IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iab/iabdpa/202606.html

Distributional Intersectional Fairness in AI-Supported Job Matching: Evidence on Amplification, Trade-Offs, and Residual Risk

Author

Listed:
  • Mühlbauer, Sabrina

    (Institute for Employment Research (IAB), Nuremberg, Germany)

  • Ziethmann, Paula

    (Institute for Employment Research (IAB), Nuremberg, Germany)

  • Weber, Enzo

    (Institute for Employment Research (IAB), Nuremberg, Germany)

Abstract

"Despite widespread recognition of intersectionality in discrimination research, most algorithmic fairness evaluations remain limited to single-attribute group comparisons or individual-level prediction errors. This paper introduces a distributional approach to intersectional fairness that evaluates how machine learning models reshape the allocation of outcomes across intersecting social groups. Using large-scale administrative labour-market data from public employment services, we analyse an AI-supported job matching system with 141 occupational classes and more than three million observations. We measure intersectional disparities via Jensen–Shannon divergence and compare observed occupational distributions to model-implied allocations. We show that unconstrained models do not merely reproduce existing labour-market structures but systematically amplify intersectional disparities across occupations. Fairness-aware regularization reduces aggregate disparities but introduces a pronounced trade-off with predictive performance and reallocates distortions across occupations rather than eliminating them. Counterfactual averaging achieves substantial reductions in occupation-level disparities while preserving most predictive performance, may provide a more favourable fairness-performance trade-off in this application setting than directly constraining model outcomes. To identify localized fairness risks, we propose an occupation-level audit mechanism that flags cases with unusually large distributional shifts. Even under strong fairness constraints, a small number of occupations exhibit substantial residual distortions, indicating that fairness interventions compress rather than remove inequality. Our results demonstrate that fairness in large-scale decision-support systems must be evaluated at the level of outcome distributions. More broadly, they highlight the limits of purely technical mitigation and the need to combine fairness-aware modelling with explainability, monitoring, and human oversight in real-world deployment." (Author's abstract, IAB-Doku) ((en))

Suggested Citation

  • Mühlbauer, Sabrina & Ziethmann, Paula & Weber, Enzo, 2026. "Distributional Intersectional Fairness in AI-Supported Job Matching: Evidence on Amplification, Trade-Offs, and Residual Risk," IAB-Discussion Paper 202606, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
  • Handle: RePEc:iab:iabdpa:202606
    DOI: 10.48720/IAB.DP.2606
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.48720/IAB.DP.2606
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.48720/IAB.DP.2606?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J64 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Unemployment: Models, Duration, Incidence, and Job Search
    • J71 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Discrimination - - - Hiring and Firing
    • C55 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Large Data Sets: Modeling and Analysis

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iab:iabdpa:202606. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: IAB, Geschäftsbereich Informationsmanagement und Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iabbbde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.