Women in Politics Flashcards
Case study- how has women in Parliament changed
2000 Sweden was top- Nordic and northern European countries tended to be towards the top but none of these countries, uh, reached the 50% mark of gender parity in 2020
Very different set of countries at the top, and at least 4 have reached that 50% mark. In a number of these places that have 50%+ they are not true democracies- the legislators are appointed- UAE, Cuba, Rwanda
Very recent change in the representation of women in parliament Sweden historically was the leader. They started to implement soft quotas in the 1970s.
Definition of gender
Political science research sees it as binary
Gender is socially constructed, a concept distinct from biological sex.
Why are women underrepresented in political office?
- Women are seen as riskier candidates (Crowder-Meyer 2013)- Especially true if they have children. The electorate tends to have sort of perceptions that women are a bit riskier and more uncertain about women who are political candidates.
- Women tend to have lower access to political resources (Norris & Ingelhart 2006)- Research shows networks within organisations and between tend to be segregated by gender. So, information travels through these gendered network structures- biassed information
- Women’s qualifications can be underestimated due to stereotypes or discrimination or both (McDermott 1997)- A meta analysis shows that voters do not systematically apply double standards when they evaluate hypothetical women candidates. In some cases, they actually favour women. This shift over time, is consistent with changing attitudes and as more women enter politics, it becomes more, more normalised.
- Women need to be more qualified and work harder than their male counterpart to reach the same level of support from voters (Anzia & Berry 2011)
- Women’s political ambitions are shaped by gendered expectations (Crowder-Meyer 2020)- evidence that founding narratives that emphasise the role of men, can boost the ambitions of men but not women. So in US history, there’s the Founding Fathers and there’s evidence that exposure to this narrative boosts men’s likelihood of wanting to run for office and doesn’t affect women’s
- Violence against women in politics- all over the world North America, South America, Asia. Receive threats and intimidation, psychological and sometimes sexualised abuse and even physical violence which might might discourage women from running for office.
Why should we care about in politics?
- Representation (Wangnerud 2009)
- Descriptive- number of women elected- much easier and more straightforward to study as we just have to measure the gender distribution of seats
- Substantive- effects of women’s presence in Parliament- harder to study with a wide range of dependent variables. Not entirely obvious what outcomes are increased by the number of women in the legislature Also, need a critical mass of women to get elected to begin to study this. - Political engagement and role modelling (Wolbrecht & Campbell 2007) female legislatures can serve as role models which might increase political participation among women. The visibility of women can challenge stereotypes and gender norms. Might inspire more women to pursue political careers or become more politically active.
- Policy impacts- Child health, climate change- reason to care about women’s politcal representation
- Normative reasons e.g. equity and social justice. Want to ensure that everybody has equal opportunities to participate in the political process. Reflect a broader societal commitments to equality and and non-discrimination.
Differnet types of gedner quotas
Reserved seats: women must make up a certain % of legilsatie candidates or fill a certain number of legislative seats
Candidate quotas: usually specify that a certain % of women must hold places on party lists- often applied in PR systems. Popular in countries throughout East Africa, Middle East and South Asia.
Voluntary party quotas- voluntarily amend their constitutions to require that women make up a certain % of candidates- common in some PR systems e.g. Scandinavian countries. Are occasionally in majoritarian systems e.g. the Labour Party in the UK since 1993 has required that candidates from all women shortlists, contest ½ of the vacant seats that the party is likely to win
Policy areas with large gender differences in prioritisation
Community-specific needs (e.g. potable water) (Chattopadhyay & Dufflo 2004, Gottlieb et al. 2018)- very common in rural and rural communities in developing countries while men will prioritise investment in roads as they travel more frequently and further from home
More universal: healthcare and poverty alleviation vs. national defense and military spending- research across Latin America, Africa, South Asia, the West that shows that both women as citizens/voters/politicians tend to report more concern about health care & poverty, while men prioritise issues like national defence and military. Also, more recent research that shows in wealthier countries women on average, are more concerned about climate change than men.
What is a women’s issue
Women’s identities are multiple- many other identities that makes one up (race/class)
Policy areas that protect women’s rights as women (e.g. to combat gender-based violence, investments in child or maternal health)
Most recent Afrobarometer data (survey that includes individuals from 39 countries across Africa) finds that gender based violence is the number one women’s rights issue that Africans say their gov and society must address
The argument is that these are issues that disproportionately affect women and policies that protect their interest.
How do quotas affect policy?
1 providing information to all legislatures about changing legislative priorities- process of adopting gender quotas helps legislators learn about women’s legislative preferences and gender equality issues. This can change the culture of the legislature.
2 increasing women’s presence in legislative decision making (Clayton & Zetterberg 2018)- influence the content of debates, the balance of roll call votes, their knowledge based on their experiences can change male legislative preferences, sponsor bills/motions/legislation related to the rights and welfare of women, agenda setting power when in leadership positions. They can go through both informal and formal channels. Once women become integrated in the networks they’re going to have effects through those informal channels.
Do quotas reduce the quality of MPs?
Stigma associated with being a woman elected by a quota as they might be of lower quality than the men they replace reducing meritocracy as it gives an advantage to women.
Alternative is that quotas lead to the replacement of mediocre men- if men are forced to recruit women they’re going to get rid of the least talented men first, which could actually raise the average quality of men that hold elected office. So there could actually be an overall increase in quality because the mediocre men are filtered out.
Research from different settings (Sweden/Italy/Argentina/Uganda/European Parliament) shows that the quotas lead to improved educational qualifications, expertise and professional diversity for both men and women (Besley et al 2017)
Some finds no effect- no difference between the qualifications and performance of Labour’s quota women and other Labour politicians in the 1990s.
No published study finds evidence of reduced quality of politicians and at least 9 find positive effects.
Can be backlash against quota-induced gains in women’s representation (Shiran 2024)- recent article analysed news articles over an 11 year period across sub-Saharan Africa and found that quota induced gains in women’s representation often are followed by significant increases conservative ethical language in news coverage of women politicians
The outcomes of an increase women’s political representation
Developing countries have better provision of public goods, especially with regard to education and health (Clots-Figueras 2011,2012)- not that gov spends more but there is improvement in these areas
Improved institutional quality by reducing corruption and rent-extraction by those in power (Dollar et al 2001)
Empower women to participate in politics (Gilardi 2015)
Improve the overall quality in the pool of politicians (Besley et al 2017)
Evidence from US Congress (other contexts too) that women make better quality politicians than men (Anzia & Berry 2011). How to measure quality- this piece finds that women sponsor more bills, more productive than men/work harder. The US Congress has no gender quotas so women have to be better quality than the men to get elected. Where women only get elected on their merits they have to work harder to overcome barriers
What happens when women get the right to vote? Case study US public health
Miller ()
Shows that granting women voting rights improved childrens health
Used the variation across states. States adopted suffrage laws at different times. Use this to get causal purchase on the effects of these laws at the state level.
Shows how the exlcusivley male politicians wanted female votes so got behind these policies. In turn we see a rise in local public health spending so saw a reduction in deaths from infectious diseases among children.
This is also true of, spending on hospitals and charities on health and sanitation- suffrage laws resulted in an increase in spending on public health.
How do women vote today?
Right to vote everywhere, men do legally
Turnout- men and women vote at similar rates. In a lot of place women are slightly more likely to turnout e.g. UK/US. This may be due to higher education attainment of women are other reasons. But, this is not true everywhere as the Afrobarometer reports shows many women in Africa vote at lower rates than men. Some evidence women are less likley to turnout at low salience elections. Also evidence women are more informed about local policy issues than national. Took a while for women’s turnout to reach the level of men’s in advanced, wealthy, advanced democracies. Since the 1980s US women voted at the same rate as men
Voter preferences- registered since the 1980s with women voting more left in advanced industrial societies (Inglehart & Norris 2000)- slightly different in post-communist & developing countries. The reason is said to be cultural & structural- women joining the workforce in large numbers, growth of feminist movements, growth of women’s educational attainment. All of these have contributed to why women vote more with the left. E.g. US women affiliate with D, men R
Significant heterogeneity within and across countries (Barnes, Beall & Cassese 2021). Women are not monoliths and neither are men (cross-cutting identities).
E.g. in the US R women tend to be more moderate than R men on childcare, education, welfare & gun control. But overall, women are more likely to identify with D. Women who identify as R hold positions more similar to R men than D women.
E.g. In Sub-Saharan Africa, the gender gap in policy preferences is shaped by women’s participation in the labour force. Seen as an indicator of economic empowerment. The more women in a country’s workforce, the smaller the gender gap in the prioritisation of things like investment in infrastructure and access to clean water. Meanwhile, when women are socially vulnerable/have low levels of participation in the workforce, there’s a larger gap in prioritising infrastructure investment.
How do quotas affect policy- Amanda Clayton
(READING)
Long-case study. Jaamal needed to decide how to use this
Gender qutoas and the crisis of the mediocre man- Timothy
(REAdING)
Main argument- If we include women it will push mediocre men to go away. Makes everyone more competent. The article is only based on Sweden’s political system so it is hard to know if the argument can travel outside.
Class disagreement- Quotas means incompetent women could get in pushing out competent men. Feeds into the meritocracy argument but no system is fully competent. Measured competency through income but there are many other factors.
