Do men and women representatives hold different legislative priorities? Do these priorities align with citizens who share their gender? Whereas substantive representation theorists suggest legislators’ priorities should align with their cogender constituents, Downsian-based theories suggest no role for gender. We test these differing expectations through a new originally collected survey data set of more than 800 parliamentarians and data from more than 19,000 citizens from 17 sub-Saharan African countries. We find that whereas parliamentarians prioritize similar issues as citizens in general, important gender differences also emerge. Women representatives and women citizens are significantly more likely to prioritize poverty reduction, health care, and women’s rights, whereas men representatives and men citizens tend to prioritize infrastructure projects. Examining variation in congruence between countries, we find that parliamentarians’ and cogender citizens’ priorities are most similar where democratic institutions are strongest. These results provide robust new evidence and insight into how and when legislator identity affects the representative process.
AhikireJ. (2003). Gender equity and local democracy in contemporary Uganda: Addressing the challenge of women’s political effectiveness in local government. In GoetzA. M.HassimS. (Eds.), No shortcuts to power: African women in politics and policy making (pp. 213–239). London, England: Zed Books.
2.
AlidouO. D. (2013). Muslim women in postcolonial Kenya: Leadership, representation, and social change. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
3.
AtangaL. L. (2010). Gender, discourse and power in the Cameroonian parliament. Oxford, UK: African Books Collective.
4.
BarkanJ. D. (2009). Legislative power in emerging African democracies. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
5.
BarkanJ. D.MattesR.MozaffarS.SmiddyK. (2010). The African legislatures project: First findings (CSSR Working Paper No. 277). Cape Town, South Africa: Centre for Social Science Research.
6.
BarnesT. D. (2016). Gendering legislative behavior. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
7.
BarnesT. D.BurchardS. M. (2013). “Engendering” politics: The impact of descriptive representation on women’s political engagement in Sub-Saharan Africa. Comparative Political Studies, 46, 767-790.
8.
BauerG. (2012). “Let there be a balance”: Women in African parliaments. Political Studies Review, 10, 370-384.
9.
BauerG.BrittonH. E. (2006). Women in African parliaments. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
10.
BeckwithK. (2014). Plotting the path from one to the other: Women’s interests and political representation. In Escobar-LemmonM. C.Taylor-RobinsonM. M. (Eds.), Representation: The case of women (pp. 19–40). Oxford University Press.
11.
BhalotraS.Clots-FiguerasI. (2014). Health and the political agency of women. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 6, 164-197.
12.
CampbellR.ChildsS.LovenduskiJ. (2010). Do women need women representatives?British Journal of Political Science, 40, 171-194.
13.
CelisK.ChildsS. (2012). The substantive representation of women: What to do with conservative claims?Political Studies, 60, 213-225.
14.
CelisK.ChildsS.KantolaJ.KrookM. L. (2008). Rethinking women’s substantive representation. Representation, 44, 99-110.
15.
ChattopadhyayR.DuoE. (2004). Women as policy makers: Evidence from a randomized policy experiment in India. Econometrica, 72, 1409-1443.
16.
ChildsS. (2002). Hitting the target: Are labour women MPs “acting for” women?Parliamentary Affairs, 55, 143-153.
17.
ClaytonA. (2015). Women’s political engagement under quota-mandated female representation: Evidence from a randomized policy experiment. Comparative Political Studies, 48, 333-369.
18.
ClaytonA.JosefssonC.WangV. (2014). Present without presence? Gender, quotas and debate recognition in the Ugandan parliament. Representation, 50, 379-392.
19.
ClaytonA.JosefssonC.WangV. (2017). Quotas and women’s substantive representation: Evidence from a content analysis of Ugandan plenary debates. Politics & Gender, 13, 276-304.
20.
ClaytonA.ZetterbergP. (in press). Quota shocks: Electoral gender quotas and government spending priorities worldwide. Journal of Politics.
21.
CowleyP.ChildsS. (2003). Too spineless to rebel? New labour’s women MPs. British Journal of Political Science, 33, 345-365.
22.
DisneyJ. L. (2006). Mozambique: Empowering women through family law. In BrittonH.BauerG. (Eds.), Women in African parliaments (pp. 31–57). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
23.
DownsA. (1957). An economic theory of political action in a democracy. Journal of Political Economy, 65, 135-150.
24.
Escobar-LemmonM. C.Taylor-RobinsonM. M. (2016). Women in presidential cabinets: Power players or abundant tokens?New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
25.
FranceschetS.KrookM. L.PiscopoJ. M. (2012). The impact of gender quotas. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
26.
FranceschetS.PiscopoJ. M. (2008). Gender quotas and women’s substantive representation: Lessons from Argentina. Politics & Gender, 4, 393-425.
27.
GoetzA.-M. (2003). Women’s political effectiveness: A conceptual framework. In GoetzA. M.HassimS. (Eds.), No shortcuts to power: African women in politics and policy making (pp. 29–80). London, England: Zed Books.
28.
GoetzA.-M.HassimS. (2003). No shortcuts to power: African women in politics and policy making (Vol. 3). London, England: Zed Books.
29.
