"Talk does not cook rice": Beyond anti-racism rhetoric to strategies for social action

Studies throughout the Western world indicate that racism against marginalised groups is an ongoing societal problem. One frequently advocated way to reduce such racism is the implementation of anti-racism strategies. But how effective are they? In the present paper, we discuss how individual and interpersonal anti-racism strategies shape up. Thus, our paper generates suggestions for anti-racism strategies within the Australian context. As well as highlighting the positive outcomes, some detail about negative outcomes is provided because it is equally important to learn from unsuccessful strategies. There are several promising avenues that can be used in anti-racism strategies (e.g., using empathy, challenging false beliefs, giving people the opportunity to discuss racial issues, interacting with people of a different background from one’s own under certain conditions). However, the small number of studies that have examined long-term effects indicate that benefits are generally not sustained; more research is necessary in this regard. Additionally, some strategies have increased racism, so any strategy that is put into place must be considered very carefully. Overall, the results suggest that a top-down approach is needed (e.g., institutionally/community instigated action) as well as a bottom-up approach (e.g., addressing social – psychological variables). These two approaches are dynamic; one affects the other. There is an old Chinese proverb ‘‘Talk does not cook rice’’. We take this to mean that theorising about an issue is all very well, but as useful as this is, we need to move beyond this to social action. This is particularly the case with respect to racism against marginalised groups, both in Australia and throughout the world. Much has been written about the pervasive and destructive nature of racism, but less has been written about the best ways to combat it. This is the focus of this paper. The last decade has seen considerable public debate about race and racial issues, much of it negative. For example, in the Western world, the reports in the media regarding attacks on the World Trade Center on 11 September, 2001 and the Bali bombings on 12 October, 2002 have resulted in a heightened salience of racial and religious issues, racial vilification and racial assaults. One frequently advocated way to reduce such racism is the implementation of anti-racism strategies by governments and other organisations. But how effective are they? Our aim in this paper is to provide a generally representative list of published and unpublished accounts of actions that focus on reducing racist behaviours, attitudes, and/or beliefs primarily with respect to adult interventions. We first give an overview of anti-racism strategies, noting which of the strategies work and which do not (taking into account individual, interpersonal, and broader social issues). We concentrate on research on the effect of anti-racism strategies on adults, although some exceptions are made when findings relating to children serve to inform us. We then make suggestions on how to successfully build upon past research, and then conclude with a number of practical implications. Although other excellent non-Australian reviews have been undertaken and will be briefly touched upon, we are aiming our review at the Australian social context. In many respects, the Australian situation is unique (for example, the governmental position on asylum seekers who enter without Correspondence: A. Pedersen at the School of Psychology, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia. Tel.: +61 8 9360 6488. Fax: +61 8 9360 6492. E-mail: A.Pedersen@Murdoch.edu.au Australian Psychologist, March 2005; 40(1): 20 – 30 ISSN 0005-0067 print/ISSN 1742-9544 online # The Australian Psychological Society Ltd Published by Taylor & Francis Ltd DOI: 10.1080/0005006051233131729 authorisation is significantly harsher than that of other Western countries, which can impact on community attitudes). We wish to focus on localised issues such as these, and we see this paper as a guide to generate guidelines for anti-racism strategies in the Australian context. Unfortunately, there is only a small amount of Australian studies in this area; therefore, we bring in relevant non-Australian studies also. In short, we review studies that have a particular relevance to the Australian context, which are either conducted in Australia or elsewhere. The terms prejudice and racism are often used loosely and interchangeably in the research reviewed here (generally speaking, prejudice relates more to attitudes, while racism relates to attitudes and other more institutional practices). In reviewing this research, we will use the terms as the original authors have used them. Racism operates at individual, institutional, and cultural levels (Jones, 1997). Therefore, anti-racism strategies need to be implemented at individual, institutional, and cultural levels. For example, previous research finds that racism relates to some personal characteristics of individuals such as empathy and right-wing authoritarianism; but it also relates to more societal variables such as lack of education and local norms. Also, it is important to acknowledge the fluidity of racism. Historical events have produced significant changes in attitudes to particular groups. An example of such fluidity was the rapid and large shifts in Americans’ views of Germans and Japanese caused by World War II (Gilbert, 1951; Karlins, Coffman, & Walters, 1969). These changes point to a salutary point: big, historical, structural changes shape attitudes. Why are anti-racism strategies needed? Racism is ideologically offensive, it results in an exclusionary segmented society, and it has considerable negative effects not only for the victim of racism, but for society as a whole. Racism is ‘‘socially disruptive, destabilises good community relations, social cohesion, and national unity . . . and decreases productivity’’ (Allbrook, 2001, p. 12). Thus, it is beneficial for all groups to eliminate racism, although not all groups stand to benefit equally and some groups stand to lose as well. Anti-racist strategies involve eliminating (or at the very least modifying) racist beliefs and/or behaviours. Until a number of different studies are examined with different theoretical perspectives and emphases, no firm conclusions can be reached. In this paper, we aim to further this endeavour. This paper aims to review published and unpublished reports evaluating anti-racism strategies. A search was made of psychological (PsycINFO), sociological (SocioFile), and educational (ERIC) SilverPlatter databases; we also conducted an Internet search as well as an informal search by way of email lists and word of mouth. Anti-racism strategies: Do they work? Most of the anti-racism strategies we reviewed could be categorised as using either individual or interpersonal strategies (as per Duckitt, 2001), and we maintain that distinction here. Most of these strategies report mainstream participants with minority group targets. With regard to individual strategies, three main issues are discussed: providing specific information about racial issues (in particular false beliefs), creating dissonance about having different values (e.g., believing oneself to be egalitarian, but disliking a certain cultural group), and empathy. With regard to interpersonal strategies, intergroup contact, providing consensus information (do other people agree with our views?), the benefits of dialogue with other people, and advertising campaigns are discussed. Most of the evaluations of anti-racism strategies we uncovered have some methodological flaws. We will not criticise the method of each study, but will make general comments about methodological issues at the end of the review. Anti-racism strategies Individual strategies Providing information about cultural issues. It is argued by some that simply reducing stereotypes can be an effective method of reducing prejudice. For example, Louw-Potgieter, Kamfer, and Boy (1991) conducted a stereotype-reduction workshop, and although there was no preand post-test evaluation, the researchers received responses such as ‘‘I don’t judge the book by the cover anymore’’ (p. 222). However, it is worth stressing that the changing of stereotypes is often easier said than done. Also, extensive retraining is often needed in this regard rather than a once-off session (Dovidio, Kawakami, & Gaertner, 2000). Abell, Havelaar, and Dankoor (1998) reviewed antidiscrimination strategies in the Netherlands using labour market professionals. This review appeared to evaluate the quality of the training rather than its effectiveness in changing attitudes; but some interesting points were made. They found that anti-racism training (i.e., seeking the support of participants to change racism within organisations) was less popular in the Netherlands compared with other Western countries. Also, cultural awareness training (i.e., making participants more aware of other cultural issues) was less effective than diversity training (i.e., ensuring that all staff can work to their full potential). Other authors have similarly comAnti-racism strategies 21