告的种族态度分开运作。

These structural inequalities may explain the divergence between the positive self-reported racial attitudes in the survey and the real-world racial inequalities that continue to plague society.

这些结构性不平等或许可以解释调查中积极自我报告的种族态度与继续困扰社会的现实世界种族不平等之间的差异。

This report takes up the Brookings analysis’s implied invitation to explore the explanatory power of structural inequality for helping us reconcile our racially cooperative attitudes with the realities of ongoing racial inequality.

本报告采用了布鲁金斯分析的隐含邀请，探索结构性不平等的解释力，以帮助我们调和我们的种族合作态度与持续种族不平等的现实。

Developing this fuller picture of race relations can aid us in bridging the gap between the growing tolerance in our racial attitudes and our still uneven racial interactions.

更全面地了解种族关系可以帮助我们弥合日益增长的种族态度宽容与仍然不平衡的种族互动之间的差距。

Although the survey explores racial interactions across a range of different domains, the focus here is on the domains of business (defined as those with whom we choose to contract for services) and employment (defined as those with whom we work).

尽管该调查探讨了一系列不同领域的种族互动，但这里的重点是商业领域（定义为我们选择与之签订服务合同的人）和就业领域（定义为与我们一起工作的人）。

There are many reasons for focusing on these two domains in particular, including: 1) the survey results demonstrate the employment domain already has the highest rates of cross-racial interaction; 2) these rates will only increase with growing demographic diversity; 3) given the survey’s high rates of self-reported attitudes favoring racial cooperation in business and employment and the empirical evidence of ongoing racial inequality in business and employment, the gap between values and practice is greatest in these domains; and 4) the costs of this gap are exceedingly high for individuals, institutions, and society as a whole.

特别关注这两个领域的原因有很多，包括：1）调查结果表明，就业领域已经具有最高的跨种族互动率； 2）这些比率只会随着人口多样性的增加而增加； 3) 鉴于调查中自我报告的支持商业和就业中种族合作态度的比例很高，以及商业和就业中持续种族不平等的经验证据，价值观与实践之间的差距在这些领域是最大的； 4) 这种差距对于个人、机构和整个社会来说代价极其高昂。

By identifying and then mitigating the structural inequalities that prevent us from realizing our aspirations for greater cross-racial cohesion, we can more fully realize the hopeful potential for racial harmony reflected in the survey.

通过识别并减轻阻碍我们实现更大跨种族凝聚力愿望的结构性不平等，我们可以更充分地实现调查中反映的种族和谐的希望潜力。

As the Brookings analysis notes, fully realizing this potential is critical to our “social and economic health [in] a multiracial and multicultural society.” Moreover, redressing the persistent racial inequality that runs contrary to our country’s founding ethos brings us ever closer to our avowed social and political commitment to the guarantee of equal opportunity for all.

正如布鲁金斯学会的分析指出的那样，充分发挥这一潜力对于我们“在多种族和多文化社会中的社会和经济健康”至关重要。此外，纠正与我国建国精神背道而驰的持续存在的种族不平等，使我们更加接近我们所承诺的保证人人机会平等的社会和政治承诺。

As we celebrate the 250th anniversary of what is called the world’s greatest experiment in pluralist democracy, it is a fitting occasion to consider how we might recommit ourselves to the promise of building a nation where we are all truly equal—not just as an aspiration, but in the lived reality of everyday Americans.

在我们庆祝被称为世界上最伟大的多元化民主实验 250 周年之际，这是一个合适的时机来考虑我们如何重新致力于建设一个人人真正平等的国家的承诺——不仅仅是一个愿望，而是日常生活中美国人的现实。

The Gallup survey queried respondents about their cross-racial attitudes across a number of relevant domains, including business, work, personal friendships, romantic partnerships, and family, using the four dominant racial groups in the U.S.—white, Black, Latino or Hispanic, and Asian American—as the basis of analysis.

盖洛普调查以美国四大主要种族群体——白人、黑人、拉丁裔或西班牙裔以及亚裔美国人——为分析基础，询问了受访者在商业、工作、个人友谊、恋爱关系和家庭等多个相关领域的跨种族态度。

(As is often the case with large survey data, Native Americans were excluded due to the small number of these respondents, making rigorous statistical analysis difficult.)

（与大型调查数据经常出现的情况一样，美洲原住民由于受访者人数较少而被排除在外，这使得严格的统计分析变得困难。）

In each domain, respondents were asked to rate the importance of race in determining how they select or maintain these relationships and/or the impact of race in assessing the quality of these relationships.

在每个领域，受访者被要求评价种族在决定如何选择或维持这些关系方面的重要性和/或种族在评估这些关系质量方面的影响。

Overall, the survey reveals significant rates of cross-racial interactions across all domains, as well as relatively high levels of positive cross-racial sentiment, with race rarely influencing respondents’ conscious choices about, interactions with, or attitudes toward friends, business associates, coworkers, romantic partners, and family.

总体而言，调查显示，跨种族互动在所有领域的比例很高，积极的跨种族情绪也相对较高，种族很少影响受访者对朋友、商业伙伴、同事、恋人和家庭的有意识选择、互动或态度。

In other words, the survey results suggest there are relatively high levels of cross-racial tolerance and relatively low levels of cross-racial antagonism among individuals in the U.S. generally.

换句话说，调查结果表明，美国人总体上跨种族容忍度较高，跨种族对抗性相对较低。

Yet the report also acknowledges that these broadly positive cross-racial sentiments do not translate into predictably high levels of cross-racial interaction, particularly in the employment and contracting domains.

然而，报告也承认，这些广泛积极的跨种族情绪并没有转化为可预见的高水平跨种族互动，特别是在就业和合同领域。

Instead, respondents reported having significantly fewer cross-racial interactions in both domains than would be expected based on their favorable racial attitudes and existing population demographics.

相反，受访者表示，在这两个领域中的跨种族互动明显少于根据他们有利的种族态度和现有人口统计数据所预期的。

All racial groups analyzed had less cross-racial exposure to coworkers, bosses/managers/supervisors, and clients than would be expected based on the relative population shares for each racial group.

所分析的所有种族群体与同事、老板/经理/主管和客户的跨种族接触少于根据每个种族群体的相对人口比例所预期的。

These patterns confirm what the broader research data otherwise show: Notwithstanding low resistance to racial integration at work and in business (as reflected in the self-reported racial attitudes of survey respondents), racial inequality and occupational segregation remain stubborn features of employment and contracting in the U.S. If these racial inequalities are not the result of intentional selection biases (i.e., they are not born of racial intolerance, which the survey suggests they are not), then what explains them?

这些模式证实了更广泛的研究数据所表明的内容：尽管在工作和商业中对种族融合的抵制程度较低（正如调查受访者自我报告的种族态度所反映的那样），种族不平等和职业隔离仍然是美国就业和合同的顽固特征。如果这些种族不平等不是故意选择偏见的结果（即，它们不是由种族不容忍造成的，调查显示它们并非如此），那么如何解释它们呢？

Structural inequality seems to offer some explanatory value that the survey results on racial attitudes and other theories on racial bias cannot.

结构性不平等似乎提供了一些解释价值，这是种族态度调查结果和其他种族偏见理论无法提供的。

Popular economic theories about the irrationality of racial bias in business and employment posit that natural market forces will inevitably purge discrimination from those domains.

关于商业和就业中种族偏见非理性的流行经济理论认为，自然市场力量将不可避免地消除这些领域的歧视。

Put simply, if discrimination is bad for business, businesses will stop discriminating.

简而言之，如果歧视对企业不利，企业就会停止歧视。

Yet, if these theories were true, Congress would not have had to enact the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1964 outlawing racial discrimination in contracting and employment, respectively—both of which remain in force today.

然而，如果这些理论属实，国会就不必分别颁布 1866 年和 1964 年的《民权法案》，分别禁止合同和就业方面的种族歧视——这两项法案至今仍然有效。

If the irrationality of racial discrimination was simply an unstoppable market force driving us inevitably toward the elimination of racial inequality, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the federal agency charged with enforcement of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, would not have reported an increase in the number of workplace discrimination charges filed between 2020 and 2024 (from 67,448 to 88,531), with those alleging discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin comprising the largest share of charges filed in each year.

如果种族歧视的非理性只是一股不可阻挡的市场力量，驱使我们不可避免地消除种族不平等，那么负责执行 1964 年《民权法案》的联邦机构平等就业机会委员会就不会报告 2020 年至 2024 年间提出的工作场所歧视指控数量的增加（从 67,448 起至 88,531 起），其中指控基于种族、肤色或民族的歧视来源地占每年提出的指控的最大份额。

Data show that notwithstanding legal prohibitions on and social disapproval of racial discrimination, racial inequalities remain pervasive in both employment and contracting.

数据显示，尽管法律禁止种族歧视，社会也反对种族歧视，但就业和合同方面的种族不平等仍然普遍存在。

There is ongoing underrepresentation of racial minorities in various professions , from medicine and STEM fields to law .

从医学、STEM 领域到法律领域，少数族裔在各个职业中的代表性持续不足。

This underrepresentation tends to grow as one moves up the professional ladder, suggesting that racial inequality affects promotions as well as hiring decisions.

随着职业阶梯的晋升，这种代表性不足的现象往往会加剧，这表明种族不平等会影响晋升和招聘决策。

These disparities are evident in tester studies that reveal the racialized patterns impacting employment, and there are similar racial inequities in awarding contracts and capital funding in business.

这些差异在测试人员研究中很明显，这些研究揭示了影响就业的种族模式，并且在授予合同和商业资本融资方面也存在类似的种族不平等。

The data show that we are not moving inevitably toward a society free from racial inequality when it comes to who gets awarded employment or contracting opportunities.

数据表明，在谁获得就业或承包机会方面，我们并没有不可避免地走向一个没有种族不平等的社会。

The Gallup survey attests to the fact that our cross-racial attitudes are in fact improving; still, we remain plagued by ongoing racial inequality.

盖洛普调查证明，我们的跨种族态度实际上正在改善；尽管如此，我们仍然受到持续存在的种族不平等的困扰。

Our attitudes about race are no longer the biggest obstacle we face to achieving racial equality.

我们对种族的态度不再是我们实现种族平等面临的最大障碍。

The problem instead seems to lie somewhere in the structural inequalities that lay hidden beneath the veneer of racial harmony reflected in the survey.

相反，问题似乎在于隐藏在调查所反映的种族和谐外表之下的结构性不平等。

It might be that we need not worry about our progress toward racial equality if we thought it was in fact inevitable, or if there were little to no social and economic costs associated with our glacial pace.

如果我们认为种族平等实际上是不可避免的，或者如果我们的缓慢步伐几乎没有社会和经济成本，那么我们可能就不必担心种族平等的进展。

But neither is true.

但两者都不是真的。

Decades of civil rights enforcement have proven the economic theory of the rational market actor false and the current tools inadequate for realizing the goals of equal opportunity.

数十年的民权执法已经证明理性市场参与者的经济理论是错误的，并且当前的工具不足以实现机会均等的目标。

The costs of this failure are enormous.

这次失败的代价是巨大的。

First, there are the social costs.

首先是社会成本。

We profess a moral and legal commitment to equality, and the survey demonstrates that our cross-racial attitudes largely match this commitment.

我们宣示对平等的道德和法律承诺，调查表明我们的跨种族态度在很大程度上符合这一承诺。

But the data also show we continue to experience widespread racial inequality.

但数据还显示，我们继续经历广泛的种族不平等。

This is not just a betrayal of our fundamental ideals as a nation, but also a betrayal of the individual aspirations of millions of Americans who the survey reveals deeply believe in racial equality.

这不仅背叛了我们作为一个国家的基本理想，而且背叛了数百万美国人的个人愿望，调查显示，他们深信种族平等。

Second, there are significant economic costs to racial inequality.

其次，种族不平等会带来巨大的经济成本。

These costs have been quantified in various ways, including lost wages (calculated at $1 trillion to $2 trillion lost each year), reduced wealth , and lower overall gross domestic product —not to mention the higher health care costs associated with increased disease (both physical and mental) due to racial discrimination.

这些成本可以通过多种方式量化，包括工资损失（按每年损失 1 万亿至 2 万亿美元计算）、财富减少和国内生产总值总体下降——更不用说因种族歧视而导致疾病（身体和精神）增加而带来的更高的医疗费用。

In spite of decades (if not centuries) of dedicated efforts to create a harmonious multiracial society, the evidence suggests that racial inequality has stubbornly persisted.

尽管数十年（如果不是几个世纪）致力于创建和谐的多种族社会，证据表明种族不平等仍然顽固地存在。

This gap between our espoused ideals and our current reality has dire social and economic consequences.

我们所拥护的理想与当前现实之间的差距造成了可怕的社会和经济后果。

The survey suggests that closing this gap is no longer about changing individual attitudes toward race, which—despite widespread media reporting to the contrary—is overwhelmingly positive.

调查表明，缩小这一差距不再是改变个人对种族的态度，尽管媒体广泛报道相反的情况，但这种态度绝大多数是积极的。

It is about something deeper, but not outside of our control.

这是关于更深层次的事情，但并非超出我们的控制范围。

One phenomenon that might help explain this continuing gap between our positive aspirations for and attitudes toward racial equality and the reality of persistent racial inequality is structural inequality.

结构性不平等可能有助于解释我们对种族平等的积极愿望和态度与持续种族不平等的现实之间持续存在的差距。

Structural inequalities are the systems that determine social outcomes irrespective of factors operating at the individual level.

结构性不平等是决定社会结果的系统，无论个人层面上的因素如何。

They are systemic and exist wholly apart from the self-reported racial attitudes documented in the survey.

它们是系统性的，完全独立于调查中记录的自我报告的种族态度。

This is the reason why it is possible for the survey to identify very high rates of cross-racial tolerance among respondents and low rates of racial salience in their employment and contracting decisions, while at the same time acknowledging broad patterns of ongoing racial inequality in society generally, as well as lower-than-expected rates of cross-racial interaction even among survey respondents.

这就是为什么调查有可能发现受访者的跨种族宽容率非常高，而在就业和合同决策中种族突出率较低，同时承认社会上普遍存在的种族不平等的广泛模式，以及即使在调查受访者中跨种族互动率也低于预期的原因。

Structural inequality includes the residential segregation that hinders cross-racial interactions regardless of individual attitudes valuing cross-racial cooperation.

结构性不平等包括阻碍跨种族互动的居住隔离，无论个人对跨种族合作的态度如何。

For instance, funding formulas and attendance zones that track district lines keep minority students trapped in racially isolated, low performing K-12 schools regardless of our long-standing commitment to school integration or individual student ability.

例如，尽管我们长期致力于学校融合或学生个人能力，但遵循学区界限的资助公式和出勤区使少数族裔学生陷入种族孤立、表现不佳的 K-12 学校。

Similarly, admissions and/or hiring requirements (e.g., standardized tests or degree requirements) often over-exclude minority applicants from educational and employment opportunities regardless of individual potential and in spite of professed commitments to diversity .

同样，招生和/或招聘要求（例如标准化考试或学位要求）常常过度地将少数族裔申请者排除在教育和就业机会之外，无论个人潜力如何，也尽管公开承诺对多样性的承诺。

These barriers do not require racial animus by individual decisionmakers, nor do they necessarily reflect individual deficiencies on the part of the those excluded.

这些障碍并不需要个人决策者存在种族敌意，也不一定反映出被排除在外的人的个人缺陷。

They may be quite unintentional, but they are nonetheless pervasive in determining how opportunity gets distributed across society.

它们可能是无意的，但它们在决定机会如何在社会中分配方面仍然普遍存在。

Combating these structural inequalities is not a function of shifting ideologies about race or altering individual behaviors—it is about restructuring systems of opportunity.

对抗这些结构性不平等并不是要改变种族意识形态或改变个人行为，而是要重组机会系统。

Research has shown that these structural inequalities mean minority families are less likely than white families to live in predominantly white (and correspondingly, economically affluent) neighborhoods.

研究表明，这些结构性不平等意味着少数族裔家庭比白人家庭生活在以白人为主（相应地经济富裕）的社区的可能性更小。

These are spaces where the socialization necessary for the cross-racial friendships, intimate partner relationships, and business contacts that the survey studied often occur.

在这些空间中，调查所研究的跨种族友谊、亲密伙伴关系和业务联系所必需的社交活动经常发生。

It is no wonder then that in spite of the survey findings showing that respondents generally did not consciously take race into account when making decisions about whom to befriend, date, or hire, the empirical data show actual rates of cross-racial friendships, relationships, and employment/contracting are lower than otherwise expected based on racial attitudes and local population demographics.

难怪尽管调查结果显示，受访者在决定与谁交友、约会或雇用谁时通常不会有意识地考虑种族因素，但实证数据显示，跨种族友谊、关系和就业/合同的实际比率低于基于种族态度和当地人口统计数据的预期。

In other words, respondents said they did not care about the race of their friends, coworkers, or business associates—but in reality, these relationships tend to reflect residential segregation as much as racial attitudes.

换句话说，受访者表示他们并不关心朋友、同事或商业伙伴的种族，但实际上，这些关系往往反映了居住隔离和种族态度。

For example, 83% of survey respondents said that race was not important in deciding whom to befriend.

例如，83% 的受访者表示，种族对于决定与谁交朋友并不重要。

Yet the survey found that white respondents were the only group likely to have more cross-racial friendships than local population demographics would predict (by only 6%), while also being the group with the lowest overall rate of cross-racial friendships.

然而调查发现，白人受访者是唯一一个可能拥有比当地人口统计预测更多的跨种族友谊的群体（仅 6%），同时也是跨种族友谊总体比例最低的群体。

Only 69% of white respondents reported having any cross-racial friendships, compared to 70% of Black respondents, 76% of Latino or Hispanic respondents, and 80% of Asian American respondents.

只有 69% 的白人受访者表示拥有跨种族友谊，而黑人受访者的比例为 70%，拉丁裔或西班牙裔受访者的比例为 76%，亚裔受访者的比例为 80%。

This is because white Americans are still likely to live in mostly white neighborhoods.

这是因为美国白人仍然可能居住在以白人为主的社区。

In addition, the survey found that Black, Latino or Hispanic, and Asian Americans had rates of cross-racial friendships that were 42%, 21%, and 38% lower, respectively, than expected based on local population demographics.

此外，调查还发现，黑人、拉丁裔或西班牙裔以及亚裔美国人的跨种族友谊比例分别比根据当地人口统计数据得出的预期低 42%、21% 和 38%。

These lower-than-expected rates among minority respondents are more consistent with entrenched residential segregation—where each of these groups is likely to live in neighborhoods with higher concentrations of their own racial group, and lower concentrations of other racial groups, than in the local population—than they are with the respondents’ own cross-racial attitudes.

少数族裔受访者中低于预期的比率更符合根深蒂固的居住隔离——与当地人口相比，这些群体中的每一个群体可能居住在自己种族群体集中度较高、其他种族群体集中度较低的社区中——而不是与受访者自己的跨种族态度一致。

Similarly, the survey found that while 87% of respondents said race was not important to their business selection decisions, all groups were less likely to have cross-racial coworkers than local population demographics would predict.

同样，调查发现，虽然 87% 的受访者表示种族对于他们的业务选择决策并不重要，但所有群体拥有跨种族同事的可能性都低于当地人口统计数据的预测。

This time, the gaps ranged from only 1% for white Americans to 20% for Asian, 35% for Black, and 38% for Latino or Hispanic Americans.

这次，差距从美国白人仅为 1%，亚裔为 20%，黑人为 35%，拉丁裔或西班牙裔美国人为 38%。

While coworkers are not a perfect proxy for business contractors, there is some overlap between the employment and contracting domains insofar as both reflect professional (versus personal) relationships.

虽然同事并不是商业承包商的完美代表，但雇佣和承包领域之间存在一些重叠，因为两者都反映了职业（相对于个人）关系。

Client relationships are a better proxy for business contracting.

客户关系是业务合同的更好代表。

Here too, the survey data show that cross-racial client relationships were generally lower than would be expected based on reported racial attitudes and population demographics, especially for Black respondents, whose rate was 27% lower than expected.

调查数据也显示，跨种族客户关系普遍低于根据报告的种族态度和人口统计数据得出的预期，尤其是黑人受访者，其比率比预期低 27%。

Once again, lack of proximity as a consequence of racial segregation in neighborhoods —and correspondingly, in schools —likely contributes to this discrepancy between our aspirations for cross-racial cooperation reflected in the survey data and the lower actual rates of cross-racial interaction identified.

再一次，由于社区中以及相应地在学校中的种族隔离，缺乏接近性可能导致了调查数据中反映的跨种族合作愿望与所确定的较低的实际跨种族互动率之间的差异。

Moreover, some of the criteria that respondents identified as salient to their business selection decisions, while ostensibly race-neutral, are nevertheless marked by significant racial disparities.

此外，受访者认为对其业务选择决策至关重要的一些标准虽然表面上与种族无关，但实际上存在显着的种族差异。

Across the two business selection scenarios presented in the survey, 84% to 85% of respondents cited nonracial selection criteria—such as degree attainment and other job-related certifications, years of experience, and recommendations—to explain their selection decisions.

在调查中提出的两个企业选择场景中，84% 至 85% 的受访者引用了非种族选择标准（例如学位和其他与工作相关的认证、多年经验和建议）来解释他们的选择决定。

Each of these, however, are associated with known structural inequalities.

然而，这些都与已知的结构性不平等有关。

Degree attainment, particularly in the STEM disciplines associated with the survey’s computer programming scenario, is a domain of society where unequal access to education has resulted in significant racial disparities .

学位获得，特别是与调查的计算机编程场景相关的 STEM 学科，是一个社会领域，教育机会不平等导致了显着的种族差异。

Similarly, recommendations are likely to reflect existing racial disparities in employment.

同样，建议可能反映就业方面现有的种族差异。

These criteria, therefore, pose a structural barrier to greater cross-racial interaction in business contracting, notwithstanding the high levels of cross-racial tolerance measured in the survey.

因此，尽管调查中测得的跨种族容忍度很高，但这些标准对商业承包中更大的跨种族互动构成了结构性障碍。

Structural inequalities keep many social domains—including our neighborhoods, schools, and workplaces—more racially segregated than we would like or expect, impeding both individuals and society from fully realizing the shared desire for greater cross-racial cohesion.

结构性不平等使许多社会领域——包括我们的社区、学校和工作场所——的种族隔离程度超出了我们的意愿或预期，阻碍了个人和社会充分实现增强跨种族凝聚力的共同愿望。

This helps to explain, at least in part, why despite high rates of cross-racial tolerance reflected in the survey, Americans nevertheless continue to socialize and date intra-racially, and also tend to have much more racially segregated workplaces and business contacts than predicted based on population demographics.

这至少在一定程度上有助于解释为什么尽管调查中反映的跨种族宽容率很高，但美国人仍然继续进行跨种族的社交和约会，而且种族隔离的工作场所和商业联系往往比根据人口统计数据预测的要多得多。

According to the Gallup survey, those who said race was “not important at all” in selecting a business contractor ranged from 72% for Black respondents to 91% for white respondents.

根据盖洛普调查，认为种族在选择商业承包商时“一点也不重要”的受访者比例从 72%（黑人受访者）到 91%（白人受访者）不等。

Indeed, the vast majority of respondents expressed race-neutral (84% to 85%) and job-related (66% to 78%) reasons for their selection decisions.

事实上，绝大多数受访者在做出选择时都表达了种族中立（84% 至 85%）和与工作相关（66% 至 78%）的原因。

Yet we know these hypothetical self-reported preferences do not correspond to real-world data.

然而我们知道这些假设的自我报告偏好与现实世界的数据并不相符。

Even the survey data show that Black respondents are much less likely to have cross-racial client relationships than population demographics would suggest: Only 60% of Black respondents had non-Black clients, despite the fact that 88% of the U.S. adult population is non-Black and 87% of respondents said race was unimportant to their business contractor selections.

甚至调查数据也显示，黑人受访者建立跨种族客户关系的可能性比人口统计数据显示的要小得多：只有 60% 的黑人受访者拥有非黑人客户，尽管事实上 88% 的美国成年人口是非黑人，并且 87% 的受访者表示种族对于他们选择商业承包商来说并不重要。

Where the survey fails to explain the discrepancy between positive cross-racial attitudes and lower-than-expected cross-racial interactions, structural inequality offers strong explanatory power.

如果调查未能解释积极的跨种族态度与低于预期的跨种族互动之间的差异，结构性不平等提供了强大的解释力。

For instance, Black Americans are more likely to live in racially isolated communities and attend under-resourced schools that do not adequately prepare them to earn STEM degrees, and are less likely to obtain employment in professional occupations (including STEM fields).

例如，美国黑人更有可能生活在种族隔离的社区，就读于资源匮乏的学校，这些学校无法为他们获得 STEM 学位做好充分准备，并且不太可能在专业职业（包括 STEM 领域）获得就业机会。

This means that when someone relies on education, experience, and recommendations to award business contracts, they are implicitly relying on race.

这意味着，当某人依靠教育、经验和推荐来授予商业合同时，他们就隐含地依赖种族。

Understanding how to mitigate the dampening effects of these structural inequalities on our positive cross-racial attitudes could prove significant in bridging the gap between our aspirations for cross-racial cooperation and the seemingly intractable reality of racial inequality.

了解如何减轻这些结构性不平等对我们积极的跨种族态度的抑制作用，对于缩小我们对跨种族合作的渴望与看似棘手的种族不平等现实之间的差距具有重要意义。

Ongoing patterns of residential and educational segregation—both of which trace in large part to structural factors such as housing and educational policy—play a key part in thwarting our racial equality goals.

持续存在的居住和教育隔离模式——这两者在很大程度上可以追溯到住房和教育政策等结构性因素——在阻碍我们的种族平等目标方面发挥着关键作用。

These structural inequalities then get replicated in business, influencing who we hire and with whom we contract.

这些结构性不平等随后会在商业中复制，影响我们雇用谁以及与谁签订合同。

Disrupting these patterns requires that we identify effective mitigation strategies.

打破这些模式需要我们确定有效的缓解策略。

Both K-12 and higher education remain racially stratified in the U.S. despite decades of civil rights enforcement through desegregation and affirmative action policies.

尽管美国几十年来通过废除种族隔离和平权行动政策来实施民权，但 K-12 和高等教育仍然存在种族分层。

Consequently, workplaces and business relationships also reflect these same patterns of segregation and stratification.

因此，工作场所和业务关系也反映了这些相同的隔离和分层模式。

Today, these inequities are more a function of embedded systems of inequality than intolerant racial attitudes.

如今，这些不平等更多地是内在不平等制度的结果，而不是不宽容的种族态度。

Historically, our approach to anti-discrimination enforcement has focused on intentional discrimination by what we presumed to be racially intolerant individuals.

从历史上看，我们的反歧视执法方法一直侧重于我们认为是种族不宽容的个人的故意歧视。

But as racial attitudes have shifted, this paradigm has become less effective for achieving our racial equality goals.

但随着种族态度的转变，这种范式对于实现我们的种族平等目标已经变得不那么有效。

Ridding ourselves of the racial inequities that have persisted in spite of these efforts requires new strategies designed to target the known structural barriers to racial equality.

尽管做出了这些努力，但要消除仍然存在的种族不平等现象，需要制定新的战略，以消除已知的种族平等结构性障碍。

However, these interventions raise important normative questions as well as legal compliance concerns.

然而，这些干预措施引发了重要的规范问题以及法律合规问题。

Namely, how do we realize our aims for a more racially integrated society without violating our commitments to individual liberty and nondiscrimination?

也就是说，我们如何在不违反我们对个人自由和非歧视的承诺的情况下实现建立种族更加融合的社会的目标？

In other words, if we cannot dictate where people work or go to school, nor can we make racialized admissions or hiring decisions, how can we effectively mitigate these known structural inequalities?

换句话说，如果我们不能规定人们在哪里工作或上学，也不能做出种族化的招生或雇用决定，我们如何才能有效地减轻这些已知的结构性不平等？

First, while we cannot pursue these racial equality goals by employing unlawful racial preferences, we can do so in permissible, race-neutral ways.

首先，虽然我们不能通过利用非法的种族偏好来实现这些种族平等目标，但我们可以通过允许的、种族中立的方式来实现这些目标。

Second, reducing artificial barriers to entry is one of the most effective race-neutral means of combating these structural inequalities.

其次，减少人为的进入壁垒是对抗这些结构性不平等的最有效的种族中立手段之一。

In fact, there are already effective—and legally permissible—models for responding to each of these structural barriers.

事实上，已经有有效且法律允许的模式来应对这些结构性障碍。

Although the Supreme Court has prohibited the use of race in college admission decisions, there is no prohibition on the continued pursuit of student body diversity in higher education by race-neutral means.

尽管最高法院禁止在大学录取决定中考虑种族因素，但并不禁止在高等教育中通过种族中立的方式继续追求学生群体的多样性。

In fact, the Supreme Court has continued to describe the pursuit of student body diversity (including racial diversity) in higher education as both a “worthy” and “commendable” goal .

事实上，最高法院继续将高等教育中追求学生群体多样性（包括种族多样性）描述为“值得”和“值得赞扬”的目标。

Moreover, much like the high rates of cross-racial tolerance in the business and employment domains expressed in the survey, students similarly value racial diversity in higher education.

此外，就像调查中所表达的商业和就业领域的高跨种族宽容率一样，学生同样重视高等教育中的种族多样性。

Most Americans expressed support for the Supreme Court’s decision striking down affirmative action in college admissions, but overwhelming majorities also express support for diversity.

大多数美国人表示支持最高法院废除大学招生中平权行动的决定，但绝大多数人也表示支持多样性。

The question, therefore, is not whether we can (or ought to) pursue diversity in higher education; the question is how best to do so without running afoul of the law.

因此，问题不在于我们是否能够（或应该）追求高等教育的多样性；而在于我们是否能够（或应该）追求高等教育的多样性。问题是如何最好地做到这一点而不触犯法律。

Many colleges and universities have successfully responded to the prohibition on using race in admission decisions by modifying their admissions processes in lawful, race-neutral ways.

许多学院和大学通过以合法、种族中立的方式修改招生流程，成功应对了在录取决定中考虑种族因素的禁令。

One of the key strategies has been to eliminate artificial barriers to entry, such as overreliance on standardized test scores.

关键策略之一是消除人为的进入障碍，例如过度依赖标准化考试成绩。

Structural inequalities in K-12 education, which remains highly racially segregated, cause standardized tests to replicate these inequalities in higher education.

K-12 教育中的结构性不平等仍然存在高度的种族隔离，导致标准化考试在高等教育中复制了这些不平等。

In light of the difficulties of directly addressing the more intractable structural inequalities in K-12 schools (which requires changes to local zoning laws and restructuring school funding formulas), efforts by colleges and universities remain critical for combating existing structural inequalities in education.

鉴于直接解决 K-12 学校中更棘手的结构性不平等的困难（这需要修改当地的分区法并重组学校资助公式），学院和大学的努力对于消除教育中现有的结构性不平等仍然至关重要。

In spite of Trump administration efforts to target colleges and universities for their ongoing pursuit of student body diversity, these practices were endorsed by the Supreme Court, and no court has yet found any college or university liable under civil rights laws for utilizing race-neutral means to achieve diversity.

尽管特朗普政府努力针对学院和大学持续追求学生群体多样性，但这些做法得到了最高法院的认可，而且尚未有法院认定任何学院或大学因利用种族中立手段实现多样性而根据民权法承担责任。

Just as the effects of structural inequality in education get replicated in the workplace, higher education institutions’ efforts to mitigate these inequalities can also be replicated in the workplace.

正如教育结构性不平等的影响会在工作场所复制一样，高等教育机构减轻这些不平等的努力也可以在工作场所复制。

Work is the natural extension of the educational experience: Students become workers, and workplaces supplant schools as the primary domain of cross-racial contact for most Americans, who continue to largely live and socialize in racially segregated neighborhoods.

工作是教育经历的自然延伸：学生成为工人，工作场所取代学校成为大多数美国人跨种族接触的主要领域，他们仍然主要在种族隔离的社区生活和社交。

In fact, for the vast majority of Americans who do not earn a college degree, the workplace is their first and primary domain of cross-racial interaction.

事实上，对于绝大多数没有获得大学学位的美国人来说，工作场所是他们跨种族互动的第一个也是主要的领域。

The survey confirms that while the vast majority of respondents had cross-racial interactions at work (81%), the rates of cross-racial friendships (54%) and romantic relationships (25%) were far lower.

调查证实，虽然绝大多数受访者在工作中进行过跨种族互动（81%），但跨种族友谊（54%）和浪漫关系（25%）的比例要低得多。

This makes the workplace a central engine driving our aspirations for cross-racial harmony and cooperation.

这使得工作场所成为推动我们实现跨种族和谐与合作愿望的核心引擎。

To avoid running afoul of civil rights laws, employers should also identify race-neutral efforts to ensure that workplaces are as racially diverse as possible given local demographics.

为了避免与民权法发生冲突，雇主还应该采取种族中立的措施，以确保工作场所在考虑到当地人口结构的情况下尽可能实现种族多元化。

This might entail eliminating closed network hiring (since such referral hiring tends to replicate the existing demographics of the workplace), and instead ensuring that open positions are advertised as widely as possible .

这可能需要消除封闭的网络招聘（因为此类推荐招聘往往会复制工作场所现有的人口统计数据），并确保尽可能广泛地宣传空缺职位。

Also, similar to colleges and universities, these efforts should entail reducing artificial barriers to entry that disproportionately exclude racial minorities, such as degree requirements and unvalidated job testing.

此外，与学院和大学类似，这些努力应该包括减少不成比例地排除少数族裔的人为准入障碍，例如学位要求和未经验证的工作测试。

Data show that eliminating these types of artificial barriers to entry can help expand opportunity and reduce racial inequality in the workplace without violating the law or compromising an employer’s legitimate hiring needs.

数据显示，消除这些类型的人为进入壁垒有助于扩大机会并减少工作场所的种族不平等，而不会违反法律或损害雇主的合法招聘需求。

Indeed, during his first term, President Donald Trump signed an executive order focusing on skills-based hiring in lieu of degree requirements for a host of federal jobs, and this requirement was recently put into effect by the Office of Personnel Management .

事实上，唐纳德·特朗普总统在他的第一个任期内签署了一项行政命令，重点关注基于技能的招聘，以取代许多联邦职位的学位要求，而这一要求最近由人事管理办公室实施。

In both higher education and business/employment, the goal should be to cast as wide a net as possible for talented individuals and to ensure that selection mechanisms do not needlessly screen out any qualified applicants.

在高等教育和商业/就业领域，目标应该是为有才华的个人撒下尽可能广泛的网，并确保选拔机制不会不必要地筛选掉任何合格的申请人。

This expands the racial diversity of the applicant pool, making it more likely that diverse applicants can be selected (whether for admission or hire) without relying on the legally impermissible consideration of race in selection decisions.

这扩大了申请者群体的种族多样性，使得更有可能选择不同的申请者（无论是录取还是雇用），而无需在选择决策中依赖法律不允许的种族考虑。

While the law proscribes taking race into account when making selection decisions in admissions and employment, it does not prohibit race-neutral efforts designed to eliminate racial inequality and improve racial diversity.

虽然法律禁止在招生和就业方面做出选择时考虑种族因素，但它并不禁止旨在消除种族不平等和改善种族多样性的种族中立努力。

Quite the contrary: The law has long encouraged both schools and employers to adopt such race-neutral efforts as part of their ongoing commitment to ensuring equal opportunity.

恰恰相反：法律长期以来一直鼓励学校和雇主采取这种种族中立的努力，作为他们持续致力于确保平等机会的一部分。

These race-neutral efforts must become a key strategy for mitigating the known structural inequalities that continue to prevent us from realizing our collective and individual aspirations for greater racial cohesion (defined as increased cross-racial interactions that are marked by harmony rather than antagonism) across society.

这些种族中立的努力必须成为缓解已知的结构性不平等的关键战略，这些不平等继续阻碍我们实现整个社会的集体和个人对更大种族凝聚力（定义为增加以和谐而不是对抗为特征的跨种族互动）的愿望。

Notwithstanding media reports of a society riven by racial strife, the Gallup survey reveals that Americans’ tolerance (even desire) for cross-racial cooperation is much higher than expected.

尽管媒体报道社会因种族冲突而分裂，但盖洛普调查显示，美国人对跨种族合作的容忍度（甚至渴望）远高于预期。

It is heartening to know that we do not lack the will to achieve racial equality in our society.

令人振奋的是，我们并不缺乏在社会中实现种族平等的意愿。

What we face are significant, but not insurmountable, headwinds to accomplishing that goal.

我们在实现这一目标方面面临着重大但并非不可克服的阻力。

The survey also reveals that our underrealized aspirations for cross-racial harmony—i.e. , the gap between our cross-racial aspirations and our cross-racial interactions—can likely be explained, at least in part, by structural inequality.

调查还显示，我们对跨种族和谐的愿望没有实现——即，我们的跨种族愿望和跨种族互动之间的差距，很可能至少部分地可以通过结构性不平等来解释。

What we need then are effective interventions to help offset the drag of structural inequality on our aspirations for greater cross-racial cooperation.

那么我们需要的是有效的干预措施，以帮助抵消结构性不平等对我们加强跨种族合作的愿望的拖累。

These mitigating efforts must involve fostering greater racial diversity in colleges and workplaces, where most Americans experience their first and most meaningful cross-racial interactions.

这些缓解措施必须包括在大学和工作场所促进更大的种族多样性，大多数美国人在这里经历了第一次也是最有意义的跨种族互动。

These institutions—which are already our most diverse spaces, and the places where people express the highest interest in cross-racial cooperation—are best suited to help realize our individual and societal aspirations for greater racial equality.

这些机构已经是我们最多元化的空间，也是人们对跨种族合作表现出最高兴趣的地方，最适合帮助实现我们个人和社会对更大种族平等的愿望。

On the nation’s 250th anniversary, there is no better time for us to commit anew to our collective aspirations for racial harmony and finally make the guarantee of equal opportunity for all a meaningful reality rather than just a lofty ideal.

在建国250周年之际，现在正是我们重新致力于实现种族和谐的集体愿望，并最终使人人享有平等机会的保证成为有意义的现实而不仅仅是一个崇高理想的最佳时机。

The Brookings Institution is committed to quality, independence, and impact.

布鲁金斯学会致力于质量、独立性和影响力。

We are supported by a diverse array of funders .

我们得到了众多资助者的支持。

In line with our values and policies , each Brookings publication represents the sole views of its author(s).

根据我们的价值观和政策，布鲁金斯学会的每份出版物均代表其作者的唯一观点。

Economic Security & Mobility Race in Public Policy Social Equity & Inclusion

经济安全与公共政策中的流动性竞赛 社会公平与包容