Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T03:47:36.495Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Troublesome “Paradox of Gender Quotas”: A Few Methodological Notes on the Margin of an Article by Michael Jankowski and Kamil Marcinkiewicz

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 July 2019

Maciej A. Górecki*
Affiliation:
University of Warsaw

Abstract

In a recent article published in Politics & Gender, Michael Jankowski and Kamil Marcinkiewicz (2019) study the effects of gender quotas on the electoral performance of female candidates in open-list proportional representation (OLPR) systems. On the empirical side, their study is a critical reanalysis of the Polish case, in particular the regularities demonstrated in a 2014 study that I coauthored. We argued there that at the micro level (candidate level), the effects of quotas were somewhat “paradoxical”: following the installation of quotas, women candidates tend to perform worse relative to their male counterparts than they did during the pre-quota period. Jankowski and Marcinkiewicz claim to demonstrate that those “paradoxical” effects are minor and thus practically negligible. In this note, I argue that their conclusion is largely a result of the particular methodological choices made by these authors. These choices seem unobvious, debatable, and potentially controversial. The note concludes that we need more reflection and debate on the methodological aspects of analyzing candidates’ electoral success in complex electoral systems, such as multidistrict OLPR. This would greatly facilitate future efforts aimed at an unequivocal examination of the contentious concepts such as the notion of “paradox of gender quotas.”

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association, 2019

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

REFERENCES

Blom-Hansen, Jens, Elklit, Jørgen, Serritzlew, Søren, and Villadsen, Louise Riis. 2016. “Ballot Position and Election Results: Evidence from a Natural Experiment.” Electoral Studies 44: 172–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faas, Thorsten, and Schoen, Harald. 2006. “The Importance of Being First: Effects of Candidates’ List Positions in the 2003 Bavarian State Election.” Electoral Studies 25: 91102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Górecki, Maciej A., and Kukołowicz, Paula. 2014. “Gender Quotas, Candidate Background and the Election of Women: A Paradox of Gender Quotas in Open-list Proportional Representation Systems.” Electoral Studies 36: 6580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jankowski, Michael, and Marcinkiewicz, Kamil. 2019. “Ineffective and Counterproductive? The Impact of Gender Quotas in Open-List Proportional Representation Systems.” Politics & Gender 15 (1): 133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutz, Georg. 2010. “First Come, First Served: The Effect of Ballot Position on Electoral Success in Open Ballot PR Elections.” Representation 46 (2): 167–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Joanne M., and Krosnick, Jon A.. 1998. “The Impact of Candidate Name Order on Election Outcomes.” Public Opinion Quarterly 62 (3): 291330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortega Villodres, Carmen. 2003. “Intra-party Competition under Preferential List Systems: The Case of Finland.” Representation 40 (1): 5566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasek, Josh, Schneider, Daniel, Krosnick, Jon A., Tahk, Alexander, Ophir, Eyal, and Milligan, Claire. 2014. “Prevalence and Moderators of the Candidate Name-Order Effect: Evidence from Statewide General Elections in California.” Public Opinion Quarterly 78 (2): 416–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar