International perspectives on positive action measures: A comparative
analysis in the European Union, Canada, United States and South Africa
Conference proceedings
The EC conference on ‘International perspectives on positive action’ was held in Brussels,
Belgium on 19 February 2009. The day consisted of welcome and opening plenary session,
keynote presentations, exemplars of positive action and panel discussion. The sessions focused
on positive action in employment and service delivery across public, private and third sectors.
Over 80 participants representing a wide range of roles and sectors including public
authorities, trade unions, legal services, employers, equality bodies, education institutions,
police forces and health services, attended the conference.
The following proceedings outline the main points presented by speakers and panelists, and the
discussion that followed.
Welcome session
Belinda Pyke welcomed participants on behalf of the European Commission and thanked the
PAMECUS project team for a sterling work in delivering the project on time. She emphasised
that this study highlights best practices and recommendations around positive action.
Alongside significant EC Directives, this study represents the commitment of the European
Commission toward eradicating discriminatory practices in the area of employment as well as
outside. The Commission sees the importance of communicating the definition of positive
action and building through it a common understanding of the term. Further, she also
underlined a number of efforts to be undertaken in order to ensure the effectiveness of
positive action measures. Belinda mentioned among others data collection, inclusion of
different actors and ongoing education of general public as key factors for a successful positive
action measures.
Michael Cashman, Member of European Parliament, charted the historical dimension of equal
opportunities movement in Europe highlighting the early struggles to challenge the traditional
hierarchy of diversity. He emphasised the importance of political will in challenging
discrimination and the need for combating discrimination across all diversity strands. He also
stressed the importance of addressing positive action issues through all actors and institutions,
including the European Parliament.
Question and Answer session:
A member of the audience asked the MEP: Given all the studies on positive action, how
optimistic are we that recommendations from this seminar will advance efforts to eradicate
discrimination in practice.
Keynote Speakers
Mark Bell from the University of Leicester gave an overview of EU law around positive action
(and specific ECJ judgments). Professor Bell drew upon the PAMECUS findings to compare EU
and non-EU countries legislative frameworks. He emphasised that the predominant feature of
positive action within EC legislation its permissive nature. Professor Bell argued that there do
not appear to be any obligations to take positive action and consequently it is unsurprising to
find that national practice varies greatly in this area. He maintained that this diversity relates
both to the grounds where positive action is permitted or required, as well as the extent to
which national legislation imposes duties on organisations to engage in positive action.
Professor Bell asserted that case studies from the non-EU countries (Canada, US and South
Africa) illustrated a greater willingness to oblige public and private sector organisations to
promote equality and to take positive action. He argued that the US Supreme Court has gone
further than Europe with respect to affirmative action decisions; however US Supreme Court
decision is more nuanced.
Uduak Archibong from the University of Bradford presented an overview of the PAMECUS study.
She explained that the study was undertaken to help the EC develop a framework for better
understanding the role that positive action measures can play in practice in preventing or
remedying discrimination and gain an insight into the kind of practical positive action measures
already being taken in the EU (and in the EFTA-EEA countries), as well as the possible costs and
benefits of the positive action measures. She pointed out that the study examined how legal
frameworks, policies and practices of positive action in the European Union compare with
Canada, United States and South Africa. Professor Archibong presented legal definition of
positive action produced by the PAMECUS study.
Professor Archibong highlighted confusion and inconsistency in the terminologies used to
describe positive measures across the study countries and lack of disaggregated data in key
sectoral fields. The study identified legislation as the main driver for positive action. It
emphasised the role of wider societal support as essential for the success of position action
programmes. A major problem identified by the study in relation to the effectiveness of
positive action relates to the lack of systematic monitoring in terms of outputs and outcomes.
Professor Archibong made a number of recommendations. She pointed to the need to create a
European-level framework of understanding of positive action measures and to define specific
indicators of success in the implementation of these measures. She stressed the role of
governments in educating the general public through ‘social marketing’ about positive action in
order to address widespread misunderstandings that appear to exist, and to facilitate the
linking up of various stakeholders already engaged in such measures.
Niall Crowley, an independent expert, in responding to the PAMECUS study, argued that this
study was very timely and important given the present economic downturn. He stated that the
economic context could easily be used as a rationale for undermining positive action for
equality. However, he warned that this would be a wrong course of action. Niall identified
four key themes that emerged from this study, namely:
 Positive action as an expression of our ambition for equality across the European Union
 Marketing positive action as this new ambition for equality
 Creating a policy context for positive action
 Creating an organisational practice context for positive action
In conclusion, Niall emphasised the need to develop standards for the design of positive action
alongside broader anti-discrimination measures.
Ronald Craig from University of Oslo gave an overview of positive action in the non-EU context.
Ronald focused on affirmative (positive) action measures in North America, and in particular
examined ‘positive action regimes’ as enforcement mechanisms of positive action measures.
In conclusion, Ronald argued that positive duties can be effective in promoting equality with
the same kind of rigour as health and safety regulations.
Exemplars of positive action
This session was chaired by Dr Karl Atkin from University of York. Dr Atkin began by
acknowledging the importance of the conference in providing an opportunity to discuss and
disseminate real life examples of positive action measures. He proceeded to introduce each
speaker and at the end of the session, he summarised the key messages from the presentations
and facilitated questions and discussion with the audience.
Nuzhat Jafri from the Office of the Fairness Commissioner in Canada spoke about the Canadian
perspective on positive action and employment within the private sector. Nuzhat provided
exemplars of positive action in Canada within the context of what is permissible given the legal
framework. Nuzhat stated that although the robust legal framework provides the basis for
implementing positive action in Canada, the business case also provided a strong incentive for
its success especially in the private sector.
Kajsa Widen from Lund University in Sweden examined the role of the Swedish Higher
Education Act in conjunction with the gender equality policy for Lund University as catalysts
for redressing the gender disparity with regards to staff employment. Due to the enforcement
mechanisms put in place, major advances have been made toward ensuring gender parity in
recruitment, promotion and retention at Lund University. She presented examples of positive
action in the University.
Evelyn Collins from the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland spoke on positive action and
religion. Evelyn examined the role of the Equality Commission in Northern Ireland as a
statutory body committed to promoting equality of opportunity and affirmative/positive
action. Evelyn identified some key anti-discrimination legislation resulting from the civil
unrest in the 1960s and 1970s. In particular, the Fair Employment Act 1989 and the duties it
imposes on employers to take affirmative action to address under-representation among
Protestants and Catholics. Evelyn highlighted the success of the Northern Ireland affirmative
action policy and attributed the success to a number of factors, such as data monitoring,
adequate legislation, and strong political agenda. She presented examples of positive action in
Northern Ireland on the grounds of religion.
Janos Darcozi and Judit Klein from the Roma Production Office Foundation in Budapest
highlighted the plight of Roma communities in Eastern Europe. They presented a detailed
account of the experiences of members of these communities. Janos and Judit emphasised
that although, Roma communities have been living in Europe for over 600 years, they are still
victims of negative media portrayal. In order to empower the members of these communities,
the Roma Production Office Foundation-Budapest produced a DVD to help showcase the
journalism internship programme that is aimed at preparing people from Roma communities to
work in the media industry.
Panel Discussion
The panel discussion was chaired by Professor Christa Tobler from the Europa Institutes of the
Universities of Basel (Switzerland) and Leiden (the Netherlands) where each speaker presented
key issues before it was opened to the floor for questions and discussion. Professor Tobler set
the scene and introduced each panelist. At the end of the session, she summarised key
messages from the panel discussion and facilitated a question and answer session with the
audience.
Panelists
Alena Angelovicova from the Slovak Government talked about positive action and constitutional
challenges and the role of governments in supporting positive action measures. Specific
examples were drawn from Slovakia with emphasis on constitutional court ruling of the Slovak
Republic.
Neil Sherlock from KPMG talked about opportunities and challenges arising from positive action
practice in the private sector and highlighted experience of positive action at KPMG.
Wilf Sullivan from the TUC highlighted the role of positive action in supporting institutional
change. He emphasised the role of trades unions in supporting the development of positive
action measures and drew attention to related problems of isolating individuals by way of
positive action.
Kenneth Erselina, an independent expert, presented his views on positive action as part of
broader complementary equality and diversity interventions. Kenneth identified factors
necessary for the sustainability of positive action and provided examples of his work on antidiscriminatory recruitment for the Dutch Government.
Ioana Carmen Niang from Associaia Cultura Pacii highlighted the role of the voluntary sector in
supporting positive action measures and the key challenges of promoting positive action in this
sector. In conclusion, Ioana made recommendations for effectively harnessing the resources
that both large and small voluntary sector organisations can contribute to promoting positive
action.
Questions and discussion:
Points raised from the floor in this session included:
 What real outcomes have been achieved from positive action initiatives in the UK?
 Marginalisation of Roma issues within the conference and in the study.
 Disparity in the understanding and application of positive action in the new EU Member
States.
 Support for organisations and individuals to facilitate the utilisation of PAMECUS project
findings.
Closing remarks and way forward
Stefan Olsson from the European Commission highlighted the need to take into account the
complexities of real-life situations regarding the EC’s competences and capability to deliver on
this agenda. He stressed the value that the PAMECUS study brings to the work of the
Commission and outlined other activities that the findings of the study will feed into including
the next equality summit taking place in Stockholm in November 2009. He concluded that a lot
needs to be done at all levels particularly at national and organisational levels.