This report examines most of the federal programs that would be considered to be affirmative action. It may be useful, therefore, to consider one or more taxonomies of those efforts. Figures 1 and 2 offer two possible matrices. In Figure 1, the horizontal dimension arrays various policy devices from the most flexible to the most pointed, while the vertical dimension arrays different spheres of activity--from those most closely to those less closely related to the federal government. (46) In this array, examples of the eight categories of policies include:

Outreach & Hortatory Efforts:

Disclosure of Data:

Affirmative Action Plan Requirements:

Targeted Training & Investment Efforts:


Market Advantages:

"Soft" Set-Asides:

"Hard" Set-Asides:

Obviously, there is no single best way to think about these efforts. For example, in Figure 2, one could categorize efforts based on their programmatic objectives, perhaps distinguishing programs focused on education and training (as more "investment-oriented"), from programs focused on employment and contracting (as more "income-oriented"), from programs focused on the assignment of scarce assets, such as bank charters and spectrum licenses (as more "result" or "reward-oriented"). There are obviously elements of "opportunity" and "result" present across the board, but the scale has some heuristic appeal.