GottliebJ.GrossmanG.RobinsonA. L. (2016). Do men and women have different policy preferences in Africa? Determinants and implications of gender gaps in policy prioritization. British Journal of Political Science, 1–26.
30.
GriffinJ. D.NewmanB.WolbrechtC. (2012). A gender gap in policy representation in the US Congress?Legislative Studies Quarterly, 37, 35-66.
31.
HeathR.Schwindt-BayerL. A.Taylor-RobinsonM. M. (2005). Women on the sidelines: Women’s representation on committees in Latin American legislatures. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 420-436.
32.
HughesM. M. (2011). Intersectionality, quotas, and minority women’s political representation worldwide. American Political Science Review, 105, 604-620.
33.
IchinoN.NathanN. L. (2013). Crossing the line: Local ethnic geography and voting in Ghana. American Political Science Review, 107, 344-361.
34.
International IDEA. (2017). Atlas of electoral gender quotas. Stockholm, Sweden: International IDEA (Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance).
35.
JonesB. D.BaumgartnerF. R. (2004). Representation and agenda setting. Policy Studies Journal, 32, 1-24.
36.
KangA. J. (2015). Bargaining for women’s rights: Activism in an aspiring Muslim democracy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
37.
KerevelY. P.AtkesonL. R. (2013). Explaining the marginalization of women in legislative institutions. The Journal of Politics, 75, 980-992.
38.
KrookM. L.O’BrienD. Z. (2012). All the president’s men? The appointment of female cabinet ministers worldwide. The Journal of Politics, 74(3), 840-855.
39.
LongmanT. (2006). Rwanda: Achieving equality or serving an authoritarian state? In BrittonH.BauerG. (Eds.), Women in African parliaments (pp. 133-150). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
40.
LovenduskiJ.NorrisP. (2003). Westminster women: The politics of presence. Political Studies, 51, 84-102.
41.
MansbridgeJ. (1999). Should Blacks represent Blacks and women represent women? A contingent “yes.”Journal of Politics, 61, 628-657.
42.
MansbridgeJ. (2011). Clarifying the concept of representation. American Political Science Review, 105, 621-630.
43.
MeintjesS. (2003). The politics of engagement: Women transforming the policy process–domestic violence legislation in South Africa. In GoetzA. M.HassimS. (Eds.), No shortcuts to power: African women in politics and policy making (pp. 140-159). London, England: Zed Books.
44.
MillerG. (2008). Women’s suffrage, political responsiveness, and child survival in American history. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123, 1287-1327.
45.
MuriaasR. L.WangV. (2012). Executive dominance and the politics of quota representation in Uganda. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 50, 309-338.
46.
MurrayR. (2014). Quotas for men: Reframing gender quotas as a means of improving representation for all. American Political Science Review, 108, 520-532.
47.
NorrisP. (1996). Women politicians: Transforming Westminster?Parliamentary Affairs, 49, 89-103.
48.
OlkenB. A. (2010). Direct democracy and local public goods: Evidence from a field experiment in Indonesia. American Political Science Review, 104, 243-267.
49.
PhillipsA. (1995). The politics of presence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
50.
PosnerD. N. (2005). Institutions and ethnic politics in Africa. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
51.
Schwindt-BayerL. A. (2006). Still supermadres? Gender and the policy priorities of Latin American legislators. American Journal of Political Science, 50, 570-585.
52.
SwersM. (2002). The difference women make: The policy impact of women in Congress. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
53.
SwissL.FallonK. M.BurgosG. (2012). Does critical mass matter? Women’s political representation and child health in developing countries. Social Forces, 91, 531-558.
54.
TamaleS. (1999). When hens begin to crow: Gender and parliamentary politics in Uganda. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
55.
Taylor-RobinsonM. M.HeathR. M. (2003). Do women legislators have different policy priorities than their male colleagues? A critical case test. Women & Politics, 24, 77-101.
56.
ThomasM. A.SissokhoO. (2005). Liaison legislature: The role of the National Assembly in Senegal. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 43, 97-117.
57.
TremblayM. (1998). Do female MPs substantively represent women? A study of legislative behaviour in Canada’s 35th Parliament. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de Science Politique, 31, 435-465.
58.
TrippA. M. (2015). Women and power in post-conflict Africa. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
WalshD. M. (2012a). Does the quality of democracy matter for women’s rights? Just debate and democratic transition in Chile and South Africa. Comparative Political Studies, 45, 1323-1350.
61.
WalshD. M. (2012b). Party centralization and debate conditions in South Africa. In FranceschetS.KrookM. L.PiscopoJ. M. (Eds.), The impact of gender quotas (pp. 119-135). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
62.
WängnerudL. (2000). Testing the politics of presence: Women’s representation in the Swedish Riksdag. Scandinavian Political Studies, 23, 67-91.
63.
WeissbergR. (1978). Collective vs. dyadic representation in Congress. American Political Science Review, 72, 535-547.
64.
WestfallA.ChantilesC. (2016). The political cure: Gender quotas and women’s health. Politics & Gender, 12, 469-490.
65.
YoungI. M. (2000). Inclusion and democracy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
66.
ZechmeisterE. J.CorralM. (2013). Individual and contextual constraints on ideological labels in Latin America. Comparative Political Studies, 46, 675-701.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
