Gender quotas and models of political citizenship

Gender quotas have spread rapidly around the world in recent years. However, few studies have yet theorized, systematically or comparatively, variations in their features, adoption and implementation. This article surveys quota campaigns in Western Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand. It proposes that one or more sets of controversies influence the course and outcomes of quota reforms. These revolve around (1) competing principles of equality, (2) different ideas about political representation, and (3) various beliefs about ‘gender’ and its relation to other kinds of political identities. The article draws on these distinctions to identify four broad models of political citizenship that determine the kinds of quota policies that are pursued and their prospects for bringing more women into political office

Western Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand: gender quotas in the context of citizenship models

Book synopsis: This is the first world-wide, comparative study of the controversial new trends of gender quotas now emerging in global politics, presenting a comprehensive overview of changes in women’s parliamentary representation across the world. This is important reading for all those working to increase women’s influence in politics, because it scrutinizes under what circumstances gender quotas do increase women’s representation – and why they sometimes fail. These distinguished international scholars also show how gender balance in politics has become important to a nation’s international image and why quotas are being introduced in many post-conflict countries. They present key case studies of Afghanistan, Iraq, Argentina, Sweden, South Africa, Belgium, covering almost all major regions of the world: Latin America, Africa, the Arab world, South Asia, the Balkans, The Nordic countries and Europe, New Zealand, Australia and the USA - and Rwanda, which in 2003 unexpectedly surpassed Sweden as the number one country in the world in terms of women’s parliamentary representation. Using a comparative perspective, this book contains analyses of the discursive controversies around quotas; it gives an overview over various types of quotas in use from candidate quotas to reserved seat systems, and it throws light over the troublesome implementation process. When do gender quotas lead to actual increase in the number of women parliament? When are quotas merely a symbolic gesture? What does it imply to be elected as a ‘quota woman’? Tackling these and many more key questions, this is a major new contribution to the field. Making an important contribution to our knowledge of gender politics worldwide, this book will be of interest to NGOs, students and scholars of democracy, policy-making, comparative politics and gender studies

Constituting women's Interests through representative claims

A recent wave of gender and politics research revisits the concept of “women's interests,” opening up new ways of thinking about who can articulate these interests and how to avoid essentialism in empirical analysis on women's substantive representation. This article seeks to advance these debates by integrating them with new work on political theory noting that speaking “for” a group also entails speaking “about” a group. Resolving some of the tensions presenting in existing work, the revised approach expands the range of actors engaged in making claims on behalf of “women” and draws a conceptual distinction between “issues,” broad policy categories, and “interests,” the content given to a particular issue. The contours of this new approach are illustrated via a comparative study of claims-making on behalf of “women” in three countries, revealing some overlaps but also important differences in the issues raised and arguments made regarding the nature of “women's interests.” This inductive method avoids problems of essentialism by arguing that “women” and “women's interests” are constructed through, and not simply reflected in, political advocacy on their behalf