Recent theory-building on the substantive representation of women (SRW) in parliamentary settings contends that in addition to traditional concerns about achieving a ‘critical mass’ of women, scholars need to question who the ‘critical actors’ are. Analysis of a range of deliberative functions of the Scottish Parliament supports the critical actor thesis—yet, while female critical actors have disproportionate policy-making influence, the present study adds to contemporary understanding by highlighting that it is how critical actors interact with critical mass that plays a key role in the SRW. Thus future work needs to be cognisant of a range of factors shaping critical mass/critical actor interaction, including: institutional mechanisms, type of parliamentary proceeding, party allegiance and whether women representatives belong to the party forming the executive.
AnnesleyC. and GainsF. (2010) ‘The core executive: Gender, power and change?’, Political Studies, 58:5, 829–1086.
2.
BeckwithK. (2007) ‘Numbers and newness: The descriptive and substantive representation of women’, Canadian Journal of Political Science, 40:1, 27–49.
3.
BeckwithK. and Cowell-MeyersK. (2007) ‘Sheer numbers: Critical representation thresholds and women's political representation’, Perspectives on Politics, 5:3, 555–567.
4.
BeveridgeF. (2000) ‘Mainstreaming and the engendering of policy-making: A means to an end?’, Journal of European Public Policy, 7:3, 385–405.
5.
BreitenbachE. (ed.) (2003) Engendering Democracy: Women's Organisations and Their Influence on Policy Making within the Devolved Administrations in Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales (Belfast: Queen's University Belfast, Institute of Governance, Public Policy and Social Research).
6.
BreitenbachE. (2005) ‘Gender equality policies in Scotland since devolution’, Scottish Affairs, 56:1, 10–21.
ChaneyP. (2006) ‘Critical mass, deliberation and the substantive representation of women: Evidence from the UK's devolution programme’, Political Studies, 54:4, 671–691.
9.
ChaneyP. (2008) ‘Devolved governance and the substantive representation of women: The second term of the National Assembly for Wales, 2003–07’, Parliamentary Affairs, 61:2, 56–72.
10.
ChaneyP.MackayF. and McAllisterL. (2007) Women, Politics and Constitutional Change (Cardiff: University of Wales Press).
11.
ChildsA. and KrookM. L. (2006a) ‘Gender and politics: The state of the art’, Politics, 26:1, 18–28.
12.
ChildsA. and KrookM. L. (2006b) ‘Should feminists give up on critical mass? A contingent “yes”’, Politics and Gender, 2:4, 522–530.
13.
ChildsS. and KrookM. L. (2008) ‘Critical mass theory and women's political representation’, Political Studies, 56:3, 725–736.
14.
ChildsS. and KrookM. L. (2009) ‘Analyzing women's substantive representation: From critical mass to critical actors’, Government and Opposition, 44 (2), 125–145.
15.
ChildsS. and WitheyJ. (2004) ‘Women representatives acting for women: Sex and the signing of Early Day Motions in the 1997 British Parliament’, Political Studies, 52:3, 552–564.
16.
Consultative Steering Group on the Scottish Parliament (1998) Shaping Scotland's Parliament (Edinburgh: Scottish Office).
17.
CromptonR. and LyonetteC. (2005) ‘The new gender essentialism: Domestic and family “choices” and their relation to attitudes’, The British Journal of Sociology, 56:4, 601–620.
18.
DahlerupD. (2006) ‘The story of the theory of critical mass’, Gender and Politics, 2:4, 511–522.
19.
DodsonD. L. (2006) The Impact of Women in Congress (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
20.
DoviS. (2003) ‘Preferable descriptive representatives: Will just any woman, black or Latino do?’, American Political Science Review, 96:4, 729–743.
21.
ElsterJ. (ed.) (1998) Deliberative Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
22.
FischerF. (2003) Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Discursive Practices (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
23.
FischerF. and ForesterJ. (1993) The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis (London: University College London Press).
24.
FraserN. (1997) Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the ‘Postcolonialist’ Condition (New York: Routledge).
25.
GargarellaR. (1998) ‘Full representation, deliberation and impartiality’, in ElsterJ. (ed.), Deliberative Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 134–178.
26.
GillG. (1999) Winning for Women (London: Fawcett Society).
27.
JohnsR.MitchellJ.DenverD. and PattieC. (2009) ‘Valence politics in Scotland: Towards an explanation of the 2007 election’, Political Studies, 57:1, 207–233.
28.
JütersonkeO. and StuckiP. (2007) ‘Consolidating content and discourse analysis: Pragmatism and context-sensitive content analysis in the field of international relations’. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association 48th Annual Convention, Chicago, 28 February.
29.
KennyM. (2007) ‘Gender, institutions and power: A critical review’, British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 7:2, 91–100.
30.
KrookM. L. and MackayF. (eds) (2010) Gender, Politics and Institutions: Towards a Feminist Institutionalism (Basingstoke: Palgrave).
31.
LovenduskiJ. and NorrisP. (2003) ‘Westminster women: The politics of presence’, Political Studies, 51:1, 84–102.
32.
MackayF. (2004) ‘Gender and political representation in the UK: The state of the “discipline”’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 6:1, 99–120.
33.
MackayF. (2008) ‘“Thick” conceptions of substantive representation: Women, gender and political institutions’, Representation, 44:2, 125–139.
34.
MansbridgeJ. (1999) ‘Should blacks represent blacks and women represent women? A contingent “yes”’, Journal of Politics, 61:3, 628–657.
McAllisterL. (2001) ‘Gender nation and party: An uneasy alliance for Welsh nationalism?’, Women's History Review, 10:1, 51–69.
37.
McKayA. and GillespieM. (2005) ‘Women, inequalities and social policy’, in MooneyG. and ScottG. (eds), Exploring Social Policy in the ‘New’ Scotland (Bristol: Policy Press, 98–127.
38.
PhillipsA. (1995) The Politics of Presence (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
39.
PitkinH.F. (1967) The Concept of Representation (Berkeley: University of California Press).
40.
PitkinH. (1972) The Concept of Representation (Los Angeles CA: University of California Press).
41.
PollackM. A. and Hafner-BurtonE. (2000) ‘Mainstreaming gender in the European Union’, Journal of European Public Policy, 7:3, 432–456.
42.
ReingoldB. (2000) Representing Women (Chapel Hill NC: University of North Carolina Press).
StudlarD. T. and McAllisterI. (2002) ‘Does a critical mass exist?’, European Journal of Political Research, 41:2, 233–253.
47.
Taylor-RobinsonM. M. and HeathR. M. (2003) ‘Do women legislators have different policy priorities than their male colleagues? A critical case test’, Women and Politics, 24:4, 77–101.
48.
ThomasS. (1991) ‘The impact of women on state legislative policies’, Journal of Politics, 53:4, 958–976.
49.
ThomasS. (1994) How Women Legislate (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
50.
Van DijkT. A. (2001) ‘Critical discourse analysis’, in TannenD.SchiffrinD. and HamiltonH. (eds), Handbook of Discourse Analysis (Oxford: Blackwell, 357–371.
51.
WilsonA. (1993) ‘Towards an integration of content analysis and discourse analysis: The automatic linkage of key relations in text’. Lancaster University Unit for Computer Research on the English Language Technical Papers No.3.
