"Given the era of high immigration in which we live, it is shocking that the burgeoning literature on assets has largely ignored immigrants. Lingxin Hao's timely book sets us straight. Color Lines, Country Lines is sorely needed and should serve as a standard reference to anyone working on wealth inequality (or on immigration, for that matter)."
-DALTON C. CONLEY, University Professor of the Social Sciences and chair, Department of Sociology, New York University

"Color Lines, Country Lines is a grand addition to the growing body of work on wealth and inequality in the global age. Lingxin Hao superbly unravels the story on wealth and immigration in America. With masterful research, she provides convincing data and critical insights for central research and policy questions the wealth accumulation status of immigrants, the role of culture in acquiring assets, comparisons across immigrant groups, entrepreneurship, and the politics of identifying model immigrant groups. Color Lines, Country Lines is a long-awaited, much-needed, and most- welcome important contribution to the emerging field of wealth studies."
-THOMAS M. SHAPIRO, Pokross Professor of Law and Social Policy and director, Institute on Assets and Social Policy, The Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University

The growing number of immigrants living and working in America has become a controversial topic from classrooms to corporations and from kitchen tables to Capitol Hill. Many native-born Americans fear that competition from new arrivals will undermine the economic standing of low-skilled American workers, and that immigrants may not successfully integrate into the U.S. economy. In Color Lines, Country Lines, sociologist Lingxin Hao argues that the current influx of immigrants is changing America’s class structure, but not in the ways commonly believed.

Drawing on twenty years of national survey data, Color Lines, Country Lines investigates how immigrants are faring as they try to accumulate enough wealth to join the American middle class, and how, in the process, they are transforming historic links between race and socioeconomic status. Hao finds that disparities in wealth among immigrants are large and growing, including disparities among immigrants of the same race or ethnicity. Cuban immigrants have made substantially more progress than arrivals from the Dominican Republic, Chinese immigrants have had more success than Vietnamese or Korean immigrants, and Jamaicans have fared better than Haitians and immigrants from sub-Saharan Africa. Indeed, many of these immigrant groups have acquired more wealth than native-born Americans of the same race or ethnicity. Hao traces these diverging paths to differences in the political and educational systems of the immigrants’ home countries, as well as to preferential treatment of some groups by U.S. immigration authorities and the U.S. labor market. As a result, individuals’ country of origin increasingly matters more than their race in determining their prospects for acquiring wealth. In a novel analysis, Hao predicts that as large numbers of immigrants arrive in the United States every year, the variation in wealth within racial groups will continue to grow, reducing wealth inequalities between racial groups. If upward mobility remains restricted to only some groups, then the old divisions of wealth by race will gradually become secondary to new disparities based on country of origin. However, if the labor market and the government are receptive to all immigrant groups, then the assimilation of immigrants into the middle class will help diminish wealth inequality in society as a whole.

Immigrants’ assimilation into the American mainstream and the impact of immigration on the American economy are inextricably linked, and each issue can only be understood in light of the other. Color Lines, Country Lines shows why some immigrant groups are struggling to get by while others have managed to achieve the American dream and reveals the surprising ways in which immigration is reshaping American society.
 
LINGXIN HAO is professor of sociology at Johns Hopkins University.

Who has ruled New York? Has power become more concentrated—or more widely and democratically dispersed—in American cities over the past one hundred years? How did New York come to have its modern physical and institutional shape? Focusing on the period when New York City was transformed from a nineteenth-century mercantile center to a modern metropolis, David C. Hammack offers an entirely new view of the history of power and public policy in the nation's largest urban community.

Opening with a fresh and original interpretation of the metropolitan region's economic and social history between 1890 and 1910, Hammack goes on to show how various population groups used their economic, social, cultural, and political resources to shape the decisions that created the modern city. As New York grew in size and complexity, its economic and social interests were forced to compete and form alliances. No single group—not even the wealthy—was able to exercise continuing control of urban policy. Building on his account of this interplay among numerous elites, Hammack concludes with a new interpretation of the history of power in New York and other American cities between 1890 and 1950.

This book makes a major contribution to the study of community power, of urban and regional history, and of public policy. And by taking the meaning and distribution of power as his theme, Hammack is able to reintegrate economic, social, and political history in a rich and comprehensive work.

"Lucid, instructive, and discerning....The most commanding analysis of its subject that I know." —John M. Blum, professor of history, Yale University

"A powerful and persuasive treatment of a marvelous subject." —Nelson W. Polsby, professor of political science, University of California, Berkeley

DAVID C. HAMMACK is professor of history at Case Western Reserve University.

With recent immigration at a near record high, many observers fear that African Americans, particularly those in low skill jobs, are increasingly losing out to immigrants in the American labor market. Because today's immigrants are largely non-European and non-white, there is also speculation that their presence will intensify the competition for housing and educational opportunities among minority groups. Help or Hindrance? probes the foundation of these concerns with the first comprehensive investigation into the effects of immigration on African Americans.

With detailed economic analysis of African American job prospects, benefits, and working conditions, Help or Hindrance? demonstrates that although immigration does not appear to have affected the actual employment rate of blacks, it has contributed slightly to the widening gap between the annual earnings of black and white males. Those near the lowest skills level appear most affected, suggesting that the most likely losers are workers with abilities similar to those of immigrants. With many employers moving away from cities, access to housing and problems of segregation have also become integral to success in the job market. And within black neighborhoods themselves, the establishment of small immigrant businesses has raised concerns that these may hinder local residents from starting up similar ventures. Help or Hindrance? also examines how immigration has affected the educational attainment of African Americans. Increased competition for college affirmative action and remedial programs has noticeably reduced African Americans' access to college places and scholarships.

Help or Hindrance? offers compelling evidence that although immigration has in many ways benefited parts of American society, it has had a cumulatively negative effect on the economic prospects of African Americans. In concluding chapters, this volume provides an overview of possible policy interventions and evaluates them within the current social and political climate. Because the long-term impact of current immigration on social welfare remains unknown solutions are far from clear. Help or Hindrance? provides a valuable benchmark for discussion of immigration and racial equity in a time of rapid population change.

FRANK D. BEAN is the Ashbel Smith Professor of Sociology and professor of public affairs at the University of Texas at Austin.

DANIEL S. HAMERMESH is Edward Everett Hall Centennial Professor of Economics at the University of Texas at Austin. He is also research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

CONTRIBUTORS: Frank D. Bean, Daniel S. Hamermesh, Julian R. Betts, George J. Borjas, Kristin F. Butcher, Robert W. Fairlie, Richard B. Freeman, Jeffrey T. Grogger, Caroline M. Hoxby, George E. Johnson, Linda Datcher Loury, Bruce D. Meyer, Cordelia W. Reimers, Peter H. Schuck, Marta Tienda, and Jeffrey S. Zax.

Winner of the 2010 Luebbert Prize for Best Book in Comparative Politics

"There is much to praise in this book. Most importantly, the authors' focus on understanding the mechanism of ethnic cooperation should be highly praised, including the manner in which they tested the major proposed mechanisms against each other. I was also very impressed by the immense amount of fieldwork that the authors devoted to the project, with obvious care given at every stage of the project to obtain meaningful results."
-AFRICAN AFFAIRS

"The authors go beyond the observation that ethnic diversity sometimes impedes cooperation and ask why this might be so. This important work will be an eye opener to those schooled in conventional 'social identity' theory and 'minimal group' experiments. By focusing on causal mechanisms, Coethnicity demonstrates the limitations of simple 'insider favoritism/outsider hostility' interpretations and opens up a new research agenda on ethnic division and cross-ethnic solidarity."
-SAMUEL BOWLES, director, Behavioral Sciences Program, Santa Fe Institute

"Good public policy demands that social scientists go beyond statistical correlations in order to understand the mechanisms that lead to market and government failure. James Habyarimana, Macartan Humphreys, Daniel Posner, and Jeremy Weinstein in Coethnicity have brilliantly, persistently, and innovatively sorted out and identified the mechanisms that undermine the potential of ethnic diversity to enrich society through the gains from trade that ethnic complementarities should provide. From Coethnicity, and now knowing these mechanisms, we are perched to devise remedies that can save us from the lost opportunities of cosmopolitanism and the specter of ethnic cleansing."
-DAVID D. LAITIN, Watkins Professor of Political Science, Stanford University

"An exciting volume with interesting insights into the effects of mixed ethnicity on public goods provision. The authors apply experimental methods in innovative ways to study the mechanisms through which mixed ethnicity hinders cooperation, making the work appropriate for a wide range of readers, from economists to charitable organizations and policy makers."
-ERNST FEHR, director, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics, Laboratory for the Study of Social and Neural Systems, University of Zurich

Ethnically homogenous communities often do a better job than diverse communities of producing public goods such as satisfactory schools and health care, adequate sanitation, and low levels of crime. Coethnicity reports the results of a landmark study that aimed to find out why diversity has this cooperation-undermining effect. The study, conducted in a neighborhood of Kampala, Uganda, notable for both its high levels of diversity and low levels of public goods provision, hones in on the mechanisms that might account for the difficulties diverse societies often face in trying to act collectively.

The Mulago-Kyebando Community Study uses behavioral games to explore how the ethnicity of the person with whom one is interacting shapes social behavior. Hundreds of local participants interacted with various partners in laboratory games simulating real-life decisions involving the allocation of money and the completion of joint tasks. Many of the subsequent findings debunk long-standing explanations for diversity’s adverse effects. Contrary to the prevalent notion that shared preferences facilitate ethnic collective action, differences in goals and priorities among participants were not found to be structured along ethnic lines. Nor was there evidence that subjects favored the welfare of their coethnics over that of non-coethnics. When given the opportunity to act altruistically, individuals did not choose to benefit coethnics disproportionately when their actions were anonymous. Yet when anonymity was removed, subjects behaved very differently. With their actions publicly observed, subjects gave significantly more to coethnics, expected their partners to reciprocate, and expected that they would be sanctioned for a failure to cooperate. This effect was most pronounced among individuals who were otherwise least likely to cooperate. These results suggest that what may look like ethnic favoritism is, in fact, a set of reciprocity norms—stronger among coethnics than among non-coethnics—that make it possible for members of more homogeneous communities to take risks, invest, and cooperate without the fear of getting cheated. Such norms may be more subject to change than deeply held ethnic antipathies—a powerful finding for policymakers seeking to design social institutions in diverse societies.

Research on ethnic diversity typically draws on either experimental research or field work. Coethnicity does both. By taking the crucial step from observation to experimentation, this study marks a major breakthrough in the study of ethnic diversity.

JAMES HABYARIMANA is assistant professor of public policy at the Georgetown Public Policy Institute.

MACARTAN HUMPHREYS is associate professor of political science at Columbia University and research scholar at the Center for Globalization and Sustainable Development at the Earth Institute.

DANIEL N. POSNER is associate professor of political science at the University of California, Los Angeles.

JEREMY M. WEINSTEIN is assistant professor of political science at Stanford University and an affiliated faculty member at the Center for Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law and the Center for International Security and Cooperation.

A Volume in the Russell Sage Foundation Series on Trust

"This volume shows how constructive intellectual dialogue among representatives of diverse perspectives yields scientific progress. Like tributaries feeding a river, the new economic sociology draws on multiple independent sources-the subfields of organizations, work and occupations, gender, social stratification, culture, networks, and more. Scholars from these areas are forging the new economic sociology as they listen to one another and take each other's work into account. The New Economic Sociology demonstrates that the future of the field depends on intensifying this dialogue, creating a multi-theoretical and multi-method approach to the sociological study of economic phenomena."
-WAYNE E. BAKER, professor of organizational behavior, professor of sociology, and director, Center for Society and Economy, University of Michigan Business School

"The editors are to be commended for assembling such a stimulating mixture of papers. They showcase the diverse topics and varied approaches taken in economic sociology, from thoughtful overviews, through detailed empirical studies, to passionate polemics. There is something here for everyone."
-BRUCE G. CARRUTHERS, professor and graduate director, Department of Sociology, Northwestern University

"A rich and wide-ranging collection of key lines of research in economic sociology by many of the field's top scholars. The New Economic Sociology is both an invaluable introduction for those new to the field and a survey of the future direction of several important research programs."
-WALTER W. POWELL, professor of education, Stanford University

As the American economy surged in the 1990s, economic sociology made great strides as well. Economists and sociologists worked across disciplinary boundaries to study the booming market as both a product and a producer of culture, tracing the correlations they saw between economic and social phenomena. In the process, they debated the methodological issues that arose from their interdisciplinary perspectives. The New Economic Sociology provides an overview of these debates and assesses the state of the burgeoning discipline. The contributors summarize economic sociology's accomplishments to date, identifying key theoretical problems and opportunities, and formulating strategies for future research in the field.

The book opens with an introduction to the main debates and conceptual approaches in economic sociology. Contributor Neil Fligstein suggests that the current resurgence of interest in economic sociology is due to the way it brings together many sociological subdisciplines including the study of markets, households, labor markets, stratification, networks, and culture. Other contributors examine the role of economic phenomena from a network perspective. Ron Burt, for example, demonstrates how social relationships affect competitive dynamics in the marketplace. A third set of chapters addresses the role of gender in economic sociology. In her chapter, Barbara Reskin rethinks conventional notions about discrimination and points out that the law only covers one type of discrimination, while in recent years social scientists have uncovered other forms of hidden discrimination, which must be addressed as well. The New Economic Sociology also addresses the problem of economic development and change from a sociological perspective. Alejandro Portes and Margarita Mooney elaborate on one of the key emerging concepts in economic sociology, arguing that social capital—as an attribute of communities and regions—can contribute to economic and social well-being by fostering collaboration and entrepreneurship.

The contributors concur that economic action must be interpreted through the cultural understandings that lend it stability and meaning. By rendering these often complex debates accessible, The New Economic Sociology makes a significant contribution to this still rapidly developing field, and provides a useful guide for future avenues of research.

MAURO F. GUILLÉN is associate professor of management at the Wharton School and associate professor of sociology, University of Pennsylvania.

RANDALL COLLINS is professor of sociology, University of Pennsylvania.

PAULA ENGLAND is professor of sociology, Northwestern University.

MARSHALL MEYER is professor of management and sociology at the University of Pennsylvania.

CONTRIBUTORS: James N. Baron, Denise D. Bielby, Wililam T. Bielby, Ronald S. Burt, Paul DiMaggio, Susan Eckstein, Neil Fligstein, Mark Granovetter, Michael T. Hannan, Greta Hsu, Ozgecan Kocan, Margarita Mooney, Alejandro Portes, Barbara F. Reskin, Harrison C. White, Viviana A. Zelizer.

"Above all others, Judy Gueron and her colleagues at MDRC did the research that led the Congress to pass the Family Support Act two years ago. As a result, we now have a historic opportunity to help welfare recipients become self-sufficient. But for that to happen, we must learn the lessons contained in From Welfare to Work, and make sure they are reflected in the reforms being implemented across the nation."
- SENATOR DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN

"A truly exceptional achievement. This is the definitive book on welfare-to-work programs. It represents a triumph of reason and research in an arena swamped by anecdote and emotion. MDRC's studies have dominated the discussion about welfare reform because they are universally accepted as careful, thoughtful, and unbiased. Anyone who cares about welfare reform - academics and administrators, politicians and the press, policy analysts and the public - must read this book."
- DAVID T. ELLWOOD, Harvard University

"Required reading for anyone involved in efforts to boost employment among welfare recipients. A thorough review of what we know - and the large amount we have yet to learn- about what works effectively. And a good antidote for those who tend to overstate the impacts that welfare-to-work programs, by themselves, can have in reducing poverty."
- ROBERT GREENSTEIN, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

"Required reading for every administrator responsible for implementing JOBS, one of the most ambitious and complex social programs of the last few decades. Clearly and concisely, this book illuminates the critical choices administrators face about whom to serve, what the desired outcomes are, and how to allocate resources."
-JULIA I. LOPEZ, Department of Social Services, City and County of San Francisco

"From Welfare to Work is the 'Bible' on the MDRC studies of welfare employment programs, which comprise most of what we know about how to move welfare recipients toward work. This book is a 'must' for anyone interested in thes initiatives, which are at the cutting edge of social policy today."
- LAWRENCE M. MEAD, New York University

From Welfare to Work appears at a critical moment, when all fifty states are wrestling with tough budgetary and program choices as they implement the new federal welfare reforms. This book is a definitive analysis of the landmark social research that has directly informed those choices: the rigorous evaluation of programs designed to help welfare recipients become employed and self-sufficient. It discusses forty-five past and current studies, focusing on the series of seminal evaluations conducted by the Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation over the last fifteen years.

Which of these welfare-to-work programs have worked? For whom and at what cost? In answering these key questions, the authors clearly delineate the trade-offs facing policymakers as they strive to achieve the multiple goals of alleviating poverty, helping the most disadvantaged, curtailing dependence, and effecting welfare savings. The authors present compelling evidence that the generally low-cost, primarily job search-oriented programs of the late 1980s achieved sustained earnings gains and welfare savings. However, getting people out of poverty and helping those who are most disadvantaged may require some intensive, higher-cost services such as education and training. The authors explore a range of studies now in progress that will address these and other urgent issues. They also point to encouraging results from programs that were operating in San Diego and Baltimore, which suggest the potential value of a mixed strategy: combining job search and other low-cost activities for a broad portion of the caseload with more specialized services for smaller groups.

Offering both an authoritative synthesis of work already done and recommendations for future innovation, From Welfare to Work will be the standard resource and required reading for practitioners and students in the social policy, social welfare, and academic communities.

JUDITH M. GUERON is president of the Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC).

EDWARD S. PAULY is senior research associate and coordinator of education research for MDRC.

"Grubb's powerful vision of a workforce development system connected by vertical ladders for upward mobility adds an important new dimension to our continued efforts at system reform. The unfortunate reality is that neither our first-chance education system nor our second-chance job training system have succeeded in creating clear pathways out of poverty for many of our citizens. Grubb's message deserves a serious hearing by policy makers and practitioners alike." —Evelyn Ganzglass, National Governors' Association

Over the past three decades, job training programs have proliferated in response to mounting problems of unemployment, poverty, and expanding welfare rolls. These programs and the institutions that administer them have grown to a number and complexity that make it increasingly difficult for policymakers to interpret their effectiveness. Learning to Work offers a comprehensive assessment of efforts to move individuals into the workforce, and explains why their success has been limited.

Learning to Work offers a complete history of job training in the United States, beginning with the Department of Labor's manpower development programs in the1960s and detailing the expansion of services through the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act in the 1970s and the Job Training Partnership Act in the 1980s.Other programs have sprung from the welfare system or were designed to meet the needs of various state and corporate development initiatives. The result is a complex mosaic of welfare-to-work, second-chance training, and experimental programs, all with their own goals, methodology, institutional administration, and funding.

Learning to Work examines the findings of the most recent and sophisticated job training evaluations and what they reveal for each type of program. Which agendas prove most effective? Do their effects last over time? How well do programs benefit various populations, from welfare recipients to youths to displaced employees in need of retraining? The results are not encouraging. Many programs increase employment and reduce welfare dependence, but by meager increments, and the results are often temporary. On average most programs boosted earnings by only $200 to $500 per year, and even these small effects tended to decay after four or five years. Overall, job training programs moved very few individuals permanently off welfare, and provided no entry into a middle-class occupation or income.

Learning to Work provides possible explanations for these poor results, citing the limited scope of individual programs, their lack of linkages to other programs or job-related opportunities, the absence of academic content or solid instructional methods, and their vulnerability to local political interference. Author Norton Grubb traces the root of these problems to the inherent separation of job training programs from the more successful educational system. He proposes consolidating the two domains into a clearly defined hierarchy of programs that combine school- and work-based instruction and employ proven methods of student-centered, project-based teaching. By linking programs tailored to every level of need and replacing short-term job training with long-term education, a system could be created to enable individuals to achieve increasing levels of economic success.

The problems that job training programs address are too serious to ignore. Learning to Work tells us what's wrong with job training today, and offers a practical vision for reform.

W. NORTON GRUBB is professor of education at the University of California, Berkeley.

"The volume is unique in that it weaves theoretical discussions and interventions into existing school finance literature with careful empirical tests of the author's hypotheses with data from the National Educational Longitudinal Survey."
-CHOICE

"Original analysis that provides considerable insights into ways of improving education by using school resources in wiser and more sophisticated ways. The Money Myth shares a powerful conceptual approach with intriguing empirical results."
-HENRY M. LEVIN, William H Kilpatrick Professor of Economics and Education, Columbia University

"During the past decade, dozens of economists have refocused on education finance policy analysis but most of their analyses are based on large data sets of macro-variables and provide little insight into what works. Norton Grubb's new book, The Money Myth, stands out in this sea of analysis by going inside the black box of districts and schools to determine what factors such as teacher quality, curriculum, leadership, and school structure actually impact student performance. Though more work needs to be done, it is these kinds of micro-analyses that will move our knowledge forward about what resources matter to student and school performance."
-ALLAN ODDEN, professor of educational leadership and policy analysis, and, codirector, Strategic Management of Human Capital (SMHC), Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE)

"The Money Myth does a masterful job of opening up the 'black box' of public schools-providing a convincing analysis of why increased per-pupil spending in U.S. schools has not lead to improved educational outcomes. The answer lies in identifying different types of resources that matter- such as instructional practices and school climate-resources that are not necessarily related to money. Norton Grubb shows how understanding which resources are effective in improving student outcomes can help explain and address the persistent problem of ethnic and racial inequality and the difficulty of educational reform, particularly high school reform."
-RUSSELL W. RUMBERGER, professor, Gervirtz Graduate School of Education, University of California, Santa Barbara

Can money buy high-quality education? Studies find only a weak relationship between public school funding and educational outcomes. In The Money Myth, W. Norton Grubb proposes a powerful paradigm shift in the way we think about why some schools thrive and others fail. The greatest inequalities in America’s schools lie in factors other than fiscal support. Fundamental differences in resources other than money—for example, in leadership, instruction, and tracking policies—explain the deepening divide in the success of our nation’s schoolchildren.

The Money Myth establishes several principles for a bold new approach to education reform. Drawing on a national longitudinal dataset collected over twelve years, Grubb makes a crucial distinction between “simple” resources and those “compound,” “complex,” and “abstract” resources that cannot be readily bought. Money can buy simple resources—such as higher teacher salaries and smaller class sizes—but these resources are actually some of the weakest predictors of educational outcomes. On the other hand, complex resources pertaining to school practices are astonishingly strong predictors of success. Grubb finds that tracking policies have the most profound and consistent impact on student outcomes over time. Schools often relegate low-performing students—particularly minorities—to vocational, remedial, and special education tracks. So even in well-funded schools, resources may never reach the students who need them most. Grubb also finds that innovation in the classroom has a critical impact on student success. Here, too, America’s schools are stratified. Teachers in underperforming schools tend to devote significant amounts of time to administration and discipline, while instructors in highly ranked schools dedicate the bulk of their time to “engaged learning,” using varied pedagogical approaches.

Effective schools distribute leadership among many instructors and administrators, and they foster a sense of both trust and accountability. These schools have a clear mission and coherent agenda for reaching goals. Underperforming schools, by contrast, implement a variety of fragmented reforms and practices without developing a unified plan. This phenomenon is perhaps most powerfully visible in the negative repercussions of No Child Left Behind. In a frantic attempt to meet federal standards and raise test scores quickly, more and more schools are turning to scripted “off the shelf” curricula. These practices discourage student engagement, suppress teacher creativity, and hold little promise of improving learning beyond the most basic skills.

Grubb shows that infusions of money alone won’t eradicate inequality in America’s schools. We need to address the vast differences in the way school communities operate. By looking beyond school finance, The Money Myth gets to the core reasons why education in America is so unequal and provides clear recommendations for addressing this chronic national problem.

W. NORTON GRUBB is David Pierpont Gardner Professor in Higher Education and faculty coordinator of the Principal Leadership Institute at the University of California, Berkeley.

A significant and eye-opening examination of the current state of the testing movement in the United States, where more than 150 million standardized intelligence, aptitude, and achievement tests are administered annually by schools, colleges, business and industrial firms, government agencies, and the military services. Despite widespread acceptance of these ability tests, there is surprisingly little systematic information about their use or effect. This book examines, raises questions about, and points the way to needed research on ability testing. It considers the possible social, legal, and emotional impact on society, the groups and organizations that make use of the tests, and the individuals who are directly affected by the results.

DAVID A. GOSLIN is staff sociologist at the Russell Sage Foundation and author of The School in Contemporary Society.

"[Families That Work] is most valuable for its extensive and up-to-date tabulations, by country, of family-related practices and policies .... A prodigious work of scholarship in a growing and important interdisciplinary field."
-MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

"Janet Gornick and Marcia Meyers have written a lively and accessible book, combining a high level of expertise on American social policy with an equally high level of knowledge of European and Canadian social policy. It is rare to find both in a single book. Moreover, they argue convincingly that, over the next several years, expansion of work-family policy in the United States is very likely. When American policymakers finally get serious about enacting paid family leave and universal pre- kindergarten programs, they should turn to this book for crucial lessons in policy design and for forecasts of policy impacts based on other nations' experiences. This will become a key resource in the field of family policy design for many years to come."
-TIMOTHY M. SMEEDING, Maxwell Professor of Public Policy, professor of economics and public administration,
and director, Center for Policy Research, Syracuse University

"The best guide in the world to family policies the United States sorely needs. Janet Gornick and Marcia Meyers argue persuasively that greater public support and reformed employment practices could benefit children and promote more equal sharing of care responsibilities. Their startling comparisons of European and U.S. programs reveal complex interactions between the labor market, the family, and the state. They also bring hopeful fantasies down to realistic earth."
-NANCY FOLBRE, professor of economics, University of Massachusetts

"Families That Work shows us how government policies could help parents combine paid work and caring for children. The harder question is whether we can do it in a way that reduces rather than exacerbates gender inequality. Janet Gornick and Marcia Meyers say yes, and present the most compelling evidence ever assembled. Read this excellent book."
-PAULA ENGLAND, professor of sociology and faculty fellow, Institute for Policy Research, Northwestern University

Parents around the world grapple with the common challenge of balancing work and child care. Despite common problems, the industrialized nations have developed dramatically different social and labor market policies—policies that vary widely in the level of support they provide for parents and the extent to which they encourage an equal division of labor between parents as they balance work and care. In Families That Work, Janet Gornick and Marcia Meyers take a close look at the work-family policies in the United States and abroad and call for a new and expanded role for the U.S. government in order to bring this country up to the standards taken for granted in many other Western nations.

In many countries in Europe and in Canada, family leave policies grant parents paid time off to care for their young children, and labor market regulations go a long way toward ensuring that work does not overwhelm family obligations. In addition, early childhood education and care programs guarantee access to high-quality care for their children. In most of these countries, policies encourage gender equality by strengthening mothers’ ties to employment and encouraging fathers to spend more time caregiving at home. In sharp contrast, Gornick and Meyers show how in the United States—an economy with high labor force participation among both fathers and mothers—parents are left to craft private solutions to the society-wide dilemma of “who will care for the children?” Parents—overwhelmingly mothers—must loosen their ties to the workplace to care for their children; workers are forced to negotiate with their employers, often unsuccessfully, for family leave and reduced work schedules; and parents must purchase care of dubious quality, at high prices, from consumer markets. By leaving child care solutions up to hard-pressed working parents, these private solutions exact a high price in terms of gender inequality in the workplace and at home, family stress and economic insecurity, and—not least—child well-being. Gornick and Meyers show that it is possible–based on the experiences of other countries—to enhance child well-being and to increase gender equality by promoting more extensive and egalitarian family leave, work-time, and child care policies.

Families That Work demonstrates convincingly that the United States has much to learn from policies in Europe and in Canada, and that the often-repeated claim that the United States is simply “too different” to draw lessons from other countries is based largely on misperceptions about policies in other countries and about the possibility of policy expansion in the United States.

JANET GORNICK is associate professor of political science at Baruch College, and the Graduate Center, City University of New York.

MARCIA K. MEYERS is associate professor of social work and public affairs, University of Washington.