Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-7f7b94f6bd-8mfwn Total loading time: 0.775 Render date: 2022-06-29T14:03:56.441Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

The Dynamic Relationship between Gender Quotas and Political Institutions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2013

Pär Zetterberg*
Affiliation:
Uppsala University

Extract

Scholars of gender quotas have paid increasing attention to the ways in which formal and informal institutions shape the outcome of this electoral reform (Hassim 2009; Jones 2009; Zetterberg 2009). Quotas, however, are not only affected by the institutional context in which they are adopted; their transformative nature also implies that they (should) contribute to changing political institutions. This dynamic relationship has consequences for the analysis of key institutions within representative democracy: Electoral quotas may, in some cases, challenge well-defined analytical frameworks and established ways to study political life. This essay aims to demonstrate theoretically how quota adoption exerts an impact on established political structures and thus challenges existing understandings within subfields of comparative politics. More specifically, I bring up two institutions within representative democracy that are likely to be affected by quotas: the political recruitment process and intraparty politics within legislative institutions.

Type
Critical Perspectives on Gender and Politics
Copyright
Copyright © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bhavnani, Rikhil R. 2009. “Do Electoral Quotas Work after They are Withdrawn? Evidence from a Natural Experiment in India.” American Political Science Review 103 (1): 2335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjarnegård, Elin, and Zetterberg, Pär. 2011. “Removing Quotas, Maintaining Representation: Overcoming Gender Inequalities in Political Party Recruitment.” Representation 47 (2): 187–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, John M., and Shugart, Matthew Soberg. 1995. “Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote: A Rank Ordering of Electoral Formulas.” Electoral Studies 14 (4): 417–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowley, Philip, and Childs, Sarah. 2003. “Too Spineless to Rebel? New Labour's Women MPs.” British Journal of Political Science 33 (3): 345–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franceschet, Susan, and Piscopo, Jennifer M.. 2008. “Gender Quotas and Women's Substantive Representation: Lessons from Argentina.” Politics & Gender 4 (3): 393425.Google Scholar
Hassim, Shireen. 2009. “Perverse Consequences? The Impact of Quotas for Women on Democratization in Africa.” In Political Representation, ed. Shapiro, Ian, Stokes, Susan C., Wood, Elisabeth Jean, and Kirschner, Alexander S.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jones, Mark P. 2009. “Gender Quotas, Electoral Laws, and the Election of Women: Evidence from the Latin American Vanguard.” Comparative Political Studies 42 (1): 5681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, Anne. 1995. The Politics of Presence. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Proksch, Sven-Oliver, and Slapin, Jonathan B.. 2012. “Institutional Foundations of Legislative Speech.” American Journal of Political Science 56 (3): 520–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahat, Gideon. 2009. “Which Candidate Selection Method is the Most Democratic?” Government and Opposition 44 (1): 6890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwindt-Bayer, Leslie. 2010. Political Power and Women's Representation in Latin America. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siavelis, Peter, and Morgenstern, Scott, eds. 2008. Pathways to Power: Political Recruitment and Candidate Selection in Latin America. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Zetterberg, Pär. 2009. “Do Gender Quotas Foster Women's Political Engagement? Lessons from Latin America.” Political Research Quarterly 62 (4): 715–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The Dynamic Relationship between Gender Quotas and Political Institutions
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The Dynamic Relationship between Gender Quotas and Political Institutions
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The Dynamic Relationship between Gender Quotas and Political Institutions
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *