Equality of Opportunity and Antitrust: The Curious Case of College Rankings

IF 1.3 4区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS Journal of Competition Law & Economics Pub Date : 2021-07-02 DOI:10.1093/JOCLEC/NHAB008
Theodosia Stavroulaki
{"title":"Equality of Opportunity and Antitrust: The Curious Case of College Rankings","authors":"Theodosia Stavroulaki","doi":"10.1093/JOCLEC/NHAB008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Rankings increasingly dominate our world. We use them to choose just about everything—from which pizza or ice cream to buy, to which doctors to trust with our health, to which universities to trust with our intellectual growth and flourishing. But should we trust them? Taking popular academic rankings as an example, such as the U.S. News rankings, this article contends not necessarily, for several reasons. First, because as this article argues, the U.S. News rankings may mislead rather than inform consumers. Second, by fueling a prestige battle between universities, the U.S. News rankings incentivize universities to harm cultural and economic diversity—important facets of educational quality. These conclusions, critical in their own right, raise additional important but underexplored questions for antitrust law. Should universities be allowed to boycott the U.S. News rankings so that they can free themselves of the prestige battle in which they participate? Can an “antirankings boycott” be justified by antitrust law on the basis that it may allow universities to promote diversity and increase access to the underserved? Although these questions are not easy to address, they are at the heart of this article.","PeriodicalId":45547,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Competition Law & Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Competition Law & Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JOCLEC/NHAB008","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Rankings increasingly dominate our world. We use them to choose just about everything—from which pizza or ice cream to buy, to which doctors to trust with our health, to which universities to trust with our intellectual growth and flourishing. But should we trust them? Taking popular academic rankings as an example, such as the U.S. News rankings, this article contends not necessarily, for several reasons. First, because as this article argues, the U.S. News rankings may mislead rather than inform consumers. Second, by fueling a prestige battle between universities, the U.S. News rankings incentivize universities to harm cultural and economic diversity—important facets of educational quality. These conclusions, critical in their own right, raise additional important but underexplored questions for antitrust law. Should universities be allowed to boycott the U.S. News rankings so that they can free themselves of the prestige battle in which they participate? Can an “antirankings boycott” be justified by antitrust law on the basis that it may allow universities to promote diversity and increase access to the underserved? Although these questions are not easy to address, they are at the heart of this article.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
机会平等与反垄断:大学排名的奇特案例
排名日益主宰着我们的世界。我们用它们来选择几乎所有的事情——从买哪个披萨或冰淇淋,到把我们的健康托付给哪个医生,再到把我们的智力成长和繁荣托付给哪个大学。但我们应该相信他们吗?以流行的学术排名为例,如美国新闻排名,这篇文章认为不一定,有几个原因。首先,正如本文所言,《美国新闻与世界报道》的排名可能会误导消费者,而不是告知消费者。其次,通过助长大学之间的声望之争,《美国新闻与世界报道》的排名激励了大学损害文化和经济多样性——这是教育质量的重要方面。这些结论本身就很关键,但也为反垄断法提出了其他重要但未得到充分探讨的问题。大学是否应该被允许抵制《美国新闻与世界报道》的排名,这样它们就可以从卷入的声望之争中解脱出来?根据反垄断法,“反排名抵制”是否合理,因为它可能允许大学促进多样性,并增加对服务不足的学生的接触?尽管这些问题不容易解决,但它们是本文的核心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
26.70%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
The Requisite Legal Standard of the Digital Markets Act’s Designation Process Price Effects of Horizontal Mergers: A Retrospective on Retrospectives ECONOMIC PRINCIPLES FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF ABUSE OF DOMINANCE PROVISIONS MERGING LAGGARDS The Effective Use of Economics in the EU Digital Markets Act
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1