Skip to main content Accessibility help

Should Feminists Give Up on Critical Mass? A Contingent Yes

  • Sarah Childs (a1) and Mona Lena Krook (a2)


Today's historic level of women in national parliaments—while still far short of parity at 16%—owes much to the global spread of gender quotas. This process, in turn, owes much to the concept of “critical mass”: International organizations, transnational networks, party politicians, women's activists, and even ordinary citizens argue that women should constitute 30% of all political bodies, the magic number where female legislators are said to be able to make a difference. As the notion of critical mass has gained wide currency in the real world, however, many scholars have come to question its utility and relevance for analyzing women's legislative behavior. Indeed, as the number of studies grows, it is increasingly obvious that there is neither a single nor a universal relationship between the percentage of women elected to political office and the passage of legislation beneficial to women as a group: In some cases, women are able to work more effectively together as their numbers grow, but in others, women appear to make a difference—in fact, sometimes a greater difference—when they form a small minority of legislators, either because their increased numbers provoke a backlash among male legislators or because their increased numbers allow individual women to pursue other policy goals. These contradictions thus raise the question: Should feminists give up on critical mass? Or are there any compelling reasons—either theoretical or practical—for retaining the concept in debates on women's political representation?



Hide All
This title adapts two classic articles on women's political representation: Anne Phillips' “Must Feminists Give Up on Liberal Democracy?” (1993), and Jane Mansbridge's “Should Women Represent Women and Blacks Represent Blacks: A Contingent Yes” (1999).



Hide All


Bratton, Kathleen A. 2005. “Critical Mass Theory Revisited: The Behavior and Success of Token Women in State Legislatures.” Politics & Gender 1 (March): 97125.
Bratton, Kathleen A., and Leonard P. Ray. 2002. “Descriptive Representation, Policy Outcomes, and Municipal Day-Care Coverage in Norway.” American Journal of Political Science 46 (2): 42837.
Carroll, Susan J., ed. 2001. The Impact of Women in Public Office. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Celis, Karen. 2004. “Substantive and Descriptive Representation: Investigating the Impact of the Voting Right and of Descriptive Representation on the Substantive Representation of Women in the Belgian Lower House (1900–1979).” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, September 2–5.
Chaney, Paul. Forthcoming. “Critical Mass, Deliberation, and the Substantive Representation of Women: Evidence from the UK's Devolution Programme.” Political Studies.
Childs, Sarah. 2004. New Labour's Women MP's: Women Representing Women. New York: Routledge.
Childs, Sarah, and Mona Lena Krook. 2005. “The Substantive Representation of Women: Rethinking the ‘Critical Mass’ Debate.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC, September 1–4.
Childs, Sarah, and Julie Withey. 2006. “The Substantive Representation of Women: The Case of the Reduction of VAT on Sanitary Products.” Parliamentary Affairs 59 (1): 1023.
Cowley, Philip, and Sarah Childs. 2003. “Too Spineless to Rebel? New Labour's Women MPs.” British Journal of Political Science 33 (3): 34565.
Crowley, Jocelyn Elise. 2004. “When Tokens Matter.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 29 (1): 10936.
Dahlerup, Drude. 1988. “From a Small to a Large Minority: Women in Scandinavian Politics.” Scandinavian Political Studies 11 (4): 27597.
Dodson, Debra, and Sue Carroll. 1991. Reshaping the Agenda: Women in State Legislatures. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for American Women and Politics.
Dolan, Kathleen, and Lynne E. Ford. 1995. “Women in State Legislatures: Feminist Identity and Legislative Behaviors.” American Politics Quarterly 23 (1): 96108.
Flammang, Janet. A. 1985. “Female Officials in the Feminist Capital: The Case of Santa Clara County.” Western Political Quarterly 38 (1): 94118.
Gotell, Lise, and Janine Brodie. 1991. “Women and Parties: More Than an Issue of Numbers.” In Party Politics in Canada, ed. Hugh G. Thorbum. Scarborough: Prentice-Hall Canada, 5367.
Granovetter, Mark. 1978. “Threshold Models and Collective Behavior.” American Journal of Sociology 83 (6): 142043.
Hawkesworth, Mary. 2003. “Congressional Enactments of Race-Gender: Toward a Theory of Raced-Gendered Institutions.” American Political Science Review 97 (4): 52950.
Heath, Roseanna Michelle, Leslie A. Schwindt-Bayer, and Michelle M. Taylor-Robinson. 2005. “Women on the Sidelines: Women's Representation on Committees in Latin American Legislatures.” American Journal of Political Science 49 (2): 42036.
Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. 1977a. “Some Effects of Proportions on Group Life.” American Journal of Sociology 82 (5): 96590.
Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. 1977b. Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books.
Kathlene, Lyn. 1995. “Position Power versus Gender Power: Who Holds the Floor?” In Gender Power, Leadership, and Governance, ed. Georgia Duerst-Lahti and Rita Mae Kelly. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 16794.
Kingdon, John W. 1984. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Boston: Little, Brown.
Mansbridge, Jane. 1999. “Should Women Represent Women and Blacks Represent Blacks: A Contingent Yes.” Journal of Politics 6 (3): 62857.
Meyer, Birgit. 2003. “Much Ado about Nothing? Political Representation Policies and the Influence of Women Parliamentarians in Germany.” Review of Policy Research 20 (3): 40121.
Phillips, Anne. 1993. “Must Feminists Give Up on Liberal Democracy?” In Prospects for Democracy, ed. David Held. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 93109.
Reingold, Beth. 2000. Representing Women. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Rosenthal, Cindy Simon. 1998. When Women Lead. New York: Oxford University Press.
Saint-Germain, Michelle. 1989. “Does Their Difference Make a Difference? The Impact of Women on Public Policy in the Arizona Legislature.” Social Science Quarterly 70 (4): 95668.
Schelling, Thomas C. 1978. Micromotives and Macrobehavior. New York: W. W. Norton.
Schwindt-Bayer, Leslie. 2004. “Women's Representation in Latin American Legislatures: Policy Attitudes and Bill Initiation Behavior.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April 15–18.
Swers, Michele L. 2002. The Difference Women Make: The Policy Impact of Women in Congress. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Swers, Michele. 2004. “Legislative Entrepreneurship and Women's Issues: An Analysis of Members' Bill Sponsorship and Cosponsorship Agendas.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April 15–18.
Tamerius, Karen L. 1995. “Sex, Gender, and Leadership in the Representation of Women.” In Gender Power, Leadership and Governance, ed. Georgia Duerst-Lahti and Rita Mae Kelly. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 93112.
Thomas, Sue. 1994. How Women Legislate. New York: Oxford University Press.
Towns, Ann. 2003. “Understanding the Effects of Larger Ratios of Women in National Legislatures: Proportions and Gender Differentiation in Sweden and Norway.” Women & Politics 25 (1–2): 129.
Wängnerud, Lena. 2000. “Testing the Politics of Presence: Women's Representation in the Swedish Riksdag.” Scandinavian Political Studies 23 (1): 6791.
Weldon, S. Laurel. 2002. “Beyond Bodies: Institutional Sources of Representation for Women in Democratic Policymaking.” Journal of Politics 64 (4): 115374.
Whip, Rosemary. 1991. “Representing Women: Australian Female Parliamentarians on the Horns of a Dilemma.” Women & Politics 11 (3): 122.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Politics & Gender
  • ISSN: 1743-923X
  • EISSN: 1743-9248
  • URL: /core/journals/politics-and-gender
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
Type Description Title

 PDF (201 KB)
201 KB


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